Ha, it works for digital instruments. I'm not so sure I've heard anything better than the analogue audio chain with real instruments.

Recording eh, well if you want my two-penneth....

Many of the classic records we know and love were produced using tube/valve based devices and 'discreet component' pathway sound desks, the inherent 'faults' in these devices are what gives the recordings their character e.g. the classic 'Sinatra' vocal sound is a achieved by 'mis-using' a microphone originally designed for low-gain 'room' recording being used as a high gain 'close up' microphone ( we can thank the Nazi's for that as most of the research was done in Germany in the 1930s to produce a microphone that made Hitler sound less 'shrill').

That's not to say it's not possible to do this in the digital domain but most engineers these days have no idea how to get the 'warmth' on a recording because they rely on the software to 'fix in the mix' in post production rather than make a decision at the time of recording about how they want an instrument to sound.

The 'distortion' and 'false harmonics' created by an an all analog tube/valve signal pathway to tape (which also adds it's own character depending on tape speed and quality of the recording media) has become the holy grail for loads of companies producing plug-ins for the modern DAWs like Pro-Tools, just have a look at Universal Audio's website they reproduce classic tube based hardware and do digital recreations of the same products.

There are many other factors to consider as people have mentioned already:

The digital domain has too many options and this means too much pissing about at mix down.

Mastering the finished recordings is an art form that was gradually being lost as record companies used the same master to produce the digital and vinyl finished product (but interestingly now a whole new industry is emerging in re-mastering/re-cutting specifically for vinyl because of it's resurgence as a format).

Too many recording engineers with certificates from Sound Schools like SAE with more Pro-Tools User certificates than you can shake a stick at who can't actually mic a drum kit or a guitar amp properly.

I could go on but my comments should give you a general flavour of the issues in modern recording practices.

Last edited by doghouse (2014-01-24 10:03:07)

'Well, in many ways the rise and use of software like Pro Tools and Cubase is like that of Punk and early Rap. Those kids didn't really know what they were doing either.'

That's a poor analogy as those punk and rap records only exist because a decent recording engineer somewhere knew how to capture the sounds the musicians created, listen to the original Ramones demos compared to the first Ramones LP as a great example of this or  even the Afrika Bambatta recordings before he started working with Arthur Baker.
The use of 'Digital Audio Workstation' software has created an illusion that 'anybody can be an artist/producer' with little outlay on equipment but very few people will actually make anything that even sounds halfway decent. The people doing innovative stuff would have done great stuff with a Tascam 4 track or even a dictaphone,
Talent is a whole different argument, you can't get a rack device or plug-in that can add it at any point of the recording

I also have to concur with doghouse on the 'analog preference' brigade, most wouldn't know if the recording was all digital as long as the end product is delivered on an analog format like vinyl (and the current craze for cassette tapes, horrifyingly this is becoming a viable format for releases again).

Last edited by formby (2014-01-24 11:15:42)