Studio Equipment
Digital v. Analogue
The tape recorder
Mixing desks
Basic effects
Windows and DAWs
Magazine Reviews
Myths and Lies

           Digital v. Analogue          

Cl;ick here to go to the introduction!

Click here to find out about the studio building!

Click here to go to the studio business chapter!

Click here to go to the chapter on studio types!

Click here to go to the chapter on people!

Click here to go to the index!

Click here to find out about types of equipment!

Click here to go to the project chapter!

Click here to go to all the links and downloads!

Types of Equipment

For the past few years there has been a debate between fans of digital and analogue technology. Much of the debate has been based on a lack of information, or even on disinformation by manufacturers wishing to push their pet technologies.

For a long time, it looked as if the digital camp was having things all its own way. Cheap and cheerful digital desks and recorders seemed to be the magic answer to everything. They claimed to be almost noise and distortion free and far easier to operate than the old analogue desks and tape machines.

These claims were, of course, false. The desks were bewilderingly complicated and the machines lost sync, broke down and chewed tape. The first attempts at hard disc recorders in PCs and Macs were of poor quality and very unreliable. The slow 16-bit converters caused hums and buzzes as they interfered with the very audio signal they were trying to convert. As the track numbers increased, the machines got slower and slower, until they went into a coma and the audio was lost completely.

The professional answer to these absurd systems was to upgrade analogue. Desks became quieter, tape became thinner and had better HF (high frequency) response, dynamic processors became far more sofisticated and Dolby SR noise reduction was born.

But the writing was on the wall. The professional was recording onto analogue tape, but the consumer was listening to 16-bit digital CDs and the race was on to create a new digital multitrack system. The first systems were 16-bit and sampling errors and noise floors, when added together over 24 or more tracks, were not good enough. But 16-bit was good enough for amateur recordings and soon the eight-track ADAT machine was hailed as the answer for amateur home recording. Over the years some 150,000 ADAT machines have been sold, despite all the problems of chewed tape, poor quality and lost sync signals.

The professional standard was DASH (Digital Audio Stationary Head) built by Sony. At first acceptance was slow as this too was just 16-bit and used expensive and unreliable tape. The first machines were just 24-track, but soon a 24-bit, 48-track version became the professional studio standard. These machines were expensive and required considerable maintenance, but set a whole new standard in audio quality.

Unfortunately many people compared first class analogue tape with Dolby SR to 16-bit digital recorded on amateur ADAT machines using poor converters and claimed that digital was poor and 'unmusical.' The analogue to digital (AD) converters in amateur equipment lack headroom and fall over immediately into total distortion if the input signal is too high. The machines are very unreliable and the resolution is poor. Comparing professional analogue to amateur digital is like comparing a vintage Ferrari with a new Ford Fiesta.

At first there were just two main professional hard disc recording systems: ProTools and Radar. ProTools runs on Apple Mac and can perform just about any post production task you can think of. It was originally used as an editing package for samplers and later as an audio aid for Avid video suites, but soon found acceptance as a home studio system. Later many studios realised the advantages of desktop editing.

Radar targeted professional studios right from the outset. It has either 24 or 48 inputs and works just like a tape recorder. Tracks are armed in the conventional manner and the only differences are that one can cut and paste, rewinds can be performed instantly and the quality is far higher than any conventional tape recorder could achieve.

But today there are many very good multitrack editing software packages such as Logic, Nuendo and ProTools for Mac and Pyramix, Sadie and Soundscape for PC. 
This growth in systems has lead to studios having to buy more than one multitrack in order to cover different aspects of the recording process.  ProTools remains the Jack-of-all-trades, with Radar the undisputed king of quick, easy and high-quality tracking.  Logic is said to be the best for integrating MIDI with audio editing and Nuendo fans love its bar-beat editing.  Sadie is the first choice of most top quality mastering houses and Pyramix and Soundscape are much praised by the TV and film post-production houses.
But all the above systems (and many others) will do just about any task, from mastering to bar-beat editing, from audio post-production for film to mix-downs.   Pyramix and Soundscape have brought out powerful mastering versions and are now fully compatible with all other DAWs (digital audio workstations).  Now that Apple owns Logic and has invested huge sums in its improvement, ProTools may find itself loosing market share as it gets squeezed between Logic on the one side and Pyramix and Soundscape on the other.


If effects are nearly all digital and recorders are digital, why do professional music studios put large and expensive analogue mixing desks into the heart of their operations?

The answer is (mainly) ergonomics, but also the quality of the audio and future compatibility play a part.

Ergonomics: This is a fancy word for ease of use of equipment. Analogue mixing desks have always had the same basic layout: a series of buttons and knobs at the top of each channel for routing and volume control of inputs and outputs to effects and tape machines, then there is an equalizer to alter highs, mids and lows and at the bottom there are pan pots (for left to right and/or front to back) and a master fader. There may be other controls for tape inputs and dynamics such as gates and compressors, but basically that is it.

That means that any experienced technician can work on any desk after a short learning period and bands and orchestras can use their favourite engineer and do not have to rely on some stranger who may, or may not know what they want.

Most amateur and semi-professional digital desks are very different. Knobs have to be assigned a function and channel strips are very often scrolled from left to right to keep down the size and cost of the desk.  Behind each channel is a menu of functions and routing possibilities that have to be called up from a central computer. If you want to turn down the highs on channel 24, you must choose channel 24 on the central computer, scroll down to the EQ section and select the low-pass shelving filter and either assign it to a knob on the desk or type in a new value. If you decide to tweak it again later on, you must go through the whole procedure all over again.

Digital desks are great for video post production because the same person has to perform the same tasks over and over again and the more advanced models provide tools for automating repetitive tasks.  But DAWs have become so fast and easy to use, that some pundits claim that we might be seeing the end of the digital desk in a few years, to be replaced by the digital studio controller - for example DigiDesign's Icon - that replaces the right-hand mixing desk screen on a DAW with hardware. 
Professional digital desks designed specifically for live work have revolutionised the expectations of audiences and artists alike.  They allow every effect, signal path, e.q., dynamics, you name it, to be altered as often as one wants and, more importantly, in an instant.
But many engineers and producers continue to praise the quality of the sound of really good analogue desks and claim that there is little doubt that a good analogue eq really does sound superior to its digital counterpart.
But an important and often overlooked reason for a studio and its customers to prefer analogue desks to digital is the fact that a high-quality, modern analogue desk is a mature technology that is about as good as it can get.  Despite all the advances in digital technology in the past few years, digital desks are still right at the beginning of their development and still have a long way to go.
This means that the whizz-bang desk of the future that costs a small fortune today, can loose its value like a falling rock as soon as it leaves the factory.  


The Byre Recording Studio