|
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.
MIXING DESKS
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.
|
