Digital or Analogue?

What does it mean? Analogue recording is onto magnetic tape. Digital recording is onto 'hard drives' (either part of a computer set-up or a standalone recorder) or it can be digital information on tape (Alesis ADAT, Tascam D88 etc).

What's the difference/advantages? Analogue tape has a sound that digital recording tries to emulate a lot of the time. Digital hard drive recording (which has pretty much taken over the digital tape domain) gives you more opportunities for manipulation of parts, lots of takes, fixes etc. etc.

A lot of digital recording equipment, software,& plug-ins emulate analogue recording equipment (tape, solid state & valve/tube outboard units) because it is a sound that 'listeners' are used to.... warm... round... soft... friendly.... sexy...... . Analogue recorders & outboard will never emulate a digital sound because it doesn't have the capacity to do so even if anyone wanted to.

Analogue magnetic tape sounds better? There are lots of people that would say Yes and some would say there's no real difference anymore (especially once it's been mastered and put on CD).

It can make a difference.

Classical recordings were the first to embrace the digital world because of the lack of tape hiss & other analogue noise which made a huge difference to the quiet passages in the music. A lot of pop and rock producers stuck with analogue tape for a long time because of it's sound and established ease of use (tape machines don't usually crash or freeze or lose information).

With the progression of Protools, Logic & Cubase enabling copying and pasting of sections, choruses etc. (and the increased stability of the hardware) the pop world has in turn embraced the digital world while manufacturers keep coming up with plug-ins & outboard units to 'warm up your digital sound'.

Contrarily, there is the opinion that digital recordings are a better representation of the sound of the instruments/performers because the sound hasn't been 'warmed up'.

When recording a voice or an instrument there are quite a few things in the chain from the source. It could be a microphone pointing at a singer's mouth or at a guitar amp's speaker, or it might be a keyboard thingamajig with a cable into the.... recording console, a pre-amp, a compressor, different qualities of cable, varying quality of air before becoming part of the finished doodah. The more of these elements that are of a higher quality the better. Tape can be one of these elements. If you record a voice or instrument with a cheap microphone through a cheap desk or pre-amp into a computer or digital recorder it will probably sound cheap. Not lo-fi, just cheap. If you record a voice or instrument with a cheap microphone through a cheap desk or pre-amp onto tape, it could sound great. Because tape is expensive. This obviously isn't the reason why it sounds good but it is the reality. Tape is relatively expensive and the chances are that if you include it at some point in the 'chain' it has the potential to sound good. It's become exclusive because it's expensive.

It's quite a lot like photography & digital cameras.

Digital cameras can take great pictures but have become popular because of the avoidance of film costs and the extended options & user-friendliness. Almost as long as there's been digital images there's been software to make them look like film.

Does 'Attack of the Clones' (filmed entirely in the digital domain) look better than the original Star Wars movie (filmed in the 70s)? Is it more enjoyable to watch?

Do recordings made in the 21st century with the most expensive recorders, software, converters etc. etc. sound any better than Nat King Cole or Frank Sinatra recordings made in the 40s & 50s? What's more enjoyable to listen to?

Content will always be what matters. A great recording won't depend on the method of capture.

It's very likely that amongst the most sought after & expensive microphones and compressors today will be the same models that were used by Frank Sinatra & Nat King Cole. If this seems like a contradiction, think about the classic guitar designs (Strats, Teles & Les Pauls) and why they've not been 'improved' upon.