Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tidewater]

 

No.


M

[Bubblepuppy]

Hey I remember a 3" 24 or 32 track machine that never quite worked, it might have been a 3M, anyway I think the problems associated with analog that Fletcher mentions alignment etc..will at some point be addresed through better design when we admit digital has never lived up to great Analog....Digital suffers the same kind of problems that are unique to the medium as did/does analog.
Just a few...
Plug-ins (what Bullshit)
Format wars 24bit/32bit/64bit/128bit (see RAID Terrabyte)
Sample rate coversions
A/D converters (why do differnt companies sound different?)
CLOCK JITTER (the real grimlin in digital)
Serial streaming (see clock jitter)
Error correction code
BER (bit error rate)i
note: zero bit error does not exist--FACT
Also consider the Mantra- higher sampling rates will solve the issue/ $$$$$$$$
Has anyone had a quote recently on a Terrabyte RAID storage system.
OOH your question
Yes I DO MISS ANALOGUE!!!!!

[vernier]

Alignment isn't an issue, especially with good recorders.

[skygod]

breathe wrote on Fri, 14 October 2005 04:20

1) .... namely making a document of musical performance that the listener 2) ....  People are usually highly impressionable sheep on most subjects, especially those they are supposed to feel the most passionate about, like art and politics 3) .... What I'm trying to get at is that you seem to be voicing a popular relativism in this post that I think is total bullshit 4).... That being said, my Leica has barely seen any use since I bought my super tiny Canon digital camera several months ago ...   Nicholas Teddy G. wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 18:15 TG

Aaah here comes the most hated person in the forum with his two cents.

This is the same mass produced digital brainwashing argument and mentality that has overtaken the entire world that a

[Ashermusic]

Skygod, seek therapy. Quickly.

[Slipperman]

Ashermusic wrote on Sat, 18 March 2006 20:05

Skygod, seek therapy. Quickly.

He's from Jersey.

We don't buy into that California stylee headshrink bullshit over here.

We solve our own problems almost as fast as we create 'em.

HOHOHO.

Anyhoo.

Great post SkyGod.

Understated. But great.

Drunken, and somewhat incoherent. But great.

SM.

PS. I can't believe somebody resurrected this old zombie of a thread. Glad he did tho... Reminded me about that Benedict Arnold MF Fletcher with his fucking RADAR.

PPS. The guys name was ANSEL Adams. Not that it matters. His shit is pretty clinical and uninspiring if ya look at it long enough. Nothing actively seeking to kill man as much as nature should be depicted in our cave wall scrawling.

[Johnny B]

Most of what SkyGod says is true.

After all, if God had wanted to make lying jerks be all digital, he would have made the Digital Math Scoundrels into big zeroes...

Tubes Rule!
Analogue Rules!

They rule because God, in his infinite wisdom, made it an analogue world.

[Bubblepuppy]

another way to express it is this, I miss the craftsmanship of good audio.
we live in a analogue universe!
Period!
Hey sky-god, i have built a shrine to your spiritual essence. very well said... If your a chick I want your number!!!!

Moondog!
Here is the fundemental reality of digital

HD-ROSETTA IS:

Compact
On a plate no larger than 2" square and 1/4" thick, the High Density Rosetta has immense storage capabilities: Based on a page size of 8.5x11", you may store about 196,000 pages with electron microscope retrieval between 5,000 - 18,000 pages with optical microscope retrieval.

Technologically Secure
Unlike digital data, which require medium-specific software and operating systems to retrieve information, the Rosetta needs only a simple magnifying lens to view the analog data. It will never face obsolescence.

Magnetically Stable
Since the Rosetta's information is etched into nickel, it is never affected by electromagnetic radiations as is often the case with digital data.

Physically Durable
With its magnetic immunity, a life expectancy of at least 1,000 years and a temperature threshold of 500

[Cosmic Closet]

Hi All,

For what it is worth, a couple of cents from this humble home recordist. I own the Tascam 2488 DAW. I know, I know, consumer POS compared to what you Big Boys play with. But I use decent external pres and I am expecting a set of matched AKG451s any day now, so I am trying....
To the subject: I tinkered with recording off and on in my teens (I am 45) on borrowed or used analog gear, and even then the 'ear pleasure' was always there. I got back into playing and recording only in 2001.
Now my Tascam DAW has all the bells and whistles, but even with that, I still missed analog.
I missed it so much that about a month ago, I dropped (for me) a good chunk of money to get a Studer 807, MkII 1/4" two-track.
At 30IPS, with new Quantegy GP9 stock, it is heaven.

If two devices could ever be said to represent their respective eras, it certainly is in the contrast here. The Studer will definitely outlast the 2488 by a long shot and just sounds a lot better than the admittedly cheap Tascam.
I know it's an unfair comparison to begin with, but nonetheless, it has just to me reinforced the glory of analog sound.

And keep in mind, I bought this:
For a private home; I know of no service techs yet.
Yes I have seen the price of new replacement heads.
I am not a techie myself, so I am at the mercy of someone else.
And still I bought it. So call me an idealist, a fool, a dreamer...yes, most likely, but....I just missed analog.

Best,
CC

[maarvold]

I miss:

Tape hiss
Bias 'rocks'
Incomplete erasure
Print through
Wow & flutter
Rebiasing
Self erasure
Finding the right compromise for 2" azimuth
Tape tension problems
Running out of Q-Tips
Running out of denatured alcohol
Running out of leader
Running out of splicing tape
Aligning with 30 sec/tone (20 sec a couple of times)
Aligning on a 30 sec record pad
Doing a manual 24 track Dolby-SR alignment
Doing a manual 24 track Dolby-SR alignment on a 30 sec record pad
Rebiasing, aligning, THEN doing a manual Dolby-SR alignment on a 30 sec pad
Bad tape slitting
Lugging 150 lbs of media around for 1 project
Prestriping [to facilitate]:
Making slave tapes
Lockup problems
Bad edge track frequency response
Head bump
Head wear
Head cleaning
Head cleaning after running a tape that badly needs baking
Baking tapes
Storing tapes
Destructive recording--and the danger of--
Punching in (and out)
Making labels
Checking reel sets in and out with signed release forms
Getting raped by the studio on tape prices

[vernier]

All that stuff is myth. I invite anyone to my studio to witness "no tape hiss".

[breathe]

Kill this thread!!!


Anyways, I've decided to make a book of my time in Santa Cruz, CA, of which I have about 8000 photographs shot on a Leica and Contax cameras (both Carl Zeiss lenses) onto either Kodak 5279 or Fuji NPH400.  I bought an Imacon scanner to do the job, which is like digitizing tapes with a Pacific Microsonics converter.  Looking at these images on my computer makes me feel vulnerable, because the images are physical.  The negatives are actually quite vulnerable and I don't know if I'm going to try to Photoshop out all of the tiny scratches.  I don't know why I'm writing this, other than to say I think I've had a religious experience reviewing my film work.  My digital camera has changed me so much as a photographer, I don't know if I could go back to film.  Nowadays, I can easily take 50 photos of a candid subject, and immediately delete the bad takes.  Before with that clunky, ancient-ish, Leica rangefinder, I really had to be in sync with the moment.

Nicholas

[breathe]

[vernier]

Quote:

My digital camera has changed me so much as a photographer, I don't know if I could go back to film.

Digital is more convenient, but still has a different look than film. Same with audio ...digital is more convenient, and yields a different sound. In both cases, I don't see the need to omit one of the technologies. And certainly not analog or film.