ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?  (Read 11482 times)

Rob Gow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 415
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2014, 09:52:22 am »

It's a good day to be into analog. Lots of big consoles out ther for sale for dimes or pennies on the dollar...
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17671
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #11 on: March 26, 2014, 10:19:24 am »

Whilst that is a good point and is true, the people I was referring to who might be using the mixer in the club I mentioned probably have little or no knowledge of any type of mixer, analogue or digital.  In that case, I think an analogue mixer is easier to understand.


Steve.

We're up to 6 or so band engineers who've come through who've NEVER mixed a show on an analogue FOH setup.  NEVER.  What do you say to them, "suck it up"?

I also disagree that analog mixers are inherently easier to understand.  IF you didn't learn to mix on analog I submit it will be more difficult simply because it's not what you learned on.  It's not part of your initial experience.

I'm mixing analog today on a Midas Legend for a corpy gig at our city Performing Arts Center.

Switching back to analog was more difficult than I recall because my workflow and mix standards for corporates depends on having lots of insertable dynamics and parametric EQ on groups, none of which exist here in the PAC.

Analog is going away.  Those with legacy issues will do well to acquire the skills and workflow to deal with digital mixers or die waiting for the Great Analogue Revival.

YMMV and all that, but the Good Ship Analog has made it's last voyage for almost all commercial uses and most professional applications.  I can count on 1 hand the number of touring FOH setups I've seen in the last 2 years.  If we include the analog monitor positions, I can use all the fingers on that hand.

In bars and clubs, perhaps less so, but as that equipment dies off it will not be replaced with analog except in rare circumstances.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2014, 10:22:17 am by Tim McCulloch »
Logged
"Practicing an art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow, for heaven's sake. Sing in the shower. Dance to the radio. Tell stories. Write a poem to a friend, even a lousy poem. Do it as well as you possible can. You will get an enormous reward. You will have created something."  - Kurt Vonnegut

Scott Olewiler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 944
  • Trust me, it will be loud enough.
    • 4th Street Sound
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2014, 11:11:34 am »

Hi Guys, first post here! I am building a small system to (hopefully) provide SR services to small bands/venues in my area who are trying to move up from the dreaded "on-stage mixing" to a real FOH provider. I'm not new to this, having done it for a few years back in the late 90's as I moved from a position as musician to sound guy. Here's my question...why am I encountering so much resistance, and in some cases outright condescension from sales people and other pro-audio people when I insist on rigging my system with analogue gear? All I keep hearing is the words DIGITAL, DIGITAL, DIGITAL...as if the last 60 years of live and recorded acts on analogue equipment meant nothing or didn't exist. I mean, if I believed what everyone is saying about me building an analogue system; I'm either supremely stupid, too old, or like to break my back lifting thousands of pounds of gear unnecessarily! I am sick of having to defend myself to guys who can't fathom why I don't want powered cabs or a rack-free FOH. Maybe I won't get any love here either, now that I've admitted to being an "Old School Fool", but if there is anyone here who still operates gear old enough that it's not ipad controllable, please let me know I'm not being stupid. I'm hoping that I can learn from the fine folks here without being flamed for refusing to mix in a virtual world. Thanks for letting me vent!

I just switch from analogue to digital.  I miss having every single control in front of my eyes at one time. I do NOT miss running snakes and power to the FOH board and/or finding a place to set it up in the first place. Very few venues in my area a have a decent place to set up front of house so I put all my digital stuff next to the stage and mix 100% from an Ipad. 

Of course you can put your digital mixer there as well, but either way you're often going thru menus to find what you want. Many times I miss having that board in front of me.   I think you should mix on what you're comfortable mixing on. Most people who think your nuts for wanting analogue are probably hung up on the financial end of it.

Think about it. You can buy a $1000 Ipad controlled digital mixer which has everything you'd have on an analogue mixer. In addition to that it has a gate and compressor for every single channel. That's equal to 8 Stereo Gates/Compressors.  It also has a stereo 31-band EQ for mains, plus 6 additional 31 band EQs for each of the 6 Aux sends. On top of that it also has alignment delay for every output.  That can not be done in analogue for $1000 plus a $400 Ipad.

Now if my digital mixer fails on me, I have lost ALL of that functionality as well. I think a case for analogue can be made right there.  (Of course I carry a back up analogue board.)  Like most people who've switch though, I'll never go back. And for one important reason: I simply can not get an analogue system that sounds as good as my digital system for the same money.  Since I get paid to make the artist sound good, that's what drive my decision to stay digital.

And a very good point was made earlier that engineers who can have any piece of equipment they want are choosing analogue. I think you should give digital a serious look before going with analogue, especially if it's just because you're comfortable with it. My guess is that if you used digital for one show, you'd never go back. 

Powered cabs is another thing. I just switched from passive to powered for my monitor system and  I have also two different sub set-ups, one passive and one powered. I see no difference in actual set up time between the two. The argument that powered is somehow automatically better is ridiculous in IMO. The only thing it is for certain is more expensive.   



Logged
If you want to feel more Kick drum turn up the kick drum fader, not the damn subs.

James A. Griffin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 818
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2014, 11:29:00 am »

Analog is going away.  Those with legacy issues will do well to acquire the skills and workflow to deal with digital mixers or die waiting for the Great Analogue Revival.

YMMV and all that, but the Good Ship Analog has made it's last voyage for almost all commercial uses and most professional applications.  I can count on 1 hand the number of touring FOH setups I've seen in the last 2 years.  If we include the analog monitor positions, I can use all the fingers on that hand.

+1.   

The OP is not empirically wrong in his stance.   He has simply made the choice of a wooden schooner when others are driving cigarette boats.   The schooner's inherent beauty is appreciated by everyone, but it won't win the race.

I've noticed that those most resistant to digital mixers are folks who have never actually operated one.  When time is taken to understand and properly use it, the digital will sell itself.
Logged
I need to determine where in this swamp of unbalanced formulas squatteth the Toad of Truth

John Roberts {JR}

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15617
  • Hickory, Mississippi, USA
    • Resotune
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2014, 11:42:10 am »

The issue is not analog vs digital but old vs new. New tools are better and often cheaper for the same capability.  Using old tools may make sense when starting out on a budget, but lets not get too philosophical about this.

JR
Logged
On the internet people tell you everything "they" know, not the answer to "your" question.

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2209
  • Marietta, GA
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #15 on: March 26, 2014, 02:09:42 pm »

The issue is not analog vs digital but old vs new. New tools are better and often cheaper for the same capability.  Using old tools may make sense when starting out on a budget, but lets not get too philosophical about this.
Trying not to get too philosophical but I think it often also comes down to whether what you want is also what your clients want and which should take precedence in any decisions.  If this is for a business then personal preferences may need to be secondary to the preferences of your potential clients.
 
I also think that while those coming from analog backgrounds likely find analog consoles more intuitive, those that have grown up with most things they use being processor based with mouse or touchscreen interfaces may not feel the same.  It seems hard to argue that a graphic representation of a compressor or equalizer may be more intuitive to someone who has never used one than a bunch of kobs or faders with numbers by them.
Logged

Steve M Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2978
  • Isle of Wight - England
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #16 on: March 26, 2014, 02:17:36 pm »

I have only ever worked on other people's equipment.  I don't own anything myself (apart from a Behringer MX3282 - Don't judge me - I only paid 21/$30 for it!).

Despite my pro analogue bias in previous posts in this thread, if I were looking to set myself up with equipment, it would be a digital desk (probably Soundcraft Si Compact) and powered speakers.  Mainly for the easier transportation.


Steve.
Logged

Mark McFarlane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1865
  • Middle East
    • Arkose Records
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #17 on: March 26, 2014, 02:30:03 pm »

As TJ asked, why don't you want powered cabs or a rack-free FOH?  With this information we can provide a better discussion.

FWIW, I went digital and powered a decade ago and wouldn't do it any other way.  However, I have spec'd analog boards for other users.  Both can make sense in different applications.
Logged
Mark McFarlane
ARKOSERECORDS
Turn down what's too loud.

Mike Scott

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #18 on: March 26, 2014, 02:30:38 pm »

I understand that digital systems offer some advantages.  But some of my concerns with digital are longevity, long term compatibility with control systems and software and the general troubles that go with failures on any integrated electronic system.  How many analog systems are still working after 10 or 20 years?  Will a digital system really be usable in 20 years?  Are you going to have a working ipad to run your system 10 or 20 years from now?  Maybe that is OK if you replace all your equipment every few years but I hope to keep the same system going for longer than that.     

Logged

TJ (Tom) Cornish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3860
  • St. Paul, MN
Re: Digital vs. Analogue. Why the contempt?
« Reply #19 on: March 26, 2014, 02:40:50 pm »

I understand that digital systems offer some advantages.  But some of my concerns with digital are longevity, long term compatibility with control systems and software and the general troubles that go with failures on any integrated electronic system.  How many analog systems are still working after 10 or 20 years?  Will a digital system really be usable in 20 years?  Are you going to have a working ipad to run your system 10 or 20 years from now?  Maybe that is OK if you replace all your equipment every few years but I hope to keep the same system going for longer than that.     
10 years isn't going to be a problem for well-made digital desks.  Consumer-focused products like the Mackie IPad mixer that had the old dock connector - crystal ball is fuzzier on that. 

People used to pay $6,000 for an IBM PC made out of space-grade components.  It was obsolete long before it was unreliable.  Like it or not, that's true of digital devices of all kinds.  A <$3K Behringer X32 has more functionality (and sound quality) than $30,000 worth of mid-grade analog gear.  Which one has to work longer to make a return on the investment?

We can wax poetic about the analog glory days of being to impress your friend with a board the size of a mid-size car and outboard racks the size of refrigerators, but those days aren't coming back - the only company I'm aware of that even makes mid-large analog desks is APB.  At some point there won't be any analog choices at all, though there could be a boutique revival kind of cottage industry for people chasing a certain intentional distortiontone.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.076 seconds with 15 queries.