#1
I read Wiki articles on both, and digital makes sense, but what the **** is the difference?
Check out my music, if you please.
#2
digital breaks down the amount of information so that is can process it, it takes the general sound but guesses a bit(no really noticeable) it converts the sound to information it can understand- so some of the quality is lost.
now extra flamey
#3
Simply put, digital recording is recording to a hard drive (usually through Pro Tools or Logic, GarageBand, etc.), and analog is recording to a tape machine. But, it's possible to record digitally while also using some analog gear (outboard analog compressors, EQs, etc.).
#4
(Someone is going to beat me to this, but I'll try anyway)

Sound travels as waves.

Imagine an analog wave like a smooth, curvy wave.
A digital recording is like that, except that it records dots along the wave, and later has to reconnect the dots, meaning you lose some of the sound information. The higher the bitrate, the more "dots" and the more faithful the reproduction becomes.

Here's kind of an example. The analog wave is on the left, the digital "file" is on the right. This is pretty exaggerated but it's a good visual nonetheless:

When the file is played, your brain connects the dots. I think. I could be wrong.

If there's anything I missed/anything I put wrong, someone could surely come and say it better.
Main gear (For complete list, see profile):
Epiphone Les Paul Standard Plain-top
Basswood Telecaster, 2 single-sized HB's, both split.
Epiphone Valve Junior
B-52 AT-412 Cabinet
Oh, and I have a Squier VM Jazz Bass too.
#5
Digital processes the signal digitally. An audio interface that sends audio to your computer in a digital format is recording digitally.


Digital Audio Interface

Analog uses absolutely no computers. An analog mixer is one that does not send to a computer or have any digital firewire or USB outputs. It is not modeling the sound it is actually changing the sound. Most mixers you have seen have been analog. Purely analog recording ends up on tape.


Classic Analog Mixer

Most studios and people use combinations of both analog and digital by using analog mixers outputted into interfaces or the use extremely expensive solid state mixers which combine the best features of analog and digital into one.

Effects and other items can also be analog or digital. There are analog compressors, EQ and dozens of other effects that you would chain into your mixer. The digital equivalent is the effects you use in programs like logic, garage band, audacity, or protools.

For the average home user, a solid digital interface with a good DAW (digital audio workstation) is the way to go. Analog can easily become way too expensive and will never get the overall sound quality that digital does at an amature level.

EDIT: Everyone is making it sound like digital is a much worse solution because you lose sound quality. It's an unnoticable difference. Analog is rapidly becoming outdated.

http://www.tweakheadz.com/choosing_a_mixer_p3.htm

read that and at the bottom hit next and read the next page.

DOUBLEEDIT: sorry about the large pic size.
Last edited by alaub1491 at Sep 7, 2008,
#6
Since people already offered the technical info, heres my two cents. Analog usually sounds warmer, with more room for dynamics and quality. Many recording artists say they prefer the sound of analog, although recording digitally is usually cheaper and easier.
#7
Quote by alaub1491

EDIT: Everyone is making it sound like digital is a much worse solution because you lose sound quality. It's an unnoticable difference. Analog is rapidly becoming outdated.


The fact still stands that analog is the exact representation of the sound wave, whereas digital still doesn't have every single bit of the curve (at this point in time).

They actually could probably be made indistinguishable eventually (if not already) but the fact still stands that analog recordings contain more information.
Main gear (For complete list, see profile):
Epiphone Les Paul Standard Plain-top
Basswood Telecaster, 2 single-sized HB's, both split.
Epiphone Valve Junior
B-52 AT-412 Cabinet
Oh, and I have a Squier VM Jazz Bass too.
#8
Quote by rafarquhar
The fact still stands that analog is the exact representation of the sound wave, whereas digital still doesn't have every single bit of the curve (at this point in time).

They actually could probably be made indistinguishable eventually (if not already) but the fact still stands that analog recordings contain more information.


Yes, this is very true, but for the average home user, you could spend 500-1000 on a solid digital studio that would get fantastic, practially studio level quality, or you could spend upwards of 5000 dollars on an analog studio that would require patience, a lot more expertise, skill knowledge, and ability, plus the fact that analog audio isnt channel assignable to a DAW. I really doubt the average home user could clearly and distinctly tell you audio difference if you played them a high quality digital sample and a high quality analog sample.
#9
In my experience, digital gives good enough quality for just about anything. CDs are digital and no-one has ever cmplained about the quality of a CD, and generally speaking digital recordings are >CD quality.

They're also a ****load simpler to do, buy equipment for, mix, edit and distribute than analogue.

And then there's the price: digital is a lot cheaper than analogue.
You're using UG classic, congratulations.
You should be using UG classic.




E-Married to Guitar0Player

http://the llama forum because its gone forever which sucks and I hate it.
#10
Quote by jgbsmith
In my experience, digital gives good enough quality for just about anything. CDs are digital and no-one has ever cmplained about the quality of a CD, and generally speaking digital recordings are >CD quality.

They're also a ****load simpler to do, buy equipment for, mix, edit and distribute than analogue.

And then there's the price: digital is a lot cheaper than analogue.


QFT

Many professional studios now-a-days are converting to purely digital. It's simpler, cheaper, and with thousands of digital effects and such a wide choice of DAWs, the possibilites are limitless. Nearly every studio today relies on the Waves Maximizer and Compressor wayyyy more than they would like to say. With effects that you can just turn on and get instantly better results, theres no reason at all to not go digital.

That being said digital still takes a lot of time and care and learning to get the perfect sound or to even get it to sound good, but for most people, its cheaper and easier than analog.
#11
My point was that even though the average user won't know the difference, analog still contains more information.

I was not speaking for convenient or how noticeable it is to go digital.

EDIT: And yes, you would be very hard-pressed to find an all-analog studio nowadays.
Main gear (For complete list, see profile):
Epiphone Les Paul Standard Plain-top
Basswood Telecaster, 2 single-sized HB's, both split.
Epiphone Valve Junior
B-52 AT-412 Cabinet
Oh, and I have a Squier VM Jazz Bass too.