Digital vs. analog audio: Which sounds better?

[subzeroxor]

The analog vs. digital debate has been raging for nearly three decades, and there's still no clear winner, because it's really just a matter of personal preference. I'm fine with that, but there's a lot of sniping in the analog/digital wars, and each side never misses an opportunity to put down the other side as misguided, deaf, just plain stupid, or worse. Each side claims its chosen format is superior and the opposite's is garbage.

I'm an analog guy, but I'd admit that analog's distortions, speed variations, and noise/hiss make it less by-the-numbers accurate, but digital sound can be cold, hard, and uninviting. So on one hand you might say analog's distortions are part of its appeal, but if that was all there was to it, why do so many analog lovers like higher-resolution (96-kHz/24-bit or SACD) digital, more than CD-quality digital? I think high-resolution digital goes a long way toward eliminating most of the problems I hear with CDs. It's just that there's very, very little newly released high-resolution digital music to choose from (most SACD and DVD-A titles are back-catalog releases).

The "loudness wars" and overprocessed sound common are rampant in digital audio formats, and that muddies the debate. "Bad" sound isn't inherent to digital, but there's a lot of pretty awful-sounding digitally recorded music out there. Better-sounding CD players and digital-to-analog converters can help improve the sound of CDs and digital files to some degree.

LPs have problems, too. While we have vastly better vinyl pressings from companies like Mobile Fidelity that reduce the noise, clicks, and pops associated with LP playback, a lot of LPs are noisy, warped, and have distorted sound. Like the best high-resolution digital titles, the number of high-quality vinyl titles on the market are more limited, and most of the better-sounding, all-analog recordings come from the back-catalog vaults of the record labels. New music on an LP can be great, but again, if the recording is overprocessed, pressing it on vinyl doesn't make it sound any better. Most new music LPs are sourced from digital masters; there are very few, new all-analog LPs to choose from.

Peaceful coexistence between the analog and digital faithful is the only way forward, and each side should enjoy music in its own way.

 

[Simpol]

I think that analog sound is better. For example,i have a minibrute and its sound incredible!!! But...vst's doesnt the same jejeje sorry for my english im spanish!

 

[Andreswa]

Great thread. Fully respect the Analog lovers and all but i do believe it's a question as vague as which DAW is the best.
Always the same answer DAW doesn't matter it's how you use it. With that said, my two cents as far as Analog vs. Digital. I used analog and i'm using digital now. I find analog as warm and big sound with no doubt, but digital gives me so much more control and things to do. For example, try mimicking Dance floor standard FX techniques like all the ones you can get in D-Blue glitch in a analog realm. Not impossible, but a lot more effort. My example may count as invalid which is fine. Point still comes back to do you create easier music with Analog or Digital. Which one works faster, which can you afford and so on.

For example in DJ'ing. I can play a set on Cdjs and a fairly okay sets on vinyl but give me Digital (Software) products and i can make new stuff on the spot.

In the end, I'd like to mix both. The ease of digital with the character of Analog and that i believe, can be achieved by running your unmastered track through a Analog mastering process. Run it through a SSL or Mackie desk into some outboard gear to just brighten it up. Which still can all be done Digitally with a lot of years of experience.

That's just my two cents. Great topic Subzeroxor

 

[pablo blue]

It's horses for courses really! Generally, a track that has been mixed and mastered for vinyl would sound better on vinyl than CD etc, but it's also personal taste.

Also, you could have at least reworded the question rather than directly copying it from here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20055650-47.html

 

[gadget609]

like stated earlier , it's a personal preference , but i prefer warmer analog to cold crisp digital.. in certain situations.

 

[burntscarr]

I have been mixing with both for a while now and I have no preference, they are both audio, and I can make music with both! I'm happy with both.

 

[tamla]

As the last post, and you can manipulate sound in so many different ways these days it makes little difference aurally. The main difference is price usually...

 

[jbusch]

When recording guitar tracks I always record a digital and an analog track at the same time. For some reason I always end up being able to get a better mastered track when I use the analog tracks only.

 

[styoung]

Analogue all the way.

 

[kiddomoney]

Long live analog.

 

[Hypex]

Also, you could have at least reworded the question rather than directly copying it from here:

Busted! :-D

Well just to add by clogging my thought into it. When it comes down it real sound in real life is analogue so it will get converted back to analogue anyway. Usually on the speakers. Even with pure digital speakers (do they exist?) once the sound hits the air it has hit the analogue domain.

I grew up with vinyl in the 80's. And also extended and 12" mixes were centred around vinyl. Something that didn't translate well when shrunk to a CD. But 12" remixes will just cloud the issue as we are talking about pure sound.

That said, I saw Enimem come out as vinyl release. I didn't understand this. What person into rap who is a teenager or even in their 30's would want to play rap music on vinyl? I also didn't see the point of cutting some rap music to a 12" disc unless it was a remix. :-?

I see talk of music being digitally re-mastered in 24-bit on the cover of 16-bit CDs. Was there a point to this? We of course do have the 24-bit SACD that didn't take off. DVD-A and now BD-A. But even the average CD player can only play CDs and some will play the new teenage mp3 format. This isn't good for digital audio. CD players can't even play DVD-A and are left behind again by BD-A.

Of course analogue has its problems with pops and cracks from a dirty or scratched disc. As does CD. But vinyl isn't the only analogue medium. We do have tape. Have their been any re-releases made on tape? I was fan of tape also. It translated to your car quite well. It was portable

But I think the big difference these days is convenience. No one, least that I know of, lugs around a giant record player in the back of their car for that pure analogue experience. :-D We had tape and then CD players. And now mp3 or other lossy music players. Or is that lousy music? I think spell correction is on the mark. ;-)

I really think the biggest blot in the music industry is mp3. Years ago FM radio in my car was clear. Now days a song sounds like a corrupted mp3. If I listened to the CD version instead it does sound clearer. Unfortunately no one made a compressed digital format that retained the data and kept the size small enough for storage that took off. Even iTunes music is lossy. Perhaps worse is mp3 with its variable quality setting. I've spent time tracking down some rare song versions only to be rewarded with a teenage mp3. That is 128Kbps. Terrible! I thought young people had the best hearing? Well the teenage mp3 proves that wrong!

So these days, what am I? I've gone digital ATM. Years of computer use and going from pop rock to techno had corrupted my ears.