Advantages Vs Disadvantages Recording Analog

[StrikeFirst]

I'd like to get some insight other than my own on this topic, everyone I know / my favorite artists record material to cassette instead of hooking up the mixer to their computer. I've always wondered what are the pro's and cons of recording analog, in theory isn't the audio captured best when it's going directly from the mixer to computer?

[Commander15]

Yeah well, according official audio tech theory it might be that the straight digital recording techniques are the most lostless ways to record audio. But in analog recording it is the certain audio degradation that brings the "magic", i.e. tape saturation, natural compression, cutting of the upper frequencies etc. And in most cases this and other factors will bring the certain juiciness and punch to the mix that sounds pleasing to the ear.

Audio recording might be pretty cumbersome when compared to the pure digital recording process, but the end results are strongly in favor of analog recording.

[Commander15]

Also the preamps and mixers matter in this. For example overdriven, saturating and sound coloring analog mixer or signal driven thru tube preamp  might bring very juicy results when compared with just recording the noise thru clean digital or analog mixer and audio interfaces own preamps.

[kiiski]

It's true that recording straight to digital is better than analog if you're looking for more dynamics, wider frequency response and a cleaner recording. Cleaner meaning that the device doesn't add any coloring (changes to tones, distortion or other 'mistakes') to the sound. These are all good things to look for when recording classical music, the human voice, movie foley, precise scientific stuff, etc. But I doubt that the cleanest possible way of recording is an ideal approach in most genres.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I would also underline that getting clean recording might be good when you are recording something that benefits of it. Lets say, acoustic instruments may be.
A lot of other sounds may not be ideal to begin with. Even the celebrated analogue synthesizers may not be that interesting unless there are something more than the sound of synth. Amplifiers. Room. Microphones. Tape overdrive. etc etc.
Not long ago I talked with guy who had expensive analogue modular gear, but he didn't get the sound he wanted. I mentioned problem is not the expensive synth itself, but that it just isn't enough alone to get that sound. If you want it dirty and saturated, digital line-in recording won't make it that. You can get other types of production that way.

Analogue recording "disadvantages" are that most often recorders are no longer as easily available or affordable as they used to be. Tapes are no longer as cheap or good as they used to be. There is way more gamble and variables involved. Positive is that it may bet you unexpected results you barely can manage to get in digital only. "Negative" is that you may need way more time and effort.

If one knows that your favorite type sound is generally achieved by analogue recordings, I would not settle for substitute as maker.

[kiiski]

The dirtiness/saturation can be emulated to some extent in digital audio workstation. I feel like those plugins do the trick if you're trying to add subtle effect: glue, warmth and all that. But if you try to push them beyond that, they don't sound good to my ears.

But I'd advice to use proper tools from the start instead of fixing things in the mix. You'll save yourself time and get better results.

I tried to emulate film look in my photography and wasn't satisfied with the results. The right decision was to start shooting on film, heh.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

Indeed, there are lots of plugins that emulate pretty accurately tape saturation. Yet, there is something they do not quite reach.. If you listen stuff old SJ, Whitehouse, Ramleh, Consumer Electronics etc besides tape, there is often room/space/amplifier etc and digitally adding some "room echo" barely is the same thing. It may sound good, but barely same thing. My advice would be to aim to generate situation where noise happens in a way it should be, rather than spending time searching how to make virtual substitute for it.

[kiiski]

Recording in a room with amplifier causes you to make decisions when recording and committing to a sound. It'll change the process and therefore the outcome forcing you to abandon the "I'll figure it out later"-mindset. This is probably clear to the more experienced guys but it may help the thread's original poster in his path. I think this all can be filed under the wider analog vs. digital -thing.

[theotherjohn]

Has anyone tried recording audio onto VHS/Betamax through a VCR, and achieved similar overdriven results to audio cassette tape? Certainly the increased recording length must be a bonus. I know Zeno Marx has mentioned before about VHS being a favoured medium by Grateful Dead bootleggers to use for dubs as the audio can be pretty close to CD quality (and with the use of things like a Sony PCM adaptor, it predates DAT). Obviously as it's not designed solely for audio then there must be some discrepancies, but perhaps some of these improper faults could be advantageous for noise making.

[StrikeFirst]

Has anyone tried recording audio onto VHS/Betamax through a VCR, and achieved similar overdriven results to audio cassette tape?

I have not, not really interested. More leaning to recording audio on tape but to each their own.

Thanks everyone for the responses, I have plans recording onto a four track with as quality master tapes as one can buy, saturating the sound with overdrives & tube preamps then dubbing the cassette as loud as possible (without clipping) to listen to the finished product.

If further questions arise on how to manipulate the sound even more to bring out the "magic" this forum will be the first to hear.

[Commander15]

Has anyone tried recording audio onto VHS/Betamax through a VCR, and achieved similar overdriven results to audio cassette tape?

I have not, not really interested. More leaning to recording audio on tape but to each their own.

Thanks everyone for the responses, I have plans recording onto a four track with as quality master tapes as one can buy, saturating the sound with overdrives & tube preamps then dubbing the cassette as loud as possible (without clipping) to listen to the finished product.

If further questions arise on how to manipulate the sound even more to bring out the "magic" this forum will be the first to hear.

If you are using cassette tape four tracker, i suggest that you should try chrome tapes in it. The end result is more hi-fi and "correct" than using ferro in those machines. Buy new old stock chromes.

[Commander15]

And i'd also recommend that you should not keep any strict rules concerning recording noise beforehand.

By this i mean that the end results may not be what you have imagined or planned in advance. If you plan to saturate the sound before it hitting the tape, try to combine the preamp and pedal distortion with actual tape saturation and compression. This could make the final mix sound better or worse, ultimately you decide. Let the signal hit the red and listen how it sounds. Try ferro tape in your four tracker instead of chrome for more lo-fi approach and "glued together" sound. 

And for example dubbing the master tape without "clipping": it might very well be that the final mix can sound better when it is pushed in the red and using ferro tape vs. cool levels and chrome or metal. But if there is lots of dynamics involved in your noise, then you should consider staying under the red in level meter. Experiment! Try different methods and ways during the session. There's ultimately no rights or wrongs, only suggestions and general guidelines.

[Phenol]

I agree with a lot of what have been said here and second the don't be too strict with following the "rules" sentiment as well. Personally, I have had the best results with a mix of line in to audio interface, miced up amp to audio interface, line in to 4 track tape recorder and miced up amp to tape recorder. I use re-amping quite a lot and mix the signals to get the best qualities out all the recordings. It takes effort and time to fiddle with eq, pre-amps etc. to get rid of hums and hisses (of the kind you don't want), phasing issues and so on, but it's also satisfying.

[host body]

100& analog recording process offers really no advantages over hybrid of analog and digital. You can get the analog sound and use the convenience of a DAW without the end product suffering at all. The way I do it is first everything goes to DAW, then certain elements or tracks to tape and back into DAW if needed. Often the master is run thru a tape deck if that kind of sound is what is needed. This does require more mental planning and awareness of the end product, where with a 4-track and no computer the end product will be much more predictable.