Why can't music be recorded simultaneously in analog and digital?

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
I'm putting this here as it's more of a technically-related question. Feel free to move if need be!

Analog fans want releases and remasters done from the original analog source. I would presume digital fans would want a pure digital signal transfer.

Can this not be done at the recording level? Record in both formats simultaneously and keep all the fans happy! I know it's a simplistic view and I suppose if it were possible it would be done (?), but I'm not sure about that.

Can someone explain to me why this is either not possible and/or feasible? What are the roadblocks? Is it money (probably not unlikely)?
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,308
1,425
1,820
Manila, Philippines
It's done more often than you think John. Digital is often used as a back-up to an Analog session. It's Analog recording that is becoming rarer and rarer.
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
It's done more often than you think John. Digital is often used as a back-up to an Analog session. It's Analog recording that is becoming rarer and rarer.

I understand that, hence my question. Why can't that be done simultanously? Surely there has to be a way.
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,308
1,425
1,820
Manila, Philippines
It's a cost issue mainly my friend. All that's needed is the budget for it.

On the other hand, if one were already laying tracks on 2" one would wonder why they would use the digital back up for anything other than that (short punch ins and the like). It would double the mixing hours which would double the studio time and mix engineer fees. You'd probably end up with two different mix engineers if time is short. The producer would have to oversee two albums too. I suppose the question is how many people actually buy a CD because it is DDD. It doesn't seem to matter much to the CD buying public if a disc is DDD, ADD, or AAD. As for the analog side, these days even the tape is digitized at some point for editing and mastering purposes. Some digitally recorded LPs actually have some pretty high demand.

The most practical workflow with analog would be to track to tape with timecode and have MDRs or a DAW recording safety from the board also slaved. Mixing would be done analog but with the aid of automation and the mix to both an analog dub and a digital one. These would be sent to the mastering house for LP, CD or anything else including compressed files for download stores.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Hi

I agree with Jack that it is mainly an issue of cost. I will add this and put on my anti-flame suit:


Is it even necessary? I surmise this from my own and other experiences including professional here on WBF. The best digital copy of analog sources is so close as to be indistinguishable from the original on most systems. I would point you to some experiences conducted by Mike Fremer from Stereophile and our own Mike Lavigne: the differences were small in both cases and they without knowing which is which, could not tell them apart .. I could be dead wrong about this conclusion am waiting for Bruce B and Mike L to correct me. I will graciously retract my words and my post then...
Another thing that struck me, was the reception from a recent LP by Reference Recordings. Even from Analog fans it was hailed as excellent analog recording, until words began to circulate in fora around the Internet that it wasn't from an analog source .. discussions of its greatness began to fizzle but no one would outright say it wasn't a great analog or at the very least "analog-sounding" LP (How's that for twisting concepts :) ?? ). People would come out and just say that it was from a digital source .. that's all no one would say that this LP sounded anything but superb ...
To me that says how far digital has gotten.. That doesn't mean the demise of analog right then and now. It means however that great ,superlative recording is possible and regularly made using only digital gears and techniques .. thus pure analog today become less and less necessary ,IMHO, IME, from my point of view, YMMV and all that :)
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
To Jack and Frantz,

Thanks guys for your responses, and I guess I kinda suspected as much.

Personally I don't have much of an issue many times when a good recording from a digital source is used. I thought McCartney's Band On The Run was a good example of a digital source done right and then used for the LP release. My question mainly stems from the objections I hear all of the time that unless it's sourced from the original analog tapes the product won't be bought as its assumed its now an inferior reproduction.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Hi

I agree with Jack that it is mainly an issue of cost. I will add this and put on my anti-flame suit:


Is it even necessary? I surmise this from my own and other experiences including professional here on WBF. The best digital copy of analog sources is so close as to be indistinguishable from the original on most systems. I would point you to some experiences conducted by Mike Fremer from Stereophile and our own Mike Lavigne: the differences were small in both cases and they without knowing which is which, could not tell them apart .. I could be dead wrong about this conclusion am waiting for Bruce B and Mike L to correct me. I will graciously retract my words and my post then...
Another thing that struck me, was the reception from a recent LP by Reference Recordings. Even from Analog fans it was hailed as excellent analog recording, until words began to circulate in fora around the Internet that it wasn't from an analog source .. discussions of its greatness began to fizzle but no one would outright say it wasn't a great analog or at the very least "analog-sounding" LP (How's that for twisting concepts :) ?? ). People would come out and just say that it was from a digital source .. that's all no one would say that this LP sounded anything but superb ...
To me that says how far digital has gotten.. That doesn't mean the demise of analog right then and now. It means however that great ,superlative recording is possible and regularly made using only digital gears and techniques .. thus pure analog today become less and less necessary ,IMHO, IME, from my point of view, YMMV and all that :)

Yes well it's two and out for me with the RRs. I'm definitely not on their fan wagon. They just sound so mechanical and amusical to me.

And I would beg to differ--and Bruce has said the same thing here--that the digital copy of a master tape isn't a mirror image of the original recording.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Well Myles seem there is only One of you ..

I never inferred that Bruce said it was a mirror image... I think he said he preferred the tapes but I remember he added they were "mighty close" or something of that nature. You in the same thread (from memory) said "it wasn't even close" which is what I would have expected from you anyway. I am pointing to the fact that in that very small sample 75% found the digital copy difficult to tell apart from the original analog and these people are analog die-hard all 4 of them .. That calls for a pause don't you think or maybe a rewind don't you think? A softening of stance .... mhhhhhh???
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
Hi

I agree with Jack that it is mainly an issue of cost. I will add this and put on my anti-flame suit:


Is it even necessary? I surmise this from my own and other experiences including professional here on WBF. The best digital copy of analog sources is so close as to be indistinguishable from the original on most systems. I would point you to some experiences conducted by Mike Fremer from Stereophile and our own Mike Lavigne: the differences were small in both cases and they without knowing which is which, could not tell them apart .. I could be dead wrong about this conclusion am waiting for Bruce B and Mike L to correct me. I will graciously retract my words and my post then...
Another thing that struck me, was the reception from a recent LP by Reference Recordings. Even from Analog fans it was hailed as excellent analog recording, until words began to circulate in fora around the Internet that it wasn't from an analog source .. discussions of its greatness began to fizzle but no one would outright say it wasn't a great analog or at the very least "analog-sounding" LP (How's that for twisting concepts :) ?? ). People would come out and just say that it was from a digital source .. that's all no one would say that this LP sounded anything but superb ...
To me that says how far digital has gotten.. That doesn't mean the demise of analog right then and now. It means however that great ,superlative recording is possible and regularly made using only digital gears and techniques .. thus pure analog today become less and less necessary ,IMHO, IME, from my point of view, YMMV and all that :)

Frantz,

Although I do not consider that some one has already proved that the best version of a DSD copy of an analog tape sounds the same as the master tape, you want to extrapolate conclusions from listening to the end product to the first generation master. I think you can not do it - the first generation will be heavily processed by the mixing and mastering people and this processes can highlight effects you are not noticing at normal listening in people systems.

We should remember that using others erroneous conclusions does not make your argument more valid - it will only weaken or impair their strong opinions. No one is questioning superlatives, just looking for the optimum.

Also, people who listen to the RR vinyl recordings should remember that the lathe system has custom electronics by Nelson Pass and was operated by long-time mastering expert Paul Stubblebine. Although the recent LPs mastered from 24/176 digital masters will be technically inferior to the original digital recordings, we can not exclude that the additional mastering carried during the extra mastering phase can ameliorate our perception of it.

As always it would be nice when people refer to digital to say what format they are referring to.
 
Last edited:

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Frantz,

Also, people who listen to the RR vinyl recordings should remember that the lathe system has custom electronics by Nelson Pass and was operated by long-time mastering expert Paul Stubblebine. Although the LPs will be technically inferior to the original digital recordings, we can not exclude that the additional mastering can ameliorate our perception of it.

I don't understand that statement? Why should that be? Take the early digital recordings done by RR when digital was downright lousy. Do you think that they're better than the analog tape?
 

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,006
512
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
Well what do you want in analog? If you want rock/pop recordings in analog, good luck. I've seen track sheets in the dozens for mic/pres/processors. The cable routing would be astronomical! If you heard raw instruments played in a studio, we're talking pop/rock here, you would not find anything enjoyable at all.
Now, if you were talking location recordings with just 2 mics, then not a problem. It's being done more and more as we speak. When most people think of "master tapes", it's really the tapes that were done as a 2-track mixdown from many overdubs, bounces and edits from 2 inch. Even "master tapes" can be 2 or more generations from the raw tracks.
Then you may have the 2-track layback from the mastering engineer. The mastering house may receive hi-rez digital files and then felt they needed to be run through a tape machine to give it a 'glue' or cohesiveness.
Long story short... I went to Japan and recorded the Yamamoto Trio for FIM. The session was recorded in DSD, DXD, Pro Tools 24/192 and to 1/4". The producer chose the DXD files.

When I do master tape transfers, I've spent years trying to get the best possible digital copy coming directly from the Studer A80. The best to my ears so far is through a Grimm AD1 into the Sonoma. It's not perfect and a A/B can confirm which is which, but as the above poster states, it's a close as you're going to get. And for most people, thats good enough.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
microstrip

from all that you have written in your post .. it would seem that it is not necessary or at least that is how I read it ... :)
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Whether or not it is necessary, it isn't practical. The universe of people who believe it is necessary, or care, or devote a moment's thought to the necessity or lack thereof, is tiny. Really, really tiny. Don't be fooled by the view from internet audiophile discussion boards, we are such an infinitessimally small segment of the world of music lovers that we really don't count at all unless you're talking about audiophile recordings of Baklavian percussion orchestras. Or Dianna Krall.

So the expense of recording to digital and analog at once, and the subsequent separate post production paths just wouldn't pay off for the overwhelming majority of stuff that is recorded. Analog is a nearly dead medium. It's not extinct, but in spite of the small population that has been reintroduced into the wild, it's still endangered. It exist for a small world of hobbyists, and while they love their vinyl and their analog gear, I'll bet it's even a pretty small subset of them who think about the master's family tree. They trust their ears, and if you start with a hi-res digital master and make vinyl out of it, dude, it's gonna sound like vinyl. Can you now copy that vinyl to hi-res digital and have an indistinguishable copy? Pointless question. Those who love vinyl will never believe it, and those who don't would never bother.

Tim
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Whether or not it is necessary, it isn't practical. The universe of people who believe it is necessary, or care, or devote a moment's thought to the necessity or lack thereof, is tiny. Really, really tiny. Don't be fooled by the view from internet audiophile discussion boards, we are such an infinitessimally small segment of the world of music lovers that we really don't count at all unless you're talking about audiophile recordings of Baklavian percussion orchestras. Or Dianna Krall.

So the expense of recording to digital and analog at once, and the subsequent separate post production paths just wouldn't pay off for the overwhelming majority of stuff that is recorded. Analog is a nearly dead medium. It's not extinct, but in spite of the small population that has been reintroduced into the wild, it's still endangered. It exist for a small world of hobbyists, and while they love their vinyl and their analog gear, I'll bet it's even a pretty small subset of them who think about the master's family tree. They trust their ears, and if you start with a hi-res digital master and make vinyl out of it, dude, it's gonna sound like vinyl. Can you now copy that vinyl to hi-res digital and have an indistinguishable copy? Pointless question. Those who love vinyl will never believe it, and those who don't would never bother.

Tim

Please show me the stats that vinyl is only for old farts Tim. You are out of touch with the resurgence of vinyl among kids. Not only that but practically every new rock release is on vinyl and it ain't old farts buying them.
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
Well what do you want in analog? If you want rock/pop recordings in analog, good luck. I've seen track sheets in the dozens for mic/pres/processors. The cable routing would be astronomical! If you heard raw instruments played in a studio, we're talking pop/rock here, you would not find anything enjoyable at all.
Now, if you were talking location recordings with just 2 mics, then not a problem. It's being done more and more as we speak. When most people think of "master tapes", it's really the tapes that were done as a 2-track mixdown from many overdubs, bounces and edits from 2 inch. Even "master tapes" can be 2 or more generations from the raw tracks.
Then you may have the 2-track layback from the mastering engineer. The mastering house may receive hi-rez digital files and then felt they needed to be run through a tape machine to give it a 'glue' or cohesiveness.
Long story short... I went to Japan and recorded the Yamamoto Trio for FIM. The session was recorded in DSD, DXD, Pro Tools 24/192 and to 1/4". The producer chose the DXD files.

When I do master tape transfers, I've spent years trying to get the best possible digital copy coming directly from the Studer A80. The best to my ears so far is through a Grimm AD1 into the Sonoma. It's not perfect and a A/B can confirm which is which, but as the above poster states, it's a close as you're going to get. And for most people, thats good enough.

Thanks for that explanation and your insights Bruce! Personally I'm not bothered by the whole a/d master debate, as long when I buy my vinyl copy it sounds good to my ears. I just find it interesting that so many do. Like Tim says however, maybe it really is just a tiny few.
 

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,323
1,314
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
Please show me the stats that vinyl is only for old farts Tim. You are out of touch with the resurgence of vinyl among kids. Not only that but practically every new rock release is on vinyl and it ain't old farts buying them.

Several years ago before my nephew was married, he and a girl friend (both mid 20's then) came over to my house. They both forgot about my wife and I for a while and acted like they had hit a gold mine in my record collection. I couldn't believe those two, they went through almost my whole record set just looking and pointing out the "rock of ages" that they knew better than I did.

Sure, digital compressed music is probably what they listened too, but it was one of few times young people thought that I was too cool for school. My competitors in the thrifts are either old hippies or very young girls and boys.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Please show me the stats that vinyl is only for old farts Tim. You are out of touch with the resurgence of vinyl among kids. Not only that but practically every new rock release is on vinyl and it ain't old farts buying them.

I didn't say a word about the age of vinyl lovers, Myles. I actually know a few young'ns who are into vinyl. Their collections are full of digital recordings transferred to vinyl, some of which haven't even been seriously remastered for vinyl (though they have thankfully been turned down). And the quality of their turnbables and subsequent systems would probably make you throw up in your mouth a little. :)

Tim
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Please show me the stats that vinyl is only for old farts Tim. You are out of touch with the resurgence of vinyl among kids. Not only that but practically every new rock release is on vinyl and it ain't old farts buying them.

Myles

Is that written in jest or do you really, but really believe the resurgence of vinyl is for real and will last? Last year total album sales excluding Vinyl was about 500 Millions .. Vinyl about 2.8 millions ... No math skill necessary to derive a conclusion ... The future is not in LP .. Don't hold your breath ...
 

Thomas.Dennehy

New Member
Jan 5, 2012
122
0
0
Bloomfield Hills MI
Myles

Is that written in jest or do you really, but really believe the resurgence of vinyl is for real and will last? Last year total album sales excluding Vinyl was about 500 Millions .. Vinyl about 2.8 millions ... No math skill necessary to derive a conclusion ... The future is not in LP .. Don't hold your breath ...

Digital downloads and vinyl will survive as delivery mechanisms for listeners that want to possess music. Sales of audio CDs are declining at an accelerating pace (no reference cited, google any weekly or quarterly music sales report) and will fall off the cliff when the current generation of buyers dies off.

Cheers!
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Digital downloads and vinyl will survive as delivery mechanisms for listeners that want to possess music. Sales of audio CDs are declining at an accelerating pace (no reference cited, Google any weekly or quarterly music sales report) and will fall off the cliff when the current generation of buyers dies off.

Cheers!
Thomas ..I am not sure anyone can object to the fact that digital downloads is the way of the future and even that is not so clear as people make greater use of "the cloud".. I haven't tried Spotify for mobile but am using regular spotify and it clearly points toward the future of music and I am under the impression that Spotify has lossless delivery in the works ...Our grand kids or their kids may not even have to download anything ...just pick it up from the cloud ... You know just like Radio broadcasts but with infinitely more control and you think by then, Vinyl, Vinyl will survive???? And why would that be?
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing