[SnappleMan]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

The solution is to realize that:

- nobody gives a shit if you make crappy music with either
- any time wasted on the debate is time better spent on actually making music

Just sayin.

[Majiffy]

A++ would read again.

[PROTO·DOME]

Just pointing out, those aren't THE two arguments, those are YOUR two arguments.

Digital doesn't allow for any more 'new' creative directions than analogue does, that's a stupid point, as is the opinionated, 'easier to work with'.


EDIT- Missed off the word 'does' which proved crucial to the point.

[lazygecko]

Originally Posted by PROTO·DOME

Just pointing out, those aren't THE two arguments, those are YOUR two arguments.

Digital doesn't allow for any more 'new' creative directions than analogue, that's a stupid point, as is the opinionated, 'easier to work with'.

Well for one, if we're talking about storage format then digital doesn't have nearly as many physical limitations in terms of how long your records can be and their dynamic range.

As for being easier to work with, just compare how time consuming it was to set up and maintain a classic analog studio, compared to loading up a digital software project. Much less time spent on that, more time spent on the actual creative process.

[PROTO·DOME]

Originally Posted by GeckoYamori

Well for one, if we're talking about storage format then digital doesn't have nearly as many physical limitations in terms of how long your records can be and their dynamic range.

As for being easier to work with, just compare how time consuming it was to set up and maintain a classic analog studio, compared to loading up a digital software project. Much less time spent on that, more time spent on the actual creative process.

But the creative process itself isn't better or worse in either, just different. Yes, it might be more accessible to grab a PC and install a DAW, but it doesn't mean it's any more creative or easier to explore than the other. My lecturers for instance would argue that tape based sonic design is a catalyst for creativity and provides a better understanding of sound manipulation in general.

[theshaggyfreak]

Tools are tools. It's a bit silly to assume that either digital or analog is 'better'. In the end, it boils down to how you use them in a specific situation.

[SnappleMan]

10 or 15 years ago things were very different, and most digital plugins sounded like ass. These days there's really no difference in the sound you can get, sure some bitter oldfucks and knowitall music students will disagree but that doesn't change the facts that the line is pretty much blurred to the point of nonexistence. So all that's left now is to either use whatever you can find to make music, or to make excuses as to why your music sounds crappy "if only I had _____ and _____."

[Fishy]

I've done the odd tape session with a band. What I like about it is you have to NAIL shit. None of this 'let's do 50 takes and let them edit it later' stuff. Make a decision, was that good enough?

You want another take of the guitar solo? Are you sure? The last one isn't coming back!

[Mikeaudio]

Originally Posted by SnappleMan

10 or 15 years ago things were very different, and most digital plugins sounded like ass. These days there's really no difference in the sound you can get, sure some bitter oldfucks and knowitall music students will disagree but that doesn't change the facts that the line is pretty much blurred to the point of nonexistence. So all that's left now is to either use whatever you can find to make music, or to make excuses as to why your music sounds crappy "if only I had _____ and _____."

I agree. Digital is becoming immensely advanced very quickly, and the line between the 2 is becoming blurred to the point of subjective opinion rather than objective knowledge. I think the only big difference between the analog age and the digital age is imagination and creativity. It seems there are 2 big problems that the digital age has: They keep trying to look back at the analog age to replicate everything that already happened(I'm not arguing against creative ideas or sound design), or they get caught up with the commercialism in the musical writing and engineering style of our present pop culture. With all the technology at our disposal now, there really couldn't be a more exciting time to write music, and there aren't really any excuses for ignorance with all the information that one can find. Today, anyone can pretty much learn anything.

[Majiffy]

Originally Posted by GeckoYamori

Well for one, if we're talking about storage format then digital doesn't have nearly as many physical limitations in terms of how long your records can be and their dynamic range.

As for being easier to work with, just compare how time consuming it was to set up and maintain a classic analog studio, compared to loading up a digital software project. Much less time spent on that, more time spent on the actual creative process.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by PROTO·DOME

Digital doesn't allow for any more 'new' creative directions than analogue does

First off, it's a lot cheaper and more accessible. That means, comparing a digital world to an analog world, more people have the means to explore creatively. That alone is a strong argument against this statement. Furthermore, we have the ability to code in whatever can be imagined as a plugin, which gives us a hell of a lot easier path to brand new sounds and experimentation. A lot of innovative changes in music in the analog era were by mistake, which makes new findings rare by definition. With intention comes a possibility for greatly increased expansion.

So yes, digital offers a lot more creative directions over analog.

Originally Posted by Fishy

I've done the odd tape session with a band. What I like about it is you have to NAIL shit. None of this 'let's do 50 takes and let them edit it later' stuff. Make a decision, was that good enough?

So true. God, that would save so much time when you have to deal with the perfectionists...