|
|
||||||
| Notices |
| Sound A place to discuss sound reinforcement and design. |
| View Poll Results: It's Simple........... | |||
| Analog |
|
28 | 70.00% |
| Digital |
|
12 | 30.00% |
| Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
as we reach greater limits in audio, this question should be asked.....
|
|
||||
|
I still like the sheer reliability and feel of the knobs in my hand
__________________
Philip LaDue Endicott Audio ADR Audio "The loudspeaker has more of an effect on the sound we hear than anything else in the audio reproduction chain"- Alan Frank |
|
|||
|
I like the knobs too..
__________________
Last night I played a tape at full blast. The mime next door went nuts. |
|
|||
|
yea i gotta go analog, my brother has a digital 12ch yamaha for his band, i hate EQing with it, IMO its really annoying.
__________________
Matthew Lipsky Sound Technician/Designer Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center University of Maryland, College Park |
|
|||
|
Both have there place. Digital x-overs/ speaker processing work great, however i am not a fan of digital desks either - hard to use on the fly and when one goes wrong, it really goes wrong (not good during a large scale concert). Also they`ve brought out digi desks with just one cable going back to the desk (a/d connverters at stage box), great piece of enigneering to fit all that signal down one cable! But what happens when that ONE cable stops working during a gig - your in the sh*t!
|
|
|||
|
Analog is the way to go... it seems that until digital systems are required for use they are not going to be totally put into effect...when that time is I do not know.
__________________
TD3-W |
|
|||
|
For consoles, I tend to prefer analog for the simple reason of accessibility. On an analog desk, every control is in front of me, and I can adjust it immediately. On a digital desk, I may or may not need to dig through menus to access the controls I need.
For signal processing gear, I would go with either analog or digital, since it's not something I would need to be changing every few seconds in the middle of a show. For audio editing, I would definitely go digital.
__________________
Mike Benonis Grad Electrical Engineering '14, Virginia Tech Electrical Engineering '09, The University of Virginia KI4RIX http://www.benonis.net/ |
|
|||
|
depends, definitley analogue for a live mixing console, but all audio editing, playback (be it from computer, cd player or md) is easiest done with digital
i must admit the feel of using faders and knobs far outweighs any tangible benfits of digital boards, (anyway how much cooler does an analogue look with all those knobs,,, ha. "do you know what ALL those knobs and switches do..?" (: |
|
||||
|
I'm seeing a lot of judgments here that are based on digital consoles that aren't designed for live use. Mind you, that's understandable, because consoles like the Yamaha PM1D and the DiGiCo line are quite expensive and not likely to be come across until you're out working professionally (and even then only in limited venues).
That said, you cannot judge digital consoles on a whole if you haven't used these. Recording consoles, particularly the more popular ones from Yamaha, are super-kludgy and a pain to use. I'm touring with an 02R right now, and it took me a good month or two to become really comfortable with it. Even now I still don't love it, but I've gotten to the point where I can quickly do anything. With consoles designed specifically for live use, however, things get soooooo much easier. The PM1D is better by far (although not my favorite). It eliminates many menus, you have tons and tons of faders at your fingertips, it's not the same as Eqing on a dedicated channel strip, but it's still not too bad once you get used to it. The DiGiCo line, however, is amazing. Everything is super easy to get to, right in front of you, and by having only one channel strip section for EQ and processing of a bank of 8 faders, things are actually easier to use, because they're less clutterred. Again, a little adjustment is necessary, but surprisingly little. Anyway, I just wanted to point out that it's not a fair evaluation to judge a whole category on the basis of a few common but less than optimal options when there are much better representatives of how things can be done well out there. --Andy
__________________
Sound Engineer, currently working in a NYC sound shop Member IATSE Local 1 One From The Road: Tools, Toys, and Tales for the Theatrical Technician |
|
|||
|
As another plug for the digital side... as far as editing and working with sound on your computer, you can get the feel of real faders and knobs for many popular software packages by getting an external (usualy USB) control desk that bascily just acts like a highly specialized keyboard (with knobs and faders) that are asignable to different settings in the program. I have never used one of these, but they look like they are nice (although they are $$).
If anyone has used one of these, please let me know what you think, I am looking into recording optoins and probably feel comfortable enough with a mouse (i am truely a computer nerd at heart) but would like any input people have regarding these controls.
__________________
[b]Peter[/b] [url=http://www.GrowInGrace.com]www.GrowInGrace.com[/url] [url=http://www.robopeter.com]www.RoboPeter.com[/url] |
![]() |
| Tags |
| great, question |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| AC or DC....that is the question | propmonkey | Lighting | 34 | November 28th, 2006 01:23 PM |