# The Great Question.........



## VipermanGTX (Jan 28, 2005)

as we reach greater limits in audio, this question should be asked.....


----------



## avkid (Jan 28, 2005)

I still like the sheer reliability and feel of the knobs in my hand


----------



## DJErik07 (Jan 28, 2005)

I like the knobs too..


----------



## ccfan213 (Jan 28, 2005)

yea i gotta go analog, my brother has a digital 12ch yamaha for his band, i hate EQing with it, IMO its really annoying.


----------



## jammers (Jan 30, 2005)

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!


----------



## TechnicalDirector3-W (Jan 30, 2005)

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.


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 30, 2005)

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.


----------



## mixsa (Jan 31, 2005)

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..?"


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Jan 31, 2005)

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


----------



## Peter (Jan 31, 2005)

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.


----------



## RelativeMischief (Jan 31, 2005)

I'm going to second what Andy said above, don't know the accesibility and functions of a digital console until you've used one designed for live applications. Myself I've gotten the chance to see a PM1D in action (though not actually used one) and the engineer didn't seem to have any problems with tweaking what he needed right away. My only hands on experience with digital was with a Sony piece of crap in a studio. I hated it, I used the Soundcraft Ghost whenever I could (analog).

Having heard both types of consoles in action I'd have to say I perfer the sound of an analog over digital. A/D converters seem to detract from the quality of the signal (this is a personal opinion, as it is with everyone. There is very little/no frequency difference in an analog or digitally converted input). Digital just sounds processed ... which might just be what you're going for in some gigs, so it's really a matter of weighing the pros and cons.

In the end: I voted analog. Nothing like all the "ooos" and "aaahhs" when you bring in an MH4


----------



## soundman1024 (Jan 31, 2005)

I am for digital integration in an analog world. For example I like VCA groups and automated mute groups. I also like the feel of an analog console, and the fact that the only thing that can go wrong is a pop, no crashes. At the same time recording is much simpler with digital audio. I would choose analog over digital for live, digital over analog for a studio application.


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Feb 1, 2005)

See, even with the 02R, while there is that nervousness in having so many eggs in one basket, the flexibility in having so many things available in one package makes it soooooo much more useful than an analog console.

With digital, you can have dynamics processing on every channel if you need it, a graphic display of the EQ curve on your parametrics channel EQs, built in delay on the outputs, built in effects processing, etc.

To do what I do with the 02R, I'd need a rack full of outboard gear with an analog console. Have you seen the massive FOH racks that most musicals tour with? On my last tour, "The Full Monty", we had one single FOH rack, which consisted of ClearCom, a CD Burner, two MiniDisc players, and some video gear. ALL of the system processing happened right in the PM1D, which made for a smaller FOH setup, a quicker load-in, and a lighter truck pack.

So yeah, I like digital. Not to say that I don't love a nice analog console, or that I think digital is perfect. But it definitely has its benefits, and it's here to stay.


----------



## Radman (Feb 1, 2005)

Digidesign Venue looks like a really great digital solution for live audio. I still works analog if the CPU crashes. There was a really good review of it in FOH not that long ago. In my opinion, digital is the way to go with large shows, even thought I've never really used a digital board.

Ahh! We didn't get our grant for new sound equip. They said it was a capitol improvement. But there might end up being a seperate sound budget in the future, instead of sharing with lights. (Sorry, little rant over now.)


----------



## VipermanGTX (Feb 1, 2005)

thanks for the feed back guys. I believe a hybrid board would be a great thing indeed


----------



## Dan-Greaves (Feb 1, 2005)

I like digital better because it has so much more capabilties than analog. And Its probably because I'm young and have grown up with digital.


----------



## SuperCow (Feb 2, 2005)

Analog. You can't beat knobs and faders. It's just so much more intuitive and it's easier to learn.


----------



## Roger (Feb 2, 2005)

Im gonna stay with analog for as long as I can. Some of the new digital consoles are looking pretty tempting though. But unfortunately none of the venues i work with wants to spend $7000 or more on a console. Which i find sad because I really want to play with the mackie tt24.


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Feb 3, 2005)

That's just the point I'm trying to make, SuperCow--a digital console designed with live use in mind not only has plentiful knobs and faders, but is easier to use because there are fewer of them. Instead of having a huge barrage of knobs to twist, you have one set of knobs (or, in the case of the DiGiCo D5, one set per 8 faders), and all you have to do is touch the fader or the select button for the channel you want before you reach for the set of knobs. This way, you're always reaching for the same spot, and don't have to scan through a ton of knobs to find the right one.

Again, digital has its ups and downs. I've had a PM1D crash (thankfully not during a show), and it isn't a pretty sight. But overall, [i[with a console designed specifically for live use[/i], if you take a little time to get used to it, it's actually easier than an analog console in certain respects. It's just an adjustment because you're used to the analog way of working.

--Andy


----------



## VipermanGTX (Feb 3, 2005)

Hey how about i get a Medal for this question? hm?


----------



## squashbucket (Feb 18, 2005)

Peter said:


> 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.



Peter, check out the edirol 110fx mixer. It is a fully analog 10 chanel mixer with an 11th USB in/out chanel. I use one and I love it. It lists for about $500 american but I found it for $200 at the accademic supper store on line. http://www.academicsuperstore.com


----------



## Peter (Feb 19, 2005)

Nice timing squashbucket! My Prosonus Firpod came UPS today and I have been playing with it all evening. (I also Finally got Best Buy to replace my laptop after them "service"ing it for 2 months [so it was a good day!]). Just by the way, So far, I really like the Firepod, although I dont know if I have enough time to put it to a real test. 

::comes back later::

Strange, I cant find anything on that mixer.... do you have a URL? Thanks


----------



## squashbucket (Feb 19, 2005)

Here you go Peter, they changed name. http://www.edirol.com/products/info/m100fx.html The older 110fx was the same exact thing but needed a firmware update to be compatable with core audio. It would be great if it was firewire rather than usb, but few prosumers need more, and it would greatly up the price. Oh, and edirol is the editing branch of roland, so the quality of the parts used are great. Everything feels the way it should. And it is a great little straight up mixer.


----------



## Peter (Feb 19, 2005)

Hmmm... that does look like a nice little box. It is kinda what I have been trying to get away from, in the fact that it only sends one channel to your computer for recording. What I bought allows me to record 10 chanels at the same time so I have GREAT flexability when doing a post mix. However this does look like a great little box, especialy (like they say) for video production (b/c it only has 2 mic inputs).


----------



## squashbucket (Feb 19, 2005)

Really? Which firepod do you have? Do you have a url? I tried looking it up and the ones I saw only had two mic inputs too. I actually use the edirol in the opposite direction. I've got a seccond sound card installed in my G4 so I have 7 outputs on that plus the two chanels on the motherboard, and then the usb chanel. Each out put form the computer is routed through on of the chanels on the board. All the outputs except the ones on the motherboard are 24bit, so I use theose for the most part. That way I can have some dynamic sound effects (10 simoltanious) all with independant variables. What recording software do you use? I use soundtrack form Apple to record sfx and such. Works pretty well, but I am always on the lookout for soemthing better.


----------



## avkid (Feb 19, 2005)

VipermanGTX said:


> Hey how about i get a Medal for this question? hm?


Hmm...doesn't work like that!!


----------



## Peter (Feb 19, 2005)

Let's continue this topic HERE where I have been discussing my recording setup, and allow this thread to get back on topic about analog v digital.


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Feb 19, 2005)

I do want to reiterate that while I am a big supporter of digital consoles, with all the benefits they provide, I fully admit they are not a panacea, and they have their downsides, too. Just today, I got caught during a show where the handheld mic we use for preshow announcers wouldn't come up; I had to page through three or four different screens to check every possible cause of the problem, and found that it was metering fine on the channel, routed to the right places, but nothing was getting to those buses. I finally managed to track it down to the fact that one of the faders was dirty and thus wasn't registering that I had brought it up!

At least with analog it's easy to scan down the strip and check the routing, a dirty fader sounds cruddy but usually at least puts something out, and if I need to move an input to an adjacent channel, it doesn't involve flipping to another screen, saving all the settings, and then reloading them on the new channel (not that matching settings on an analog strip is cake, either, but it's a bit quicker in many cases).

So, for every upside, there's definitely a down!


----------



## VipermanGTX (Feb 22, 2005)

i was joking about the medal..........geez....


----------



## Skitty (Mar 1, 2005)

I have always loved the simplicity of an analog console. However, once i got my hands on a digital console, I fell in love with all the internal atributes.


----------



## avkid (Mar 1, 2005)

DIGICO has a line of live digital consoles the flagship of which is the D5 
live. Info and specs can be found at: http://www.digiconsoles.com/digico.2/overview56.htm


----------



## Peter (Mar 1, 2005)

Hey, Welcome Skitty! Nice to see a new member posting! Be sure to drop by the new member forum and say hello and allow us to properly welcome you! 

I have never worked on a fully digital console, so i am not really qualified to say, but I tend to like Digital stuff but like i said, i have never used a digital console so...


----------



## VipermanGTX (May 19, 2005)

Lets keep this going!


----------



## jonhirsh (May 19, 2005)

well i am not a sound guy and would never pretend to be but i do know a fair bit about it from the technical side and i do own a protools digi 02 well on the last 3 shows i have worked on all theatrical shows they have rented it and used it for recording play back of sfx and for eqing and puting effects on live mics and it works perfectly and i can make an extra buck or two 


i thiknk its the perfect interface between play back and console and i love that they can throw in a effects delay and eq with in seconds with out multiple racks taking up my space in the booth.


so i vote for digital 

JH


----------



## koncept (May 19, 2005)

I would love to be able to have a ditital console. The feel of an anlouge console is wonderful, but having a digital that resembles an analouge console should be easy enough to learn. I have never used a digital but I would like to mostly for the effects and delay additions. The outboard gear is wonderful and all, but is costly so we dont have much (an effects processor). I do think that for an on the fly show outboard gear and analouge will be easier to setup and tweak, but for a long show where you have the time to tweak it and set it up right digital would be easier, especialy if you have "god mics" for peopl not on stage or you have your pit in another room due to set sizes, you could have one fader for the pit (im asuming you dont have multiple analouge consoles, or that you have had problems with people playing with the pit console) for the pit with all levels set and just adjust that based on the group as a whole. (i know someone is gonna say its better to keep them separate, but sometimes you cannot do that due to the lack of resources or money)

either way
hybrid gets my vote, but i think digital is here to stay


----------



## herr_highbrau (May 19, 2005)

I personally am still all for analogue, although I'm pleased digital's on the way up. As has already been said, I like the feel of the knobs and faders, but I'd like to see an analogue style desk where everything (and I mean everything) can be stored theatre stack style.

Knowing me something like that already exists though :roll: lol


----------



## Eboy87 (May 21, 2005)

It depends on the # of inputs. More than 20, plus EFX sends, auxs, all that and I'd go digital. The Mackie TT24 I think is a great digital console that seems (to me at least) a lot like analouge.


----------



## Hughesie (Aug 27, 2005)

*Analog*

If it's not analog it's just another step towards Lighting 

i like big desks

 (so that the lighting desk looks small)  


and anything Digital has a chance of crashing


----------



## Foxinabox10 (Aug 27, 2005)

Anything analog also has a chance of breaking, Hughesie89.


----------

