Is "best" sound the defining factor in what you use?

[amost]

I think X sounds better than Y but it's pretty close and I like using Y more. I get more done in Y & also quicker...yet I'm pretty sure X's overall sound is better. Should I be using X because it sounds better to me? Is that the defining factor, I mean it should be about the sound shouldn't it...we're all trying to get the best sound right?

Okay so 2" is pretty revered tone-wise....yet it's barely used these days even though it's considered to sound better than just about everything else so I guess I'm thinking it's not soley about the sound. There's other considerations. I ain't saying it's right or wrong.

[Fretbored]

Originally Posted by amost

I think X sounds better than Y but it's pretty close and I like using Y more. I get more done in Y & also quicker...yet I'm pretty sure X's overall sound is better. Should I be using X because it sounds better to me? Is that the defining factor, I mean it should be about the sound shouldn't it...we're all trying to get the best sound right?

Okay so 2" is pretty revered tone-wise....yet it's barely used these days even though it's considered to sound better than just about everything else so I guess I'm thinking it's not soley about the sound. There's other considerations. I ain't saying it's right or wrong.

X=Tape and Y=Affordability & Efficiency - Ha! See mom, I can do Algebra...unless X=Nuendo and Y=Protools, in that case I'm still an idiot.

[Tony Shepperd]

With todays budgets the way they are, it's hard enough to get a label just to pay you.

Now, let's go back to the label and tell them you need an additional 3-7k JUST FOR TAPE COST for the project.

How do you think that would go over with the A&R guys?

[desol]

No. Best performance is the deciding factor in who i work with.

D.

[RainbowStorm]

Originally Posted by amost

I think X sounds better than Y but it's pretty close and I like using Y more. I get more done in Y & also quicker...yet I'm pretty sure X's overall sound is better. Should I be using X because it sounds better to me? Is that the defining factor, I mean it should be about the sound shouldn't it...we're all trying to get the best sound right?

Okay so 2" is pretty revered tone-wise....yet it's barely used these days even though it's considered to sound better than just about everything else so I guess I'm thinking it's not soley about the sound. There's other considerations. I ain't saying it's right or wrong.

In music and recording it's all about tone. But what's great sounding is subjective and also determined by our experience based perspectives. More and more engineers find ways of compensating for the loss of warmth you get from analog tape saturation and when they think about the maintenance work with analog tape they want something more useful so they transfer to semi-digital setups.

What I think most engineers agree about is that it still takes class A analog signal processing to reach the kind of sound quality needed when excluding analog tape from the equation. Digital setups enable the engineer to strip music apart, isolate elements and process the material artificially, which removes emotional and social underpinnings, that tends to filter the emotion out of the music. Elements like bit reduction, weird timing effects of instable clock circuitry, lost intensity due to artificial expressions of software instruments, latency inducing drivers combined with digital plug-ins/samples and audio/midi quantization can kill a digitally recorded song in an instant. But engineers find ways around these problems, in many cases by compensating with a lot of high quality vocals.

When it comes to the sound quality of modern sound we face a point when we need to be more specific when we describe the sound we want to achieve. Today, in 9 times of 10, what we mean by improving the sound quality is adding more emotions to the sound. In order to best deal with this I think we need to go back to the basic elements of music and take a look at how we go about generating the sounds that end up on the recordings. I think the main problem with digital recordings is the negative impact it has on modulation. The converters, both the ADC and the DAC, play a very significant role in this regard. That's why the converter is the single most important component in a digital or semi-digital setup.

A good way of improving the emotions is to use a really transparent limiter just before the monitors and analyze what it feels like as we limit the sound more and more. Does it come alive or does it die? In this way we can select the mics, pre-amps and converters according to what best translates the natural wave modulations. Think of your studio as an emotion filter. Vocals should be used when determining the modulation quality.

You have all probably compared the difference in distortion characteristics between digital and analog guitar distortion. Have you ever noticed where the real difference is? If you listen closely it's not just in the high-end, there is also a huge amount of modulation artifacts in the digital distortion when you compare it to the real thing. It reminds me a lot about the degrade from wav to mp3.

[84K]

Originally Posted by desol

No. Best performance is the deciding factor in who i work with.

D.

X2.

If I am picking between gear X vs. Y, I usually like gear with more attitude. Even more so when recording digital. Remember, Technically, Digital sounds better than analog if you add points for clarity into the equation. But Analog has warmth and harmonic distortion that is pleasant to the ears. So, when I record digital I like gear to make up for the missing 'tude and still maintain the benefits of the clarity.

[T_R_S]

The X factor for me has always been a proper acoustics and bunch of gear iles up in room can be difficult to achieve the desired reults.