Arpangel wrote:The resolution just isn’t there with digital, it just doesn’t work.
As one who had the "joy" of using analog tape for many years, I really miss it too.
I miss the tape hiss, the limited dynamic range, the smell of isopropyl to clean the heads, the time spent lining the thing up, setting up any noise reduction system (because tape sounds SO good people use noise reduction!), the limited recording time that got halved if you doubled the speed to get better quality, the time to rewind and change reels, the reduced editing facilities, no ability to loop phrases while recording, the limited number of tracks, the storage space reels took up, the space a reel to reel machine took up, loss of quality at each bounce down, very limited editing abilities, depending on your skills with a razor blade only one level of undo, expense of tape, the awful feeling when you changed the monitoring from "desk out" to "off tape"...
Do specsavers do rose tinted specs?!
The very first time I used a digital workstation (AMS Audiofile which wasn't exactly user friendly) I was glad to hear a giant step in fidelity, and was amazed at the editing possibilities. Even slipping one track against another was a game changer.
Now we have incredible A to D converters that can cope with dynamic ranges approaching that of the human ear, running DAWs with editing and sound changing abilities that were science fiction when I used tape machines, on modestly priced computers. The total cost much, much less than any Studer reel to reel tape machine!
Digital works, really well.