I think some of the recording techniques are different in analog vs digital. I started with a Tascam Portastudio, then worked with real 2" tape on Stevens and Ampex machines in "real" studios, then bought an ADAT - of which I never liked the sound. It wasn't until I bought upgraded converters for my Digi001 did I start thinking digital sounded "OK". My 002R sounds better, since it's newer - and I haven't even tried 96K yet.

However, if you're in doubt about how "analog" digital can sound, check out the Beach Boys "Smile". I'm pretty sure it was done at 88.2 into Protools with a lot of vintage mics and preamps (and older recording styles). I remember a big article in Sound-On-Sound about recording it only a few months ago.

I personally think that a lot of people don't like "digital" sound because there are SO many bad recordings done with it, people start thinking "digital = bad sound".

...and next year, digital will sound even better, but there will probably be just as many really lousy recordings (and bad engineering) done on them.

However, I remember before Quantegy, and you used to buy Ampex 456 tape. You either used that or 3M 250 tape - depending on whether you wanted more low-end punch (Ampex) or a nice even frequency response (3M).

I still have some 1/4" 456 tape reels from my (long-sold) Fostex 1/4" 8-track with Dolby C. Remember those?


------------------
Larry
www.audibleresponse.com

[This message has been edited by Lwilliam (edited 01-06-2005).]

Larry
http://www.audibleresponse.com
http://www.myspace.com/larrywilliamsproductions
...now writing/producing with Natascha: http://www.myspace.com/nataschacorrigan