I've been following your channel for awhile and have taken great interest in your work regarding the 'analog sound'. I've been in the recording game since the mid 1980's and have worked in many studios. I started in the large format magnetic tape era, suffered through the home studio cassette multi-track period and on into Pro-Tools and PC based audio production, the format we are currently using. I know what the 'analog sound' is and your assessment of this philosophy is absolutely spot on. Magnetic tape and the equipment used to record to this format had limitations, some of which were severe: mechanical noise, narrow frequency range, physical distortion of the media (wow and flutter), high noise floor. These problems, thankfully don't exist in the digital realm with the added benefit of low cost and easy accessibility for anyone who wants to pursue audio recording. The pundits who crow about the beauty of the analog sound are really only championing the nostalgia of this limited equipment and more importantly, the sound of the music they admired. You see, the sound of the recording has a lot to do with the joy and inspiration they felt when they listened to it. Sometimes this morphs into a disdain for, let's just say, acoustical natures that don't sound like what they are accustomed to hearing or working with. As a record producer, I endorse fully the digital realm and really don't ever want to go back to the 'analog sound' if it means using outboard gear, old-school analog mixers or magnetic tape. The time it takes to maintain and manage the gear in the recording chain could be better used in actually creating music: working with the artist to write music, trying different types of in the box plugins to enhance the sound including, yes, getting the analog sound many think are better. Then there is also the idea of altering the sound: I would much rather have a perfectly clean well-recorded sound from a good mic in a good room with an excellent artist producing it into my computer/laptop and changing it later to suit the feeling or vibe that the artist is aiming for. Back in the day, just trying to get a decent sound with a good mic on to the tape was a tremendous hassle with all efforts spent trying to get the gain as hot as possible in order to widen the dynamic range to avoid the dreaded hiss and buzz created by the gear in the chain. Never again, my friend. I'll leave it to the in the box plugins to give that sound back to me on demand whilst I have a perfectly clean copy backed up in the cloud for future uses (remixes, remaster, sample generation, etc...). Keep up the good work, bro. Your accuracy, honesty and integrity are what I admire in your posts. I hope you get to interview more people from the industry to add to your channel. If it's possible, please try and interview engineers who work in the purely acoustical realm. I would be interested in hearing from classical and chamber music engineers and producers in addition to the folks who squash signals for EDM and hip-hop. Some jazz producers would be nice too especially guys from the 1960's and 1970's. Peace.

I love the old school analog gear. That’s where I started. But nowadays plugins do an insane job an emulating just about any piece of gear. Awesome video.

YOU ARE A WELL SPOKEN TEACHER...APRECIATE THESE CONTENT

Fantastic series. Thanks

Love all your content really needed this glad I got to meet you at NAMM

Great video, Kyle. And the Universal Audio 275 interface looks awesome!

You explained this the best to me

You're the best.. you explain everything 👍🏻😉

I like this video. Thanks ✌🏼

Can't wait

You forgot to talk about cramping... why people never mention it when comparing digital to analog?

Let’s get it!

please make a video guide on making small decisions in mixes, real world examples

01:27 how far along does that sweep go before people can't hear it? I get to about the half way point.

While I understand some of this, however, your overtechnical posts, unfortunately do little or nothing to help the novice,

5:34 I guess that explains a song having 820 tracks! YIKES

I think people just dont know the technical part of why it sounds the way it does.