Any harshness you may hear on a CD was due to mastering. Early CDs especially suffered from this problem because mastering engineers were used to increasing high frequencies to counteract analog to analog loss in that frequency region. Digital is a near-perfect representation of a master "tape". The problem is, recording to digital usually sounds "boring". Most do not have the transformers, op amps and other bits of analog gear that added "that something extra" to audio sources. Some converter companies (like Burl) have addressed this issue, but most aim for transparency, which can be boring/sterile/cold. Another problem is, up until the past say 5-10 years, music was being produced at CD quality sampling rates. 44.1 kHz is fine as a distribution format but not as a production format. It would be kind of like using a 7.5 inches per second tape speed when you have the option for 15 IPS. Anyway, digital can sound great in the right hands. Just like how analog can sound awful in the wrong hands. The people who had the money to own analog audio recording equipment usually also had the money to own top tier consoles, microphones and so on. The home studios of the day were relegated to using Tascam Portastudio cassette recorders!

Most have no clue what a real audio system sounds like put together with good quality components.

One for you, one for me ;-) Loved your hit single - thank you for the music

@@m.schumacher8828 Thank you so much!

Belive me! Analoge maschines have never stopt in recording!, i myself have two tascam ms 16 professional 1" 16 track maschines! ( the ms 16 and the 24 track on 2" atr 80 from tascam was one of the last big pro maschines! In late 80s to 90s) one have 90 kg! Absolute top stuff! And have some other pro maschines, also tube mashines! And i have see the moste big studios have tape maschines in there!, and it come back now!, than people know digi is not better, its only different! ...now it come back, and it was also build new tape recorder!, it was never from market or not more used in studios!, no tape maschines are used all over the world!!! Look in big studios and lidl studios! Good studios can record analog! Only digi recording studios are not real studios! Not becouse i will say digi is not good!, its also good but bot better its a other kind of recording! But good studios can record analog (100%) and also digi! Both kinds of technical ;) ...greetings

Was I the only one that kinda gave an eye roll when the digital machines came up in the video? Not as disrespect for what they were capable of but something indeed dies...

I can mostly agree that many younger people completely rely on their modern computers. But there are also some, including me, that are very interested in that analog world. Im currently 16 years old and my dream would be to own a little studio with both digital and analog (multitrack, and stereo) machines to capture sound, even tho my plan is to work as a broadcast and/or live event engineer :).

@@musicaltechnique1620 Right on. I wasn't saying that young people lost interest with analog. I meant, "Don't think the younger generation has lost interest," because I am too and I know many people like us that are into analog recording and synthesis. I have a small home studio with an 8-input DAW running Logic and Pro Tools along with a 1/4" 8-track reel to reel machine, cassette 8, and 4-tracks and a stereo 1/4" machine to mixdown to. I love mixing the best of both worlds and using both things for their strengths, For example, my new album was recorded on a Tascam 688, mixed in Logic Pro and then mastered to tape at 15ips.

@@copheart Sounds nice! Sorry btw for reading that phrase wrong xD

@@musicaltechnique1620 No worries brother. Send me any links to your projects and I'll check them out

❤️

Revolution a 740

There's absolutely no WOW. Believe me.

When people started stealing music, tapes days were numbered. Digital, while not as nice sounding, is simply cheaper (in sooo many ways), more efficient to work with and can quickly be sent over the internet.

it's the decline of what we used to call Hi Fi

When I started steeling music mostly Off fm to 8 track is when I started BUYING albums, then cds. As for analog, I'm sure you can show better specs for digital. However, I found an old recording that I made about 18 years ago put it on I was amazed as it was there in the room thay were playing. Anilog is special to me.

Why? Will it make you write better songs?

a 37 has up to 7volts of gain in amps so running at 1.23v plus 4db you have lots of headroom.

@@JULIAN8845both the C and J are easy to overdrive so not so certain about that headroom… but a GREAT sound!

I'd say so!

Cool!

+King Bee "trouble free" lol. Not exactly, but as close as any company came to manufacturing a trouble free deck. Atari's were pretty reliable as well, at least the MTR90.

You mean Otari...

a J-37 not an A-37

Of course they are but people don't care. Massive audience don't choose. They onpen their mouths and swallow. Don't even chew. And click "next" button. (x-cuse my english)

+Paul Fabrique "what is between the slices is lost". Well yes but this is misleading. We might wonder why Willi Studer's company also embraced digital audio tape recording as the video relates.

I have listen to a small amount of today's digital recordings and what is missing is NOT the data between the slices, but the tape hiss. It sounds like 'something's missing'. In fact with the advent of digital telephone networks they actually had to make the audio WORSE by putting the hiss back in! When you don't hear the hiss it sounds like the phone line is dead and you lost the connection. Every time shortly before I catch the common cold the tinnitus in my ears drops to a quieter level and I will know right away that something has went terribly wrong. In other words the digital recording works TOO good.

This is a common misunderstanding. Audible sound covers only a limited bandwidth. Both analog and digital recording can be designed to "leave out" what our ears cant hear. Just like digital, analog never captured "everything", couldnt anyway, and just for audio, didnt need to.

The hiss isnt there in the original speech or the music so why should it be in the recording? Why from 1966 did Ray Dolby make noise reduction units for analog tape machines including Studers? Because for hifi we wanted rid of the hiss! But telephone networks have to economise which means lo fi sound. Analog networks before them also.

correct, digital is so good that when you master too it and then transfer it back, nothing is lost. Analogues best friend is digital.

Bummer. What model?

The machine was from the 60's of maybe 70's or something, it was only stereo. It was good but not spectaculair. I bought it in a secondhand store and because it had a very good name. I expected it to be for fabulous but is was only good. It could be that my criticism is to hard, after all is was stil working perfectly after more than 20 years. When I had to move out off my house I sold it.

i have the studio sound m10 review it had the lowest wow and flutter of any machine tested.the bbc made all their in house test tapes on m15a they tested a studer a820 and found the belt drive m15a had lower wow and flutter. basf always had telefunken.the a820 first one was a joke it had a solid guide on the tention arm which was great on sticky ampex tapes.they later changed it to roller.ampex had 14inch on first product it took studer 30 years to produce one

the m15a has tention arms that control the brakes as did the philips pro 20 unlike studers they dont suffer electroncs caps decay in transport system.