Analogue & Digital

[soundspider]

Not only that, but while almost all professional work may well be done on digital desks, a lot of my work is in churches who don't have professionals operating their systems, so only getting your hands on a desk once a week/fortnight/month isn't easy to pick up the flow of any digital desks.

 

Today's 50-odd year old church amateurs who don't know how to run a digital desk will become the retired 70-odd year olds who inevitably get lumbered with the sound system, so still won't know how to run a digital desk. Even the concept of layers is hard to comprehend if you're not doing it all the time, never mind gates, compressors, GEQ's etc.

 

Churches almost never (in my experience) run outboard, so that's not an issue, and its much easier to troubleshoot analogue with all the controls in front of you all the time.

 

And with the likes of Behringer producing very basic analogue mixing desks for about £30 (and they work fine in the right context! I'm not a gear snob!!) I think there will be a market and a place for analogue (albeit probably small format) for many years to come.

 

Alan

[RichM]

For the work I do (large corporate events, live music touring and festivals):

 

Advantages of analogue - none

Advantages of digital - everything

 

For me, it really is a simple as that.

 

If I never see another analogue desk in my entire life I'll be a happy man.

[dbuckley]

The reality is that all larger desks are already digital. Its the small mixers that will stubbornly remain analogue for a while.

 

There have been a few very small format digital desks done over the years, because I have two of the them(!) the Roland VM-3100 springs to mind, which is a great little desk but was (in 1999!) very expensive compared to an analogue 10 channel desk, which because of no motorized faders is where it usefully sites in the hierarchy of things. But the smaller mixers are coming along now, the Berry XR12 is now almost at a give-away price, and the big thing you get with digital that is always a hassle on small analogue is buses and auxes. Add per-channel comps, integrated effects that are so much better than the integrated effect (singular) that many analogiue desks had, analogue's day really is done. That's not to say that there wont be folks continuing to use their XL4 because they like it, but the large scale manufacture of analogue mixing desks is heading for its swansong.

[richardash1981]

The reality is that all larger desks are already digital. Its the small mixers that will stubbornly remain analogue for a while.

[...]

But the smaller mixers are coming along now, the Berry XR12 is now almost at a give-away price, and the big thing you get with digital that is always a hassle on small analogue is buses and auxes. Add per-channel comps, integrated effects that are so much better than the integrated effect (singular) that many analogiue desks had, analogue's day really is done.

The XR12 is cheap, but it's still a lot more per mic channel than a basic analogue desk. For the same money, I can get a Soundcraft EPM12. OK, no effects at all, but 12 XLR mic inputs instead of four, and the same number of auxes (two). Bigger box, but I don't have to buy a tablet to use it, and then keep the tablet charged/secure/not broken.

 

So I think analogue mixers will continue to go into multi-user installations like churches and halls for a long time, because most of the users there will never need anything more than volume controls on the inputs. They will however want enough inputs that the patch can be fixed (i.e. one source => one input), and a single box solution which can't have bits go missing! The cost difference for a digital mixer with it's own control surface (or even one of the ones which physically docks it's tablet) still seems to be significant if you want to match numbers of mic inputs rather than headline channel count.

[Simon Lewis]

...So I think analogue mixers will continue to go into multi-user installations like churches and halls for a long time, because most of the users there will never need anything more than volume controls on the inputs.....

 

I would agree with this. Systems that require higher input counts and outboard etc. are natural candidates for digital desks, but there are many situations where a simpler user interface, a lower purchase price and a lack of additional functions are needed, and small analogue desks still do this well. The fact that the main manufacturers are still bringing out new variants of small analogue desks suggest that market is not dead yet...

 

 

 

[Jivemaster]

A "fader per channel " mixer is easier to sit straight down to, but a digital mixer will give more facilities to an operator with rehearsal time

[Bobbsy]

Let me throw in one more thought. I've taught the basics of sound and mixing to a number of teenagers (some of whom have actually gone on to work in the industry).

 

For absolute beginners, it's much easier to grasp the workings of things like auxes (pre and post), EQ and so on. Once they understand what they're doing on an analogue-knob-or-button-per-function desk it's far easier for them to make the jump to digital.

[Tom_M]

Analogue will definitely continue in Amateur Theatre for quite some time to come as some of the nice people in Pro Theatre keep passing down their cast offs to us for free. I run a Soundcraft 24:8:2 K3 Theatre as the main mixer and for smaller things a Soundcraft Spirit Folio 10:2. Our outboard needs on the K3 are very easy - a 31 band stereo graphic on the main out for the FOH mix and a smaller set on groups 7 and 8 which is used for the on stage foldbacks.

 

The K3 is very easy to teach others to use as there is a button or knob for every task. I can get someone to run the show using the basics in about 20 - 30 minutes including how to turn the whole system on and off.

 

When we go to the local Pro theatre I get to play with the newer digital kit and yes it is nice but it takes so much longer to learn and then when you have rush to find the sensitivity control on a channel half way through a performance because a radio mic has gone dead and been swapped with someone else's or someone has decided to be a mumbler just for this performance its a pain to get to quickly. I find it so much quicker on the analogue to just reach up to the top of the channel and adjust the sensitivity instead of having to use the touch screen and dive through half a dozen screens to get back to the channel setup and try and get it adjusted before the scene is over and they are not back on for a while and I've got the SM screaming on cans that they couldn't be heard.

[paulears]

Trouble is, are we not just carrying on teaching old ways that are historic in nature? I too feel quite at home with this kind of kit, but as it is essentially obsolete and lacking in currency, why do we bother teaching the newcomers how to work it?

 

A five year old can use an iPad, go to the App Store and download and install apps. They can navigate and use the software effectively. At some point these people become younger versions of us. Should they learn historic methods of operation? We did this when starting the first memory lighting desks, starting to use audio tools like protocols and cubase/logic. We tried to justify using the old systems, until suddenly we stopped. In my studio there is a big analogue desk that essentially has two faders up, getting the audio out of the machine to the speakers. I could plug the amp into the interface, and then it would do nothing at all. It takes up a great deal of space, but frankly, I don't need it anymore. It's obsolete. I've got touch screens, and a mouse, and they do everything I need. If you were a teacher, would you even waste time talking about the old days, which really are now just five years back! Process is everything, equipment is now almost irrelevant. Very sad. In my studio are two floor to nearly ceiling racks, virtually full. Most haven't been switched on for ages. My collection of GM, XG, and GS sound sources are never used any more. Loading in old files that use them are a pain, and often I end up finding VSTs that can replace them, and very rarely can I not find them. I can see a place for analogue devices up to a couple of hundred quid, but big stuff?

[soundspider]

That's just it though Paul - the low end stuff that small churches, with speech only for 4 microphones and a bit of background music will continue to need and use. Even up to 12 mic channel analogue is about £200 - no way you're getting that capability at that price point with digital, let alone anyone in that setting having a clue how to use them.

 

Also the argument about 'we have new technology so bin the old stuff' seems a little absurd. My 4 year old knows how to type on a computer or touchscreen, do I not bother teaching him how to write with a pencil? And yes, these days he could survive fine without that skill. It doesn't mean its the right approach.

 

Big analogue may have had its day, but small format will have its place for a good while to come.

 

Alan

[paulears]

Yes - I understand, but today, I lost two more channels on my large and now 8 year old Yamaha large format desk. What do I do? waste money on something that is now worth what? A few hundred quid base don current ebay prices - or spend quite a bit more for a digital one. 32 channels, but I guess less than 16 on a regular basis. If I have a new and younger person on the crew next year - they'll pick up the digital one quicker, I think. Just not keen on spending the money. Mind you there are some amazing bits of kit for almost pocket money second hand - but do I want to potentially waste my money?

[fincaman]

Hello All, less of the "older engineers don't like digital" please I'm 68 and have a Phonic summit, a Behringer X32 Producerwith an SD16 stage boxand my latest is a Behringer XR12 AIR for rehearsals and small gigs. Digital desks are a DREAM, I agree that the learning curve is steep but once you've saved a few setups and been able to recall them in an instant you will be hooked. I have a "basic PA setup" saved for live shows which I recall and then tweak it saves a lot of time. As far as the birth of analogue it's difficult to define what a "mixer" is, I built a four channel valve mixer when I was 18 using ECC83s. The first transistor mixer I ever saw was a WEM Audiomaster.

[soundspider]

Ha ha! I'm 38 and still definitely stuck between analogue (for cheapness, ease of use, 1 knob/fader for every action) and digital for all the above mentioned pros!