The Instigator
ihsalinas
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points
The Contender
candice
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

Analog vs. Digital Mixers

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2007 Category: Technology
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,685 times Debate No: 861
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (8)

 

ihsalinas

Pro

I have been in the sound business for awhile now, and just recently opened my eyes to more possibilities of sound. In my experience as a sound guy Analog Mixers have always been the way to go. Not only because that was first made and anybody can figure out how to use them, but because they're reliable and will always be better than any Digital monster board on the market.

Digital boards, like most digital anything, have plenty of room for error. They have to many sub page this and that, and any aspect of the actual board is run by this motherboard. From the mechanical faders, and the infrastructure of adapting compressors, gates, reverbs, and any other outboard effect you could use built in. I know having everything built in seems like a great idea. Compact and easy to move, but it's not necessarily better. One thing goes wrong and the whole thing goes down the drain. Analog boards, on the other hand, have everything laid out in front of you and allow the sound guy to preform the job better. If an effect or channel goes out, easy fix. Why? Because its right there to physically see and change. Unlike these hoax boards were you have to be a sound Guru and now a electrician and scientist, and take the whole thing apart to fix the dang thing. And thats not easily down on the gig site.

Now for the point. I think anybody who's anybody should stop making this unholy mobs of mess and stick to what works and whats been working for years. Analog mixers are hands down the standard, and there's nothing wrong with moving outside the box, but when it comes to sound Analog boards are what this world needs.
candice

Con

Personally, I don't believe anyone would want someone with limited knowledge to be mixing any music for them. The client would want someone with extensive know how and experience. So even if the mixing equipment was hard to figure out, I would want my sound professional to learn the techniques that would best suit my needs. Why not learn techniqes that would better the quality of your profession?

Reliablity comes with quality, and I am a firm believer that quality and perfection can be found in digial recording. Most of all the music we hear on the radio today was recorded using up to date digial recording. Not to mention the small sound jobs that can be made easier by using one peice of equipment compared to many to get the same effects. There is room for error in any peice of high tech equipment. The controler of the gadgets is in charge of using the tools he or she has correctly and efficiently.

Having more than one piece of equipment brings the ratio of sound quality down... because its traveling from cord to cord. Also, more equpment equals more chances of malfuncion.

Sound guys shouldn't be scared of that which they do not know... and embrace new technologies to better their feild... and quality of their product.
Debate Round No. 1
ihsalinas

Pro

I'm sorry I should of been more clearer in my opening statement, I talking about live sound usage. My apologies.

"Why not learn techniqes that would better the quality of your profession?" "Having more than one piece of equipment brings the ratio of sound quality down... because its traveling from cord to cord. Also, more equpment equals more chances of malfunction."

In what sense does digital mixing make a better quality. I know with Analog yes there is more cabling so there might pose a problem. User error or bad cables, but it is something that can be tracked down and fixed by a properly trained sound technician on the spot, instead of ripping apart or sending the digital mixer back to the factory. Also, regardless of all the extra cabling, it does not bring down the sound quality. The sound traveling the short distance of 3inch - 1 foot, does not deter from the overall sound. I'll tell you what will cause a bad sounding mix is these dang fangled new age digital mixers. Improper care and misuse of the these digital mixers causes those sensitive little parts and microchips to rattle and destroy itself. Another thing these digital boards were created to make life easier for the sound tech, in reality its more of a pain in the rear end to read endlessly the manuals and practical application. They have the features of presets and hundreds of memory banks to store and save your work. Situation:

You show up to the gig site and you have 20min to set up and start. Johnny Dumbface walks up and says "Hey I'm there sound guy and would like to use your equipment to make it easier" you agree to the favor, and what does the moron do. Erases all the work you've done and your back to square one. On average to go trough and replicate all the settings you have for the gig might take you hours to reset. Hours you dont have.

With a Analog board to physically reset the whole board is something you can notice and prevent from happening. With that high tech junk, one button takes you right back to bringing that board right out of the box. Another situation:

You show up to a gig unprepared cause your boss doesn't give you time to prep for the gig. Now with an Analog board you can wing it and set up on the fly. Twisting and setting your knobs as you go, why, cause you can physically grab the knobs and faders you need right there. With digital boards your flipping trough pages and pages of information trough the board that you cant see, only in the tiny screen and this knob works as this and that, multipurpose single knob and button after button just to find the page were the panoramic potentiometer or EQ is at.

Analog just makes life easier on the sound tech. And still produces a great quality performance, regardless.
candice

Con

Not only does the new technology of digital mixers inable easy live gig set up, they're also more cost efficient. Instead of byuing the multiple parts and gadgetry needed for an Analog run show, you can buy a digital mixer for the same price and get a higher quality product. In turn giving the audience a better show.

Resolution for situation A: Don't let unasociated people screw with your equipment.

Resolution for situation B: A professional is always prepared. Or, you could get better glasses, or a digial mixer with a large screen and knob capacity to suit your individual sound dude needs.

YOU beleive analog makes life easier. But is easier always BETTER?
Debate Round No. 2
ihsalinas

Pro

"Not only does the new technology of digital mixers inable easy live gig set up" Did I not go into detail on why its a whole lot easier to set up in analog.

"...they're also more cost efficient. Instead of byuing the multiple parts and gadgetry needed for an Analog run show, you can buy a digital mixer for the same price and get a higher quality product"

First of all, I also addressed the fact that digital boards do not provide a better sounding show. I'll put my life on it that if I were to set up both type of systems on the same band, no one would be able to tell the difference unless they actually were the sound tech. Second as for cost efficiency, to actually buy the digital board vs. all the parts that would make the same thing is just about the same price range. I'll give you a perk as to why purchasing all the parts separately would be better. You know whats going into your system. Lets see do I want Yamamha deciding what compressors I use or can I chose DBX or Alesis. If a part goes bad, easy fix. I take it out and replace it. Digital board part goes irate and back to the shop for that piece of junk for a replacement. I get to mix and match to find the "better quality" in my analog board and its completely mine all for the same price as those digital boards.

"A professional is always prepared. Or, you could get better glasses, or a digial mixer with a large screen and knob capacity..."

Ok now. Sometimes you cant be prepared when your boss or manager or whoever is in charge(unless its yourself then your to blame) doesn't allow you to prep for said upcoming gig. As for the bigger screen. Ok you can maybe if the brand allows it to add on a bigger screen, that does not address the problem of flipping through the pages within the board. When a mic is feeding back or my channel is not responding I dont want to be flipping trough pages and buttons to fix the problem, by then it could be to late, oh damn there goes my speaker. It just blew up because I couldnt mute or turn down my channel or mic down quick enough. Last off the actual knob problem and there not being enough is not something to be remedied by buying more knobs. That just how they're built, the companys wanted a "do it all" function on these boards so there's only a handful of knobs and twisty go bobs to make it tight and compact. In which, like I said, does not allow for quick and efficient adjustments.

"Don't let unassociated people screw with your equipment."
Thats the biz man. A band walks into the bar and they need reinforcement, you can't just tell them no. Most sound techs should trust their fellow sound guy to use and handle the equipment. But there's always that one slip up that can send you to the ground. Hell the actual owner of the board can reset the thing if he/she wasn't paying close enough attention and accidentally hit a button. In which with analog, if you hit a button the worse that can happen is you mute a channel or turn off the board, in which case you turn it back on or un-mute the channel. Simple and easy.

So yes simple is better. Honestly you should strive to work smarter not harder. So once again is simple is better, in this case...
candice

Con

"I'll give you a perk as to why purchasing all the parts separately would be better. You know whats going into your system. Lets see do I want Yamamha deciding what compressors I use or can I chose DBX or Alesis."

Mix matching different brands of equipment could have adverse effects, such as every different brand has a seperate power cord with seperate voltage requirments. Many of these different power cords have the same plug that runs the voltage into the equipment from the outlet. If you were to accidentaly place the wrong power cord into the wrong peice of equipment, then you could blow the tubes or circuitry and possibly cause DEATH. Being totally knowledgable about your tools and technology is crucial for success. Personally, I believe that Yamaha knows exactly which tools mesh well together for the most professional, not to mention SAFEST product and outcome with use.

For faster and more visible immediate changes during show, you could hook your digital mixer up to a monitor.

Sound Dude's should always have a clients sound prepared and ready at the time of the show. So a professional shouldn't risk quality for brotherly music mumbo jumbo. PRIORITIES, sir.

Constant awarness and respect for your equipment gives a smaller margin for error. For the safest, newest technology, digital is the way to go. Not only does it make recording and live show's easier, and better... there will be up to date companies to assist you if you have any problems. Not to mention constant upgrades available to fit you, or clients needs! From my experience in the sound feild... I like to do what is best for MY clients. What THEY need, making THEM sound better. Gratification of creating my own "custom" sound board is not what I'm for. Quality performance. Isn't that what mixing sound is all about, making the best sounding show possible. That's what I'm for... are you?
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by GFAUST 4 years ago
GFAUST
Hi all I have been a pro sound guy since 1976 it really comes down to what kind of a venue you
are doing. if its pure sound quality your looking for I will put my altec lansing 515's and tube power amps up in any show down with the digital world. The Best sound in town comes from iron transforms and pure tube waves. If you want all the trick software to get that sound i just outlined you might come close but that is the holly grail sound all the software engineers are trying get. I wont argrue digital can be convenient but then agin how convenient was it for the artist to get their skills -- respect use the best My 2 cents !!
Posted by Paz 4 years ago
Paz
This was a poorly defined debate to begin with so we cant hope that the debate was concise either. Both sides fail to bring up loads of empirical data which has been gleaned over the decades to support either argument. Its down to personal experience which is valid, but not truly a debate.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
The debate in my opinion goes to Candice. The facts are analog mixers provide deeper, richer sound, and analog outboards are used in the final stages of production in the best productions studios. The best producers record and pre-mix in digital, but sounds are process by many producers through analog outboards in the final mixdown and mastering stages. Digital is always a numerical algorithm of what processors believe to be a duplication of reality, and so to the trained ear there is a noticeable difference. Truth is most modern music does not require analog remixing, but this practice is still excercised by the best producers.
Posted by candice 9 years ago
candice
Enjoyable debate ihsalinas.... I enjoyed it!!!
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by gogott 8 years ago
gogott
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sully 8 years ago
sully
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by NomadWolf 8 years ago
NomadWolf
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Theomega 8 years ago
Theomega
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Chob 9 years ago
Chob
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Pluto2493 9 years ago
Pluto2493
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by candice 9 years ago
candice
ihsalinascandiceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03