The audiophile holy war, analogue vs. digital, has been raging for a couple of decades now. This Economist article (damn I love that magazine) has some interesting thoughts on the matter:
Hear the difference
Nov 14th 2008
From Economist.comWhich is best—analogue or digital?
A MUSIC lover but no audio zealot, your correspondent has often wondered whether analogue recordings really are “warmer” than digital ones. In other words, do audio amplifiers and microphones with old-fashioned thermionic valves (“vacuum tubes” to Americans) inherently produce a sound more natural and satisfying than those with transistors and other solid-state devices?
He suspects it’s mostly a myth, stemming from the days when analogue was in its prime and digital recording in its infancy…
I was thinking about this article last night, when Kelley and I were talking about a particularly sad mashup done by a local DJ who obviously didn’t understand that you can’t just fling two sounds together, you have to clip and shape sound to create space for them to mesh with anything resembling clarity. (At least I assume you do; I don’t know the first thing about this–I’m just making shit up as usual–but hey, it’s a good story.) And then I fell into my usual What If reverie: what if I’d known about sound engineering as a teenager? Would I have followed that path? I think I might. It’s just the right combination of art and science, geekery and cool, that appeals to me. Then, hey, maybe I would have grown up to be Mars (the Mars of “Dangerous Space,” available now as a .pdf, for free). Except, huh, I would have been the Sound Guy for some pretty girls, not pretty boys like Noir. Hey, maybe Kelley would have been on keyboards…
Nicola Griffith 
Ah, the paths not taken… Sound engineer definitely sounds like a fun job – it certainly sounded great in “Dangerous Space.”I’ve always wanted to hear the difference myself of the analogue vs digital on one of those multi-thousand dollar systems, but I have not ever had the chance.
I actually have a radio very similar to the one in your photo. It used to work. I would plug it in and watch the tubes turn to glowing orange. I liked the sound of tuning to different channels.I also made a crystal radio when younger. Strung the wire out my bedroom window to an ash tree. I thought I was super smart. My sister said she was waiting for the lightning to come down the wire and fry me in my bed…We have come so far with sound technology… I promise not to tell the audio-tech version of the “I can remember walking two miles in the snow to school” stories…” :)
Warning – geeky tecnical stuff alert!As she who took the audio engineering road and has heard the difference on the megabucks playback system – well, my reaction is mixed.Working with digital files and digital recording equipment (particularly in remote or field recording) sure beats hauling half a ton of recorders and tape everywhere you go, then hacking at the results (blind) with razor blades. Digital is easier.Back in the 80’s, sampling rates were set ridiculously low to get the technology on the market. Those sampling rates still apply to CDs.In simple terms, those standards only ‘listen’ to the top frequencyyour ears can hear 2 times per second. Not very accurate.Analogue recording represents the whole audible spectrum, but the trade-off is noise – the sound of that audio tape, those tubes, those old school amplifiers. Also not very accurate.I prefer to work digitally, especially now that equipment exists that supports a far more musical sampling rate. But I still like using tube technology to colour the sound – old tube microphones and amplifiers can be used to ‘warm up’ that cool, crisp digital edge.Of course, mp3/mp4 sampling is quite another can of worms! (Yum!)
Jennifer – come visit! I work with Caryl and we can get you in a studio to play! :)
That sounds like fun, but, well, who is anonymous? Is that you Sarah? I think Duff is the most frequent ‘anon.’ around these parts…
I think I might actually have met the guy who wrote this Economist article. At least I knew two people in that time and place with hugeous Wharfedale speakers. Oh, there’s nothing like making the walls shake! That is, there’s nothing like being a teenager with resilient ears and making the walls shake and your innards move…linda, I never made a radio, but I do remember exposing the gurs of my stereo, helping my brother-in-law mess with integrate circuits, and another time running batteries in series to make my wee transistor work. Now I pick up my iPod Nano and just *marvel* at it.caryl, hey (waves). One day, yes, let’s open that mp3 can o’ worms :) I think they’re pretty vile for music–though better than nothing and v. handy for fill-the-ears-distraction. But when it comes to really playing that stuff through the house, ugh, no.anon, that is you, Sarah, right?
yes, sorry – should get a proper account or at least sign my name. was in a hurry…in texas as i write, where there’s a bloody COLD FRONT! ugh! :P-SARAH
Okay, how is this for geeky tech. I have to have another endoscopy-wireless. This time I have to literally “swallow” the camera! (Reminds of a film about people going into the human body in a small ship. Can’t remember the title.) I thought the doctor was joking. It will take 4-6 weeks for the insurance company to give their blessing. Oh, we have come so far from crystal radio sets…Sarah, I am also in Texas and welcome the cold front although it is not bringing a drop of rain.
linda, it’s called <>Fantastic Voyage<>. Asimov wrote the novelisation. I hope your insurer gives you a quick go-ahead, and I hope you get good results.