I am of the opinion that late 70's very early 80's were still pretty much all analog, the height of analog development. I suppose there will be a span in there in the 80's where there was a mixture of both analog/digital until digital finally took over completely. I have a habit of searching out vinyl from those all analog years. I could be wrong on my timeline though. To my ear it just seems those 70's records from Atco, RCA, AM, sounded better than anything after.
What Years Did Digital Recording/Mixing Take Over?
- Thread starter DougJH
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Mrv8q
Audiofool
From Wikipedia:
Professional ratings
Bop Till You Drop is Ry Cooder's eighth album, released in 1979. The album was the first digitally recorded major-label album in popular music. Bop Till You Drop was recorded on a digital 32-track machine built by 3M.[5][6]
The album consists almost entirely of covers of earlier rhythm and blues and rock and roll classics, including Elvis Presley's "Little Sister" and the 1965 Fontella Bass-Bobby McClure hit "Don't Mess Up a Good Thing", on which Cooder duetted with soul star Chaka Khan. Khan also performed on the only original track on the album, "Down in Hollywood”.
I have this album but it’s been so long since I‘ve played it, I can’t comment on its sound.
Digital snowballed soon after.
| Ry Cooder chronology | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studio album by Ry Cooder | ||||
| Bop Till You Drop | ||||
.png) | ||||
| Released | July 1979[1] | |||
| Recorded | Warner Brothers Recording Studios, North Hollywood, California | |||
| Genre | ||||
| Length | 39:56 | |||
| Label | Warner Bros. | |||
| Producer | Ry Cooder | |||
|
The album consists almost entirely of covers of earlier rhythm and blues and rock and roll classics, including Elvis Presley's "Little Sister" and the 1965 Fontella Bass-Bobby McClure hit "Don't Mess Up a Good Thing", on which Cooder duetted with soul star Chaka Khan. Khan also performed on the only original track on the album, "Down in Hollywood”.
I have this album but it’s been so long since I‘ve played it, I can’t comment on its sound.
Digital snowballed soon after.
Soundstream - Wikipedia
Manufacturers of our gear started put in their ads and on amps & integrated amps, CD ready/compatible or Digital, about 81-82 on a regular basis if my memory serves me correct.
Welcome to AK Doug!
59volvo
Super Member
was Jazz digitally recorded too?From Wikipedia:
Professional ratings
Bop Till You Drop Studio album by
Ry CooderRy Cooder chronology Released July 1979[1] Recorded Warner Brothers Recording Studios, North Hollywood, California Genre Length 39:56 Label Warner Bros. Producer Ry Cooder
Jazz
(1978)Bop Till You Drop
(1979)Borderline
(1980)
Bop Till You Drop is Ry Cooder's eighth album, released in 1979. The album was the first digitally recorded major-label album in popular music. Bop Till You Drop was recorded on a digital 32-track machine built by 3M.[5][6]
The album consists almost entirely of covers of earlier rhythm and blues and rock and roll classics, including Elvis Presley's "Little Sister" and the 1965 Fontella Bass-Bobby McClure hit "Don't Mess Up a Good Thing", on which Cooder duetted with soul star Chaka Khan. Khan also performed on the only original track on the album, "Down in Hollywood”.
I have this album but it’s been so long since I‘ve played it, I can’t comment on its sound.
Digital snowballed soon after.
sqlsavior
Lunatic Member
Between Bop Till You Drop in 1979 and Brothers In Arms in 1985, digital recording became mainstream. Around that time, acronyms such as AAD and ADA appeared to describe the methodology at each stage of production. Basically, anything made after 1980 would need research on an individual basis.
IMO, it's all in the mastering, which can range from awful to wonderful in either medium. There was a Great Wringing of Hands, and a legal settlement recently made, about these matters, as you may have read regarding 'Original Master Recordings' by Mobile Fidellity.
IMO, it's all in the mastering, which can range from awful to wonderful in either medium. There was a Great Wringing of Hands, and a legal settlement recently made, about these matters, as you may have read regarding 'Original Master Recordings' by Mobile Fidellity.
FauxHall
Super Member
I check after about 1975. The earliest was the SoundStream as SREGOR above pointed out. These could sound pretty good.
Yes, I would welcome a return to the AAA/ADA/DDD etc system of labeling on physical media. I have seen it used on a few new products aimed at the audiophile market.
Yes, I would welcome a return to the AAA/ADA/DDD etc system of labeling on physical media. I have seen it used on a few new products aimed at the audiophile market.
robert_kc
Super Member
I’m a fan of modern hi-res digital recordings. I rarely listen to LPs. Nonetheless I’m curious about the OP’s question.
How many LPs pressed since the 1970s are pure analog – i.e., the music was never digitized?
I’m not knowledgeable about the process of manufacturing LPs.
My understanding is that for the last several decades most LPs were produced from digital masters. (This was sometimes advertised as a benefit – i.e., a million copies can be made from a digital file and the quality of the master doesn’t deteriorate.)
I’m hoping that someone can explain a separate issue: I’ve read that sometimes a “digital delay line” (in lieu of a “preview head” on a tape machine) was used when creating the master lacquer disk so that the engineer could manually adjust the groove width when operating the record cutting lathe. My limited understanding is that because a digital delay line was used in manufacturing some LPs, even LPs made from an analog master tape sometimes had the music digitized.
My understanding is that digital delay lines were first used in the 1970s.
I’m not certain about any of this - can anyone clarify?
LP pressings that predate the recording industry’s use of digital technology would contain music that was never digitized. (For example, a 1950s era RCA “Shaded Dog” LP pressing.) However, am I correct that later pressings of vintage analog recordings may have been made from a digital master (and possibly edited in the digital domain), and/or used a digital delay line?
How many LPs pressed since the 1970s are pure analog – i.e., the music was never digitized?
I’m not knowledgeable about the process of manufacturing LPs.
My understanding is that for the last several decades most LPs were produced from digital masters. (This was sometimes advertised as a benefit – i.e., a million copies can be made from a digital file and the quality of the master doesn’t deteriorate.)
I’m hoping that someone can explain a separate issue: I’ve read that sometimes a “digital delay line” (in lieu of a “preview head” on a tape machine) was used when creating the master lacquer disk so that the engineer could manually adjust the groove width when operating the record cutting lathe. My limited understanding is that because a digital delay line was used in manufacturing some LPs, even LPs made from an analog master tape sometimes had the music digitized.
My understanding is that digital delay lines were first used in the 1970s.
I’m not certain about any of this - can anyone clarify?
LP pressings that predate the recording industry’s use of digital technology would contain music that was never digitized. (For example, a 1950s era RCA “Shaded Dog” LP pressing.) However, am I correct that later pressings of vintage analog recordings may have been made from a digital master (and possibly edited in the digital domain), and/or used a digital delay line?
intro6
Well-Known Member
I always appreciated that labeling too, although I admit that, at first, I didn't know what it meant. I'm thinking that the reason the labels stopped showing it was because music became so overwhelmingly DDD.
Recorded in June of 1979 and released in August, Giorgio Moroder - E=MC² (NBLP 7169) was Recorded live digitally (direct to digital except for pre-recorded 2nd & 3rd part harmonies) by Soundstream, Inc. with computerized editing done by Jules Bloomenthal and Bruce Rothaar.
DeadRock
Ideas Guy
I was writing, singing, and recording a fair bit through the 80s. As mentioned above, though digital recording was "born" of the late 70s...it was around the mid 80s when it was so prevalent as to be an option (if not the only one) in even the smallest of "hobby" (independent, basement) studios...
RunOutGroove
Addicted Member
I'm no expert in this stuff, but it seems to me that likely the early digital recording era was one were they were still learning about this then new medium and working out the kinks. It was only later that both the tech and the know how improved so that digital productions became more consistently decent sounding. For my ears, the best digital recordings stand up very well to the best analog ones. There are plenty of great records made with each of these...
Thank you!
I think the subject is more interesting than anything, all listening preference aside, and it must have been exciting times to see digital in action, and even probably strange to others. And it is also nice to hear from those who were actually around and seen the transition first hand. So when I pick up that record I might have some idea of the process used to create it.
Pio1980
AK Member
Digital bypasses most if not all of the pitfalls of analogue recording, from mechanical time base clocking errors with motor driven media thru freq response linearity and range to dynamic limitations. Poor digital audio practice introduces its own problems, as does in analogue.
RunOutGroove
Addicted Member
Digital is also useful and necessary for creating new analog pressings of old master tapes as the tapes will inevitably degrade so they at some point will all need to be made into digital copies. I believe that if these copies are made well enough that the resulting pressings from them ought to sound identical. I feel like complaints from the purist analog audio faction about getting pressings made only from original analog tapes have far more to do with their feelings about analog then they do with perceivable differences of LPs pressed from analog vs digital masters. LPs these days are expensive, particularly any ones that are labeled as audiophile and I believe that folks would just like to believe that they are paying for the full analog experience when they buy an LP vs the same thing on a purely digital media. It seems to me that a lot of arguments of digital vs analog have much to do with perception and less to do with real observable differences...
Last edited: