Jan/Feb letters section, T Bone Burnett

[btswire]

In this month's letters section, Todd Zimmerman poses what I believe is a question that deserves closer attention. He is referencing the T Bone Burnett interview from a previous issue, in which Mr. Burnett states that digital recording degrades the sound quality.

It is common practice to record to analog tape and then dump the tracks to Pro Tools, as Larry states in his response to the letter. If I may quote you Mr. Crane, "The process involved in using analog tape imparts a quality to the sound that is different than recording straight to digital." Yup, totally!

However, it must be pointed out that most engineers who employ this practice do so because they like the "magic glue" that the tape provides, and when it comes time to transfer, they don't have to worry about losing this magic in the A/D conversion. I think that at this point in time, most engineers feel that recording at 24 bits with good converters isn't going to mess much with the signal.

Mr Burnett, on the other hand, feels differently, and believes that the digital "stair step" will make the recording suffer. So why would he mess up his great sounding recordings by bringing them into the digital world that he so despises? Why not mix to 1/2" tape and let the conversion happen at the very last step in mastering?

[winky dinglehoffer]

That's pretty much the same reaction I had. Larry was addressing an entirely different issue than the "stairstepping" of Mr. Burnett. The Burnett article was fine, but it didn't wow me as much as it seems to have wowed some others. (on the other hand, it didn't piss me off as much as it apparently did Jim Dickinson.)

[studio139]

I appreciate the careful reading of my letter and the posting of the thread.
Larry's response was reasonable I thought, but as you point out, addressing
a different point. I am still confused about the central question, although
I doubt there is really an answer other than compromise.