Analog vs. Digital debate: Letter to the producer

lecheverria1005
Ms. Garcia
Science 8
April 4, 2019

Analog vs. Digital Debate

To my dear producer,

        It didn’t use to be such a big thing, digital recording. Everything was analog, and everyone loved it. But now, digital technology is making an entrance, and the everlasting debate over whether to use it or not is splitting opinions everywhere. Now everyone is wondering: is digital better, or is it analog? Which should we use? Both have their pros and cons, but one must be better than the other. Many may argue for digital, but analog is really the one to go for. The differences in digital and analog recordings may not be so obvious, but to a watchful ear, they can be. Analog is accurate in a way that digital could never be. So, before you make your choice, you should look into the pros and cons of both sides. 

        Way back in the day, when every single thing was recorded as analog, everyone was happy. Ancient Egyptians carved their messages into stones, English poets and authors wrote by candlelight with a quill pen, and blueprints from long ago are still held in museums today. If digital is so much better, producer, then why is it that all analog recordings are still around? People still have their precious plastic CDs, but nobody thinks that digital MP3 files are as valuable. In an article titled, Analog and Digital by Chris Woodford, it is said, “One interesting question is whether information stored in digital form will last as long as analog information. Museums still have paper documents (and ones written on clay or stone) that are thousands of years old, but no-one has the first email or cell phone conversation. Open any book on the history of photography and you'll see reproductions of early photos taken by Niepce, Daguerre, and Fox-Talbot. But you won't see any pictures of the first digital photo: even though it was much more recent, probably no-one knows what it was or who took it!” Analog was there first, and, although everyone believes that digital will soon take over, it will always have its place. People cherish their analog records and recordings, but you’ve never seen a whole shelf for MP3s, have you? People don’t place the same value on digital stuff as they do for analog. That’s why analog watches are so much more expensive than those cheap digital ones. Analog has been and will be around forever.

        Well, producer, you may have noticed that analog recordings have a much more natural and warm sound. Digital recordings sound colder and less natural, because really, you aren’t hearing the whole thing. Digital recordings take increments of sound and string them together, so you’re actually only hearing part of what you’re listening to if it’s digital. Digital recordings take small samples of the analog waves, about 44,100 per second. We can’t really tell that we aren’t hearing the whole thing because it sounds like it’s natural, but, when compared with analog, it’s just not as warm. According to the article Analog vs. Digital: What’s the difference? By Recording Connection, “...analog sound tends to be warmer, has more texture and is thought to capture a truer representation of the actual sound. Digital is felt to be somewhat cold, technical and perhaps lacking in analog’s nuance.” Furthermore, in a video titled Analog and Digital, it is mentioned that “Audio files say that while digital provides sound that is crisp and clear, it misses subtleties in the sound that analog recording and vinyl captured.” Digital technology and recordings may provide a sound that many people like, but you can’t miss the natural, textural feel of analog. Although many people believe digital to sound better for many reasons, analog will always have its place and time. 

        However, dear producer, you do make a good point. Digital technology can sound clearer with a crisper sound, and it is much cheaper. As stated earlier, both sides have pros and cons, and digital has quite a bit going for it. For one, analog recordings have a lot of background noise, like hiss, wear and background sounds that may be picked up. In analog technology, this can’t be fixed, but in digital, it can. Besides, if a piece of analog recording is accidentally deleted, there’s no way to get it back. If a piece of digital recording is accidentally deleted, you might have to do some digging, but you can get it back eventually. According to the video Analog and Digital, “Digital has certain perfect things about it. It immediately solved all the problems of analog - background noise, hiss, wear, pitch control, all those things.” Any sound quality problems that come with analog can be easily solved with digital. Besides, as stated by the article Analog and Digital, What’s the difference?, “...digital is much cheaper. Recording an album with analog technology can require a whole studio full of equipment, but with digital recording technology, it’s possible to record a whole album in a bedroom on a laptop. And whereas analog technology can wear out or be damaged, digital media can last for an indefinite length of time.” Sure, digital equipment has better sound quality and will last much longer, but analog is still better. It’s much more accurate, and, though digital has a lot going for it, it isn’t enough. 

        Alas, producer, analog will always overrule. In the end, accuracy will always win, and analog is just more accurate. On an analog wave, the lines are curved. When digital tries to replicate this wave, the lines are less curved, and less accurate. In order for digital to be even close to the accuracy of analog, you would need to be extremely precise with how you graph the points. Besides, a digital clock can easily be mistrusted. On an analog clock, you can see the hands physically turning, which makes them that much more accurate. Steve Guttenberg agrees as well. In his article Why Analog sounds better than Digital, he states, “An analog watch might be far more accurate than a digital one if it uses a high-precision movement [gears and springs] to measure time passing, and if it has a sweeping second hand it will represent the time more precisely than a digital watch whose display shows only hours and minutes.” Being able to see the hands physically representing the time is far more trustworthy than a little computer chip. Nobody can tell what that computer chip is thinking, and we won’t know if it’s getting ahead or behind unless we compare it to analog. 

        So, dear producer, as great as digital technology may be, analog will always be the best choice to go with. It’s been around for much longer, and has been trusted for a long time. Museums still have analog records written on stone tablets from thousands of years ago, but nobody has any digital records. Plastic analog records are treasured, but nobody attaches the same value to digital technology. Analog sounds much more natural, with a warmer, more real texture. Digital technology may omit background noise, but analog gives you the full, real sounds without cutting anything out. Despite the facts that digital may be cheaper and easier to use, analog will always be superior. It’s just more accurate in a way that digital could never be. Besides, analog watches are way cuter than digital watches. Take that, digital. 

        Sincerely,

                lecheverria1005

Analog vs. Digital

You may have heard of analog and digital, and what makes both of them special or more favored than the other. Some people may say that analog is better and more accurate, whereas others may argue that digital can be easier to use and can hold more data. 

Analog pretty much means an analogy of something, or representation. An analog clock is not time itself, but it represents time, or is an analogy of it. A ruler is not the measurement, but a representation of measurement. Analog recordings are the waves on the device. Analog technology is a representation of something, just like an analog clock. 

Digital data is stored as numbers, or digits. A digital clock shows the numbers rather than the moving clock hands of the analog clock. Digital recordings take the sound and convert it into digits to be stored. All digital data is stored as digits. 

Some people think that analog data is much more accurate than digital data. Why? Well, let's go back to the clock example. On the analog clock, you can physically see the second, minute and hour hands moving around in circles as an analogy of time. On a a digital clock, all you see is the numbers changing every so often. This is why people tend to think that analog is more accurate: you can see everything changing and can make a more accurate assumption of the time. Besides, if you've ever listened to an audiobook or podcast on a digital device, the words might not be so clear. They could be saying, 'the dog jumped over the stick', but you could hear, 'the dog was very sick' and make a wrong assumption of the story. People tend to think that analog is much more accurate than digital, although both of them have their pros and cons. 

S&EP: Models

This week, I used models to compare analog and digital graphs. I noticed that, when plotting on a digital graph, the lines were much less accurate than on the analog graph. It could be possible to make the digital graph as accurate, but it would be difficult. Instead of plotting every one or 0.5 on the graph, we would need to plot every single decimal point and be very precise with the numbers to make them the same accuracy. Overall, this model helped me see the reason in the argument that analog is generally more accurate, although there are some things that digital is better at that analog. While comparing the digital graphs I made to the analog graph given, I noticed that I would need to be incredibly precise if I were to make the digital graphs as accurate as the analog one. 

Analog graph

Digital graph1.comparison

Digital graph2.comparison

XCC: Scale, Proportion and Quantity

When I was making my digital graphs based off of the analog graph, I noticed that the scale of the digital graph was different than the analog graph. The analog graph had a curved line, and the digital graph had a kind of straight, clunky type of line. I noticed that to have a curved line like the analog graph did, the points on the digital graph would have to be much more close together than every one or 0.5 on the graph. There would need to be much more often intervals than there are on either of the graphs in order for the line to be as accurate or even close to the accuracy on the analog graph. 

Musical Instrument Project Blog 3/22

Flouti(t)aur

This week, we completed our musical instrument project. We needed to build a working instrument, record its sound and audacity, and make a video recording of us playing the instrument. Above is the image and link to the document holding all of our work. Our instrument is called a Floutitaur and is a hybrid between a flute and a guitar. While working on this project, we recorded our notes and audacity, which are the four images in the middle. We played different notes at different pitches and volumes, and we compared them to see how frequency, wavelength and amplitude were affected by pitch and volume. When the pitch is higher, the frequency increases and the wavelength decreases. When the pitch is lower, the frequency decreases and the wavelength increases. The amplitude increases with volume and vice versa. This was all clear while comparing the audacity images above. 

Backward-looking: What problems did you encounter while you were working on this piece? How did you solve them?

Some problems that we encountered while working on this piece were tuning our instruments. We had trouble getting the guitar to sound like we wanted it to, and the flute wasn't making very much noise at all. We solved this by placing two pencils between the rubber bands and the guitar body and rotating them to tune the strands to the proper pitch. We wrapped the flute in tape, covering the holes, and placed a piece of baking paper on the bottom to make a sound similar to that of a kazoo. With these minor fixes, we were successful. 

Inward-looking: What was especially satisfying to you about either the process or the finished product?

What was satisfying about the final product was that it actually made music. I wasn't sure that it was going to sound good, but it made noise and it was in tune, and that was very satisfying for me. I liked playing the song as well because I enjoyed playing music on the instrument that I had helped create myself.

Outward-looking: Did you do your work the way other people did theirs? In what ways did you do it differently? In what ways was your work or process similar?

Other people had different ideas for their instruments, and their building process was different. They also chose different songs for their performance, but the audacity was the same basic idea where we played the note and compared them with the other notes. Our process of building, then doing the audacity and then playing was the same, but the material we used and our priorities in the building process were different. 

Forward-looking: What would you change if you had a chance to do this piece over again?

If I had a chance to do this over again, I would build my instrument faster and get on to the audacity sooner. We spent a while building because our plan wasn't very good, and we were rushed in all of the other tasks. If I could do this again, I would make sure that we had a solid plan before we started anything.