
I've never had much of an opinion about recording analog versus digital. I mean it makes sense to me that analog would sound more natural to us. After all, we can't hear 1s and 0s. When I got into recording in high school, I borrowed a bunch of my dad's old analog gear, and eventually I got this little cassette 4-track.

That unit died when I was in college, and a friend and I traded some gear and pitched in on a new one - a Tascam 234 4-track and 106 mixer. Still cassette based, not 1/4" or 1/2", we messed about with it for a couple years, but it was quite challenging. It's amazing to me that recording engineers dealt with tape for so long, and that some would still prefer it. Don't get me wrong, it sounded great. Despite our crappy mics and not really knowing what we were doing, those tapes have a warmth that I still love. But having to keep track of counter numbers, the limitations on track count and having to commit to a mix a few tracks at a time, etc. sometimes made for a frustrating time.
We decided that a computer would be better. I'm not sure what our logic was. I don't think we really thought about digital versus analog at first. I think it was more the ridiculous track counts, unlimited editing capabilities and graphic representation that drew us in. Odd as it may seem, we didn't really consider the sound. We were writing material and recording was recording. And now I've been recording almost exclusively in digital for 10 years because it's just simpler.
The 234 didn't get much use after I bought a computer specifically to use in the little studio/music room we'd built. But I still own it and have carted it around for years for no discernible reason. Recently I read an article about mastering and how some mastering houses still prefer to get the material on 1/2" tape. I was kind of shocked, but it got me thinking about reintegrating analog gear into my computer setup, especially since I've been thinking that my newest project should have a more vintage feel. There are plugins that model classic units and their analog circuitry, but why not just run the music through some real analog circuitry? Or even record it to real analog tape and then re-digitize it?

So, out came the 234. Unfortunately, the tape head doesn't seem to function anymore. Still, I tried plugging my electric guitar as well as a microphone into the 4-track and then patching the outputs to my audio interface, essentially using it as a preamp. I did a bit of tracking, and it worked pretty well. There is definitely a difference in the sound. It's warmer but also a little noisier, perhaps in a good way, and you can't beat the look of this old gear.
Two problems with this method: 1) When mixing these recordings and adding effects, the noise gets enhanced along with the instrument. Not a big deal for 1 or 2 tracks maybe, but beyond that, it really becomes noticeable. And 2) I can only record my guitars and vocals this way. Any electronic or sampled parts don't get the same treatment. I think a better method would be to track and mix digitally, record my final mix to tape, and then record from the tape back to the computer adding any mastering effects at that point for a finalized, release-ready recording. That way I also get the sound of tape as well as the analog circuitry, and the entire mix is treated, not just a few individual parts.
I emailed my dad, and I'm hoping his old TEAC reel-to-reel tape deck from the 60s still works (an attic dweller the last few years unfortunately). Otherwise I'll have to pay to have the 234 repaired (which might cost more than it's worth at this point), or buy a reel-to-reel from craiglist or ebay (there are quite a few available, but any in guaranteed working condition aren't cheap). I've actually been thinking about getting a tube preamp too (the Presonus BlueTube), but we'll see where this goes first...
-TFW