Thanks for such a detailed reply. His (or other analog audio devotees') thoughts on the environmental impact and ecological footprint of tape recording would be really interesting to hear.
It is tempting to state "digital is more environmental friendly". But developing new hardware and software obviously bears an ecological burden as well, whereas that old analog gear can be used more or less "as is" for decades.
I'm interested in analog mostly because I feel DAW screens are tiring for the brain. And, as an occasional producer of a long-form radio program, I often think whether a show produced in a more "analog manner" (solely relying on my ears, not my eyes during montage) would have a different "feel".
For that reason, CLI-only software like ecasound or mixer4 [1] have been interesting to me for a long time; so far, during real montage work, I have nonetheless always opted for DAW-based solutions, or maybe simple destructive audio editors. Still like the idea of not having to look at the waveform for making my cuts, though.
It is tempting to state "digital is more environmental friendly". But developing new hardware and software obviously bears an ecological burden as well, whereas that old analog gear can be used more or less "as is" for decades.
I'm interested in analog mostly because I feel DAW screens are tiring for the brain. And, as an occasional producer of a long-form radio program, I often think whether a show produced in a more "analog manner" (solely relying on my ears, not my eyes during montage) would have a different "feel".
For that reason, CLI-only software like ecasound or mixer4 [1] have been interesting to me for a long time; so far, during real montage work, I have nonetheless always opted for DAW-based solutions, or maybe simple destructive audio editors. Still like the idea of not having to look at the waveform for making my cuts, though.
1: https://ecasound.seul.org/ecasound/, http://www.acousticrefuge.com/mixer4.htm