When did albums start having a full digital workflow start to finish? (Without a digital to analogue to digital conversion during the mixing)

[KG10]

I know this has been discussed before on the steeve hoffman forums. https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thre...recordings-using-digital-mixing-desks.257168/

But I wondered if anyone here has some insight to this subject.

 

[par4ken]

Right from the beginning of the CD format there were fully digital releases. The SPARS code conveyed that information. DDD would be an all digital recording. AAD is analogue recorded and mixed, digitally mastered recording. The SPARS code fell out of use for some reason.
SPARS Code

 

[KG10]

Right from the beginning of the CD format there were fully digital releases. The SPARS code conveyed that information. DDD would be an all digital recording. AAD is analogue recorded and mixed, digitally mastered recording. The SPARS code fell out of use for some reason.
SPARS Code

True but most of the mixers I heard from that time worked in the analogue domain so the audio signal went like this: digital (multi track tape) -> analogue (mixer) -> digital (stereo master tape)

 

[IMachine]

DDD is all digital.
DAD would be anlog mixed.

 

[IMachine]

As far as I know Brothers In Arms was the first DDD disc I had.

 

[KG10]

DDD is all digital.
DAD would be anlog mixed.

Thought that meant it an analogue tape was used during the mixdown?

 

[barfle]

I have a few LPs that indicate they were digitally recorded, but obviously they are analog media. I don’t recall that there was any discussion of clock rate or bit depth on those discs.

I have many optical discs that are AAD, because they are digital distributions of an analog recording and mix.

I don’t recall seeing any DAD indicators, but of course, it’s possible. There are producers who feel that a pass through analog tape adds something desirable to the finished product. YMMV. Old multitrack session tapes could certainly be used in an ADD distribution.

What was the first DDD? I have no idea.

 

[Bill B]

I agree with @IMachine.
I remember a big deal being made out of Brother's In Arms being the first DDD when it was released

But when I Googled the question, "what was the first DDD cd"

September 5, 1982: Peter Gabriel releases his fourth studio album (titled Security in North America and Peter Gabriel IV elsewhere). When released on CD in October 1984 it becomes the first full-digital DDD release. It was recorded on Sony's Mobile One digital studio and mixed to a Sony PCM-1610.

 

[CPR]

Madonna Immaculate Collection, was the 1st one I remember

 

[PurpleMoustache]

Not *albums* per say, but Talking Head’s Stop Making Sense was the first movie to have a 100% start to finish digital production in 1984

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Donald Fagens Nightfly is the first one I can recall

 

[lukpac]

DDD is all digital.
DAD would be anlog mixed.

That's incorrect. SPARS codes only referred to the recording, mix, and master formats. It had nothing to do with the steps in between.

A DDD CD could still be mixed on an analog desk and mastered with an analog mastering console.

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

That's incorrect. SPARS codes only referred to the recording, mix, and master formats. It had nothing to do with the steps in between.

A DDD CD could still be mixed on an analog desk and mastered with an analog mastering console.

Correct

 

[LuvMyQuad]

That's incorrect. SPARS codes only referred to the recording, mix, and master formats. It had nothing to do with the steps in between.

A DDD CD could still be mixed on an analog desk and mastered with an analog mastering console.

I don't think this is correct. What steps in between? AFAIK DDD indicates all processing was done in the digital domain.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Correct

Can you explain please?

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

Can you explain please?

As far as I remember this (SPARS codes) began in the early 80s when it referred to the recording and mastering formats before digital mixing consoles and workstations were being used or even existed. I agree that might be a bit confusing now, and these days we have so much analogue emulation in the digital world!!!

Of course this is not what the original question was about - I can't remember when complete digital workflows started to become used - me, I began to work on some projects all digital 'in the box' more than 15 years ago....

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Far be it from me to debate a music insider, but when I read this explanation, it seems pretty clear that DDD means a full digital path.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_code

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

Far be it from me to debate a music insider, but when I read this explanation, it seems pretty clear that DDD means a full digital path.

I agree, but I don't think it did mean that when it was first implemented in the early 80s when digital mixing consoles were not yet available - I didn't see one until the late 80s and they were very rare anyway.....

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I agree, but I don't think it did mean that when it was first implemented in the early 80s when digital mixing consoles were not yet available - I didn't see one until the late 80s and they were very rare anyway.....

Then you are saying the DDD designation on the Fagen album is a lie? See below the wiki link for The Nightly. This was recorded in 1981-1982. It mentions the difficulty involved with the recording process. Although it does not discuss the mixing console, it does state several times that it is a full digital recording.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nightfly

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

Not saying anything is a lie - it's a different interpretation of what was happening at the time - this is all about the mixing console situation.

If it can be proved that the Digital Multitrack was connected directly to a digital mixing desk and then mixed down to a digital (DAT?) tape - then yes that would be a truly digital workflow.

But 1981??