Different brushs but both can paint good pictures. Practice and learn from both sets of tools.

Link555 wrote: Different brushs but both can paint good pictures. Practice and learn from both sets of tools.

+1

I see a couple of ways of interpreting your question.
1. Are you asking about the relative merits of preprocessing a vocal track using analog eq units before recording vs. manipulating the track digitally after it has been recorded?
2. Or are you asking about using the tube eq as a postprocessor for the recorded track?

If it is option 1, this is a pretty frequently debated topic on this board - usually in the context of using compression before recording. One side says it is best to record without preprocessing since "you can't undo" the processing. The other side says that it should always be the goal to record the best vocal performance you can get to disk. As you might guess, one side has a lot of people who invested considerable time and money in analog equipment and learning how to use it before digital recording came along. To me the real question isn't "which is best system?" but "which system is the best investment in my current situation?" If you own a lot of great analog equipment and know how to use it, you may get one answer. If you don't, you may get another.

If it is option 2, note that you are doing "digital doctoring" with the tube eq when you convert back and forth to analog. So you really have to compare the whole system of converters and eq to the digital plugin. I don't think there is any basic principle you can rely on here. Just have to compare sound, ergonomics and cost of the components/plugins involved.

Just the answer I was looking for, thanks bob :>