"I recently upgraded from an analog multitrack and mixer to a 24-bit hard disk recording system. It was a long process for me to take the plunge, but I have been extremely happy with the results so far. I do hear a quality difference between the two though, and frankly I think my analog gear sounded a little better overall (not that I'd go back). I've read a lot about recording levels in digital and how one is supposed to record as hot as possible for best fidelity. I've messed with my system a while now and I really don't hear any difference when I record at fairly low levels. Why does everyone think it's such a big deal?"

In the early days of digital recording the converters simply weren't very good by today's standards. Plus, most of the systems had a maximum of 16-bits to work with. The maximum dynamic range a 24-bit system is capable of capturing is substantially greater (greater even than the analog gear connected to it), and this does have an impact on the recording quality, particularly at lower levels. If you were to try your experiment with an old DAT machine made in the mid-1980's you would definitely hear the difference. To hear someone who has good enough ears to perceive the quality difference between analog and digital say they don't hear this difference is a testament to how far digital equipment has come in the past few years. We still say recording at higher levels is generally a good idea, but with a 24-bit system it is nowhere near as critical as it was back in the 16-bit days, so don't sweat it.