I'll answer some of this questions with how I feel it, meaning I might be totally wrong.

1. I find this better as you can sync your animation to your audio. To me, this makes animating dialogue a lot easier, as you have the audio and can use it to move your characters after it. Like, if you have a line with someone shouting, it is easier to animate the shout after it is recorded. I think I tried it once with recording audio after. My fig slightly moved his arms when he was shouting!
2. I think a lot of people do it, but I know some that doesn't. I think ANP records audio after?
3. I find this easier...
4. I haven't seen one
5. Syncing your movements to the audio you have recorded.
6. I think you can insert an audio file into Dragonframe, or so I heard, so you can better match the sound to animation. I just record my audio in Audacity, and then insert it into Sony Vegas Pro and then sync up audio and animation and continue shooting...

I hope these answers wasn't just complete rubbish

Recording audio first is the accepted method in traditional animation studios. Animation is such a labour-intensive activity that studio execs want to see everything planned out in detail before animation starts. Making mistakes during production can be a very costly business. Plus, as Mjolnir points out, it's really the only sensible way to sync dialogue with action.

I feel that this method works better for longer brickfilms (Or at least those with more lines), but recording after might be working for shorter ones with one or two lines, as this is easier to animate before recording.

It's a lot of work to reap the benefit of recording voices before you animate. In most cases recording voices before animation is essential because you need the exact lines for mouth animations; that's the biggest reason professional studios do it this way. However, LEGO minifigs don't have moving mouths, so this reason does not exist, so why do it? It comes down to final production value. In most of the very best brickfilms, you'll notice that animation will match up with the subtle inflections in the actors voice, which in turn makes the whole thing much more believable; the view is more likely to be really engaged in the film. You also have more control over the animation than an actors voice, so it's easier to plan out the animation than try to match a voice (although there are ways of cheating at this). In my opinion it's important to make sure all other aspects of production are up to a really good quality your happy with before you worry about syncing audio really precisely. For the most part it has to be done manually, because most programs are designed to sync mouth animations, not really the rest of it; these programs also tend to be quite expensive, not really easily accessible to the average brickfilmer. How I have done it in the past and plan on doing it for the nine minutes I have of audio for the film I'm working on is this: Based on how long the clip is, calculate the total number of frames for which the character will be talking. Then listening to the clip, decide which inflections I want to emphasis, and what type of movement to use, making sure I keep it varied. I then figure out how fast I want the movement to be, and from that how many frames it should take from the start to the end of the movement. I then calculate the number of none moving frames in between each movement, and compile an ordered list of movements and gaps from which I animate. It would look like this: 10 frames, arm up 7 frames, arm down 6 frames, 15 frames, turn head right slightly 4 frames, 8 frames, turn head straight 4 frames, 14 frames. I hope that wasn't to hard to understand.

Youtube Channel

Thank you

When I go to animate a dialogue scene, I usually animate a lot of different variations of hand gestures, movements, tilts, head turns, body changes, etc. Then, when I go to add voice acting, I simply sync the various types of movements to wherever they are needed best in the voice acting. Also, if you film a series of movements you can try to reverse the shot and you'll get a slightly different combo.

Visit me: Website | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Google+

I am one of the people who has done both.

I have extensive experience in post voicing.
How to Not Rob a Bank, Pirates Rule!, Mailbox of Doom!, and many other films of mine were done like that.
The advantage is if you want to change something right on the spot, you can just animate it differently to have that line you've thought up.

I got to be very good at timing lines as so they would fit what I wanted to record later, and I could remember the plots of entire films without scripts.
The disadvantage is that post voicing takes much more time, because you have to make sure it fits correctly, it's kinda hard.

And ever since Sharks and Clowns, I've been actually scripting my films and voicing beforehand.  I've found that this is actually faster, and I can animate the movements nicely to fit the words.

Still, both work.

For I Am The Night, I'm actually doing a mix of the two.  I'm trying to keep it mostly per-production voicing though.

Squid, I've gotten very good with the timing, and knowing how much animation is rquired to speak... and as I animate, I'm hearing the syllable being spoken at the time.  And by the time I'm animating, I have every word memorized.  Most of episode 1 of my series was done in "reverse", with the dialogue recorded afterwards, and even then I used a temp dialogue track (the episode with the alt dialogue is on HOLDING OUR OWN THE COMPLETE FIRST EPISODE DVD, which can be ordered from me), but having used both methods I can say that it's MUCH EASIER to record dialogue first and animate after, unless it's a story light on dialogue.

I'm going to say, do what you feel comfortable with.