A potential problem with analog mixer-based approach?

[dualphin]

Hi all.

Choosing gear for a synth studio...I am getting there.

I am considering a 16 track, 4-aux mixer (say, mackie 1640) + 4x4 audio i/o (say, Echo Audiofire 4) + macbook-based DAW.

Alternately, a firewire mixer, or a 12-input i/o mixerless approach.

So, say, I am using a DSI Mono Evolver Keyboard, a Nord G2, a Waldorf Blofeld, and an MPC 2500.

I want to be able to run them all at once, and monitor them. I will probably be recording only 2 tracks at a time. But there is the possibility of needing to do more than 2.

That means 2 outputs from the MEK, 4 from the G2, 2 from the Blofeld, and 4 (maybe more) from the MPC , plus a mic and an instrument hooked up. That is at least 14, up to 16, mixer inputs.

I want to keep all of the G2 outputs hooked to the mixer (or i/o, in a mixerless approach) all the time, and like I said, maybe 4 of the MPC outputs. The MEK and Blofeld must stay connected too. This is a personal workflow issue. If I have to unplug a synth to send its signal somewhere, I may never plug it in again. I am that lazy. I work hard to get cool sounds, so don't ask me to change in this respect.

I need to be able to quickly route stereo signals to the MPC recording inputs. Like, one or two button pushes or knob twists.

I also want to be able to send audio to the G2 and MEK inputs for processing back into the mixer, but like I said before I need the main and aux outputs of all instruments to stay plugged in to the mixer (or i/o, in the mixerless approach). I do not mind directly patching the mixer aux sends to the synths' inputs in this case, although it would be nice to keep them all hooked up. I just don't think that's possible.

I need to be able to monitor the mix (I am not sure of the terminology here) coming into the mixer from the synths, and simultaneous the mix recorded in the DAW.

I need (and this is crucial) to be able to get signals out of the DAW, apart from the main recorded mix, to the MEK and G2 for re-processing, while both the synth>mixer mix and DAW-recorded mixes are playing.

For this application I was considering an analogue mixer like the mackie 1640, plus a 4x4 audio interface (i/o). This gives me a pair of mixer aux sends to the MPC, plus another pair to the DAW. The main mixer outs go to the monitors, and one pair of aux returns come in from the first out pair of the i/o. And the second out pair from the i/o can send recorded audio from the DAW directly to the G2 or MEK for processing.

Now the question is, with all the mixer and i/o ouputs used, how do I get a stereo signal from the mixer into the G2 or MEK? Or, more complex, a live preamped vocal into one MEK input, and beat or loop from the MPC into the other MEK input to trigger the envelope?

That is the problem with a mixer + 4x4 i/o approach. And also, there is only 2- (max 4) track recording with this configuration.

If I use a 12x12 i/o mixerless approach, I don't have the routing problem, but then I don't get the eq's for coloration, or mixer for live use.

If I use a firewire-based mixer, all I get is a single stereo return from the DAW, without the 2nd stereo pair I need for processing recorded audio in the synths simultaneous with monitoring the whole DAW-recorded mix.

I like the idea of a mixer, for the electroacoustic character it will impart. I'd like to learn to use one, anyway. Does the problem I forsee seem like a real problem? I have only just been looking at mixers, and only Mackie, since I hadn't really been considering a mixer until e-m member Dasz suggested using one. But it does seem like a good idea, for the flexibility it brings.

Are there other <$1000 or so (more is okay) mixer + i/o approaches out there that will give me equal sound quality + routing flexibility?

The Mackie 1604 and their Onyx 1640 seem like they would do the trick, possibly. The 1604 gives me an extra aux pair send. But again, I am stuck pretty much doing 2-track recording at a time, unless I unplug and replug stuff. I want to avoid that. And the Onyx only has one stereo return from the DAW.

So, does anyone have advice on how to overcome this potential obstacle?

Thanks,

d[/u]

[elektro80]

It sounds like what you really need is something like the RME Fireface 800. Or two.. The routing matrix is brilliant.
You should also consider some patchbays.

Most "affordable" consoles are more or less intended for mixed live/very limited project studio use. What you are thinking of here is a very flexible recording console. These are usually quite expensive, really big and you might still want some features.

A recording console is usually both for tracking, signal routing and monitoring. You can get there by simply going for line in ( patchbays will allow you to route stuff in a flexible way anyways ), a flexible audio interface like the RME, buy outboard whenever you need outboard and if you ever feel the need for a dedicated monitoring mixer then buy some budget desk that does exactly what you need it to do.

[elektro80]

If you think you need some warmth ( I hate that term... ) then you should rather consider buying stuff that adds some colour rather than a full console.

A secret weapon the is the Universal Audio UAD-1 DSP card and the UAD plugins. This stuff is really good. Seriously! The stuff if brilliant. I have 3 UAD-1 cards in my Mac Pro and most of the plugins.

[elektro80]

Potential problem with a console?

Several.. but they are kinda of the YMMV type.

Cost! ( A really good console is expensive )
Size! ( These things are huge )
Noise! ( Oh yes.. there will be some noise.. less these days than 25 years ago.. but still )
Less flexible than you might thing ( Oh yes.. )
You aren´t really excluding the need for outboard, patchbays, super multichannel audio interfaces, preamps, DIs, transformers, EQs and compressors. You will probably get all of that no matter what. Sooner or later you will start to wonder why you bought the console.

That being said, a console is always "nice" to have around but I´d say it makes more sense these days to buy a desk that does one thing really great rather than a bad hybrid. If you go for the line in approach then you might later decide on getting a desk for monitoring mixes that also can double as a console for rehearsels and live use. And... do yourself a favour and get one that also has direct outs on each channel.

A monitoring console? Why?

If you want to play with more people than yourself then you will soon find out that what you track will not be quite what you want to put into the monitoring mix. So.. you need a tool for setting up effects and individual mixes for singers, guitarists, drums and whatnot. Don´t worry if you don´t get it now. You will later.. and when you do you are ready for a monitoring console. The "quality" of such a desk does not have to be stellar. It simply needs to do what you need it to do very well. You will decide on what that is when you get there. Stil, directs out will often be cool when choosing a mixer for such a purpose. You`ll never know when you just might want to also record a feed from this desk as well.

[elektro80]

And then there is stuff like the LiLo

http://www.speck.com/lilo/lilo.shtml

[dualphin]

Lilo looks nice... later maybe??

FF800 looks nice.

Do you recommend anything else like the RME FF800? Maybe with more ins?

d

[elektro80]

Nah, the RME will do just fine. You simply add more i/o using the ADAT pipes.. or more RME FF800s.

[dualphin]

Any recommendations for patchbays?

d

[elektro80]

Patchbays? Hmm.. you need something that is fully balanced. The Behringers are cheap and kinda works most of the time ( at least while they still work ):
http://reviews.harmony-central.com/reviews/Effects/product/Behringer/ULTRAPATCH+PRO+PX2000/10/1


Most of the vendors playing the same market segments have similar patchbays. I think Phonic, Samson and Alto also have patchbays.

I have 4 Behringer 2000 and 3000 series patchbays, an old trashed Studer thingie I´m about to restore, and old JBL. The Behringer patchbays are working fine just now but I do think the quality of the connectors is dubious. Sooner or later they will fail. That is why I´m going to reoair and restore the old ones. The Studer thingie is a bit big.. it is on wheels..

[elektro80]

Important:

A lot of Behringer gear is so sad that it is hard to put into words. A few items do in fact work almost as advertised. Take care.

I really loathe the Behringer mixers, but nothing beats a Behringer when you need something truly dispensable. I´ve recently tried out the Behringer rack mount DIs. Don´t go there.

[dualphin]

Yeah, Behringer seems like shit molded into studio-gear shapes.

So a Samson or Alto patchbay is probably a more permanant solution than a Behringer?

BTW, I'd like some more of your opinions on my classic compared to contemporary gear thread over in Schmooozze.

Unless you are too busy "Admin"ing. Your wife.

d out

[elektro80]

[elektro80]

[lcvl]

First of all, pardon if I didn't understand your routing needs correctly.
I use a pretty similar setup (at least conceptually).

This is what I'd do with a Mackie 1604:

Synths & sampler Outs --- > Mixer Input Channels
Audio Interface Out 1-2 ----> Mixer Input Channels (stereo)
Audio Interface Out 3-4 ----> Mixer Input Channels (stereo)

Mixer Control Room Outs ----> Studio Monitors

Mixer Main Mix Out ----> Audio Interface Rec Inputs 1-2
Mixer Alt Out 1-2 ----> Audio Interface Rec Inputs 3-4
Mixer Alt Out 3-4 -----> MPC Sampling Inputs

Aux 1-2 ----> G2 Ext Inputs
Aux 3-4 ----> MEK Ext Inputs

This way you can have all your instruments always patched into the mixer input channels, ready to go.

You'll be able to set your studio monitoring levels using the Ctrl Room knob, while the rec levels to your audio interface/DAW are set by the Main Mix and Alt Out 1-2 faders.

Using both out busses will make possible to record two independent stereo signals (or 4 mono) simultaneously to the DAW.

To sample an instrument output into the MPC just press the Alt Out 3-4 button on the specific channel.

You also have two separate stereo feeds coming from the DAW into the mixer. The first one could be considered the main mix, the second one is the one that allows you to process DAW signals through the G2 and MEK. Just use the Aux Sends on that stereo channel accordingly.

This way you'll be able to listen to the rest of the DAW mix playing AND record your real time processing to the DAW on a separate track.

In case you start to run short of channels remember you can use the stereo Tape Ins and AUX returns inputs as well.

Hope this helps a bit
ciao
leo

[dualphin]

@lcvl,

Thanks for the input(s)...(winkwink). I had not really thought about how to use the aux outs correctly. And I think you did understand my routings

I think I may end up going with e80's advice, though. I think the idea of setting all the routings via software appeals to me.


@e80,

r u a previous incarnation of my head?

what do you think about the preamps on the fireface800? Probably pretty good for a first serious studio, right?

[elektro80]

Dunno about the incarnation bit, but I´ve been around.. and as for the preamps in the FF800, they are quite decent and fairly non obtrusive and neutral. The preamps themselves don´t have the absolutely wonderful and silly headroom you might find in some of the boutique designs but this isn´t really a problem.

[lcvl]

Sure, the mixer-less setup makes completely sense, and it's been my choice for a few years, before getting back to a hw mixer.

Incidentally, my audio interfaces of choice are RME as well (MUltiface and Digiface here), both on desktop and laptop computers (PC/Mac).

I absolutely love RME hw products and software expertise. I find TotalMix and the zero-latency hw monitoring/routing approach they pioneered way before other companies did, absolutely essential to my way of working with audio on computers. Without even mentioning the whole set of measuring tools included...

BUT, at the same time, the immediacy of having a real mixer is still a necessity to me. I'm not talking about mixing OTB: it's more about what happens before your synths sounds get into the computer. Easy access to levels, panning, basic EQ, FX sends, feedback loops, etc. I rarely record dry sounds, and if I had to access Totalmix for each one of those tasks I'd get crazy in a few minutes...

You think that the Mackie is a complicated beast and Totalmix will be the easiest path. Well, Totalmix basically offers the characteristics of a high-end router into your PC, using a streamlined UI.

To understand what's going on in Totalmix you need to have at least some basic understanding of how a traditional mixer works, otherwise it's gonna be hard to a) use it at its full potential b) understand where your signals are being routed to without getting massive headaches.

The Totalmix UI in this case doesn't work very well (not an RME fault), at least compared to a hw mixer, where every control is just one pot/fader/switch away.

The other point (then I'll stop before running the risk to sound like a Mackie sales person) is that I've never been 100% satisfied with the sounds I was getting from my synths-->audio interface setup.

With a mixer I feel it's a different story. I don't wanna talk about "warmth" or "analog feel", but it's some kind of "presence" that my previous setup wasn't giving me.

That's all.
Have fun
leo

[dualphin]

leo,

what mixer do you use?

d

[lcvl]

mackie 1604 (not onyx).

[Jyoti]

[v-un-v]

Sorry, but I also agree with Jyoti here Elektro

My Behringer desk (it's a tiny 8 into 2 model) has lasted years now (6 years?). I've used it on the road, in really smokey clubs and venues, I even mixed a couple of singles on it, and it has been a rock- 100% reliable.

[elektro80]

Of course you are allowed to love the B stuff for what it does for you.

I should stress that my gripe with the Behringer products is basically about that a huge lot of it does simply not work as advertised and certainly not like any serious piece of kit would. It still kinda works though and that might be just what you need.

Say, some might end up with a big Behringer MX console thinking they have a pro product like some Allen and Heath desk or a Midas. No no..

That being said, using the cheap and cheerful Behringer for disorganised and spontanous indie live events sounds more sensible than bringing your own Midas. Less mess with insurance..

I haven´t tried the Behringer EFX pedals yet. I reckon some are pretty decent clones of old designs and might work just as well as pretty much the same thing in a 50 cent more expensive and solid housing sporting a familar brand name ( and with a 5 times markup ) Small series production of efx boxes is expensive. We know that. But the markup that some of the high volume brands are relying on is near senseless.

[elektro80]

[v-un-v]

Who says my gigs are filthy????

[elektro80]

skip that part and go huba huba on your nipples?