yes, another mixer opinion question..

O

o-ron

New member
Need a good mixer with good sound for the smallest budget possible. I record mainly acoustic (piano, violin, voice, choral, guitar, etc.) but also do some rock stuff (but as far as sound quality goes, I care more about the acoustic/classical).
I will only have 4 or 5 mics for quite a long time until I can eventually make another investment. (although I may borrow some SM-57's).

I currently do 4-track digital recording, but may eventually bump up to 8-track digital recording.

I'm looking at the following mixers:

Mackie 1402VLZ
Behringer 2004A
or... ?

I wish I could afford a Mackie 1604, but i just can't quite do it.

THANKS!
 
Go with mackie or Soundcraft expecially if you are doing acoustic stuff. The Pre's and overall noise level is much better.
 
Ok, this is really a dumb question i know, but, what exactly is a stereo return and how does this compare to stereo aux sends?

Thanks
 
o-ron said:
Ok, this is really a dumb question i know, but, what exactly is a stereo return and how does this compare to stereo aux sends?

Thanks
Click to expand...

An Aux Return is just another input into your board, much like one of the regular channels. The difference is, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of a full channel strip. For instance, it will usually be line level only (no mic pre), and if it has any eq, it may be a reduced featured eq (maybe just high and low, no sweepable mids). The routing from the aux returns may not be as flexible either, and they probably won't have insert points. Think of aux returns as "bonus" inputs on your board, and use them for things that may not need much "done" to them. Some people use them for playback from CD players or cassette or DAT decks. Other people use them for FX returns, like reverb or delay. But you could pretty much use them however you want. And if you have plenty of regular channel strips, you can also opt not to use them at all. A stereo return basically means that you can plug a dual left/right signal into the return, and then tweakl both with a single set of controls

Aux sends are found on each channel strip. On a lower priced mixer, there are typically 2-6 of them. Often, like on a Mackie, there are 6, but with only four available on any given mixer channel (two are switchable from 3-4 to 5-6). Aux sends are extremely useful for either setting up seperate headphone mixes or sending differing amounts of signal from individual mixer channels to an effects box (like a reverb or a delay). Stereo Aux sends are not as common as stereo aux returns, but you can always use two mono aux sends to create a stereo pair. Also, usually on the master control section of the mixer, there will be master volume pots for each aux send to raise or lower all the individual track aux's in volume.

Hope this helps! :cool:
 
ok, since I'm going to be using this mixer essentially exclusively for recording (4-track simultaneous at first, and possibly up to 8 track simultaneous down the road), i would then use the aux sends to fill out those tracks, right? IE run the aux 1,2,3,4 to the 1,2,3,4 inputs on my digital 4-track recording device?

So i would be better off in the long run with the most possible aux sends? (although i could use the inserts on an individual channel i suppose if there's only 1 mic per a particular recorded channel)

Thanks!
 
I would use the insert points (cable patched halfway in, assuming no direct outs) for sending one mixer channel to one tape channel. If you need to send a blend of more than one mixer channel to one tape track, it would be useful to have subgroups. If you can't afford a mixer with subgroups, you would be forced to use the aux sends, but that would mean you could not use those sends for the usual functions like cue (headphone) mixes and effects sends.
 
ok, so are there any mixers in the sub-$600 price range that have subgroups?

Also, I don't really need those aux sends for other purposes, as I use the digital recording equipment i have for monitoring/playback and such.

Thanks

P.S. what about the Soundcraft Spirit Live 16 Channel Mixer?
 
The pre's in the Spirit Live series are not as good as the the M series.

If you have proper direct outputs on each chanel (as the M series does) you don't need subgroups.

Mark
 
Not only do you NOT need subgroups for what you're trying to do, even if you HAVE subs or auxes for every input to your recorder, you will get cleaner results by getting back out of the board at the earliest possible part of the circuitry you can. Direct outs and insert points both come off the channel strip earlier in the circuit (less components to go through) than the signals that go to aux sends or busses. This means that your signal has to go thru fewer degrading components to get to the recorder when you use direct outs or insert points. All you want the board for during recording is to raise the level of the mic signal enough to be compatible with the input to the recorder, either -10 dBV or +4dBu, depending on the machine. After that, the sooner you can stop screwing up the signal, the cleaner the recording will be. The only other thing the board needs to do during recording is to monitor the results, but that will have nothing to do with the recording quality unless you screw up and cause a feedback loop during recording... Steve
 
except the only problem is when i record a performance or a group as a whole (and not going back to record instruments separately), i need to mix a whole bunch of channels to sound nicely in 4 channels. But yes, I agree with what you're saying. I think as long as I have one set of aux outs i'll be fine.

Thanks for your help
 
Sorry, I thought by your posts that you were only going to record 4 mics at a time, in which case the cleanest way to do that would be direct outs or inserts out. However, if you will have to use auxes or busses, you definitely want the cleanest mixer you can afford. That would be the Soundcraft or maybe the Mackie, but not the Behringer. That company seems to always be stealing designs and ideas from other companies, then undercutting their price in order to take sales away from them. In order to sell for less, you have to build for less. This usually shows up in reduced reliability, cheaper electronics, etc - not a good plan if you want value for your money or resale value. Generally, buying "cheap" is more expensive than buying "good", because you'll still end up buying the good one after losing at least half of what you spent on "cheap"... Steve
 
I'm a little confused..

On the M8, how would/can I route submixes of the 8 mono inputs to the 4 stereo aux outs? (for multitrack recording)?

Also, I was looking at this mixer:

http://www.macmidimusic.com/bcenspirfolf.html

It's a soundcraft Spirit FX8. The effects I don't really need, although they can't hurt (maybe i'd use them for live effects monitoring).
Anyways, it definitely has a separate submix group thus giving me 4 fadable and assignable outputs (sub and main).
The other reason I'm looking at this mixer is I found it on ebay for only $350.

Opinions?

Thanks!
 
I would use aux returns mostly for effects. Nothing else. You go out from an aux send, into a reverb/effects unit, and then back through the aux return. Stereo just means it has the ability to be stereo.
 
Here's one more option:

the older Mackie CR-1604 mixer with the 10XLR extension rack. Are the older pre's on this mixer good enough to make it worth it? This setup is considerably less expensive than the newer 1604VLZ


Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top