Behringer mixer built in FX reverb vs Digital Reverb

logan12197

New member
I am getting together my first set up for home recording (just to mess around with myself on different instruments), and I've already explored whether getting an AI or a USB mixer would be best for my needs, and decided to go with a Behringer Xenyx USB Mixer. I know there are many downsides to this such as it consolidating all channels to one track when recording, but since I will never be needing to record more than one track at a time it is most cost-efficient for me.

As I'm deciding on exactly which model of mixer to buy, I've come across a question.

The mixer without built in FX [the Behringer Xenyx Q1202USB Mixer] is $30 less than the one with built in FX [the Behringer Xenyx QX1202USB]. (I don't yet have permission to post links here, but I plan to buy from Musician's Friend)

I definitely will want to add reverb when I record ukulele and possibly acoustic guitar, and wouldn't be using the built in FX for anything else. I'm not entirely certain what program I will be using to record with (maybe someone can suggest one), but I have used Audacity for recording directly from my soundcard and have Ableton Live 8 but haven't learned to use it yet. Is it worth it to pay the extra $30 for reverb from the board, or can I just as easily add quality reverb in the recording program? From what I understand about reverb, the reverb from the FX unit in the soundboard is digital anyway.

Thanks
Logan
 
I am getting together my first set up for home recording (just to mess around with myself on different instruments), and I've already explored whether getting an AI or a USB mixer would be best for my needs, and decided to go with a Behringer Xenyx USB Mixer. I know there are many downsides to this such as it consolidating all channels to one track when recording, but since I will never be needing to record more than one track at a time it is most cost-efficient for me.

As I'm deciding on exactly which model of mixer to buy, I've come across a question.

The mixer without built in FX [the Behringer Xenyx Q1202USB Mixer] is $30 less than the one with built in FX [the Behringer Xenyx QX1202USB]. (I don't yet have permission to post links here, but I plan to buy from Musician's Friend)

I definitely will want to add reverb when I record ukulele and possibly acoustic guitar, and wouldn't be using the built in FX for anything else. I'm not entirely certain what program I will be using to record with (maybe someone can suggest one), but I have used Audacity for recording directly from my soundcard and have Ableton Live 8 but haven't learned to use it yet. Is it worth it to pay the extra $30 for reverb from the board, or can I just as easily add quality reverb in the recording program? From what I understand about reverb, the reverb from the FX unit in the soundboard is digital anyway.

Thanks
Logan

Please don't do this Logan!
Now I am not a Behringer basher! In fact I have defended the companie's products many times (if not their early business ethics!) and I own a Xenxy 802 and it did sterling work for me a couple of years ago, but....Not what you want for basic home recording.

You need an Audio Interface and one that has attracted much kudos is the Steinberg UR22. This comes with Cubase "lite" but you can try Reaper or my favourite free software, Samplitude Siver cloud. There are also many other AIs on the market at the £100-£150 point, Focusrite, Tascam, Roland to name but 3.

WRT reverb: The general "rule" is to record without it ("dry and clean" as they say) and then add it using software as and where/when. The software FX, reverb etc in any of the prorams I have mentioned are going to be of vastly better quality than those in the Behringer.

Oh! And I better tell you to read the stickies!

Dave.
 
Yup.

Record your original tracks with no effects then add what you need later. Once added while tracking you can never change them; adding them later allows you to experiment and change things until you get exactly the right sound.

Up to you if you want a mixer but, dollar for dollar an interface will provide better quality simply because you're not paying for flashing lights and extra knobs you don't need. If a mixer is cheaper than an interface despite looking more complicated, you have to ask yourself where the money was saved...the answer isn't reassuring in terms of audio quality or long term reliability.
 
First of all, thanks for both of your inputs regarding the reverb, that makes sense now that I think about it.

However, like I said I did a lot of research between an AI or mixer before I decided to use a mixer. Although I wasn't really planning to go into it in this thread, let me at least walk you through my thought process.

-I understand that for recording purposes, I would be sacrificing potential sound quality by using a mixer instead of an AI. I'm not releasing music for anyone else to hear, and I'm not too concerned about the best quality at the moment.
-I was looking at a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, but $100 is a lot cheaper than $150 when you're a high school student and have no income
-In addition to recording myself on different instruments and layering those tracks at home, I also intend to use the mixer for live use (just playing with friends and running 2 mics and drum/track through it) and will need more than the 2 inputs on a ~$150 AI. The limited inputs for the cost is the main reason I was going to go with the flexibility of a mixer.

Obviously I respect your opinions, which is why I posted here (what do I know after all), so let me know what your thoughts are about this now that you know more information.
 
Hmm...Budget botherations, always a PITA.

Ok, well you could look for one of these..
M-Audio Fast Track Pro (Mobile USB Audio / MIDI Interface) | eBay

They are of such a BSH build that they rarely go wrong (in 8 years of recording and forums I have never read of a dud). I picked up a Tascam 144 complete with an un registered copy of Cubase LE4 for £60 a year ago from Cash Generators, works fine.

The problem(s) with usb mixers is not so much the audio quality, I have an 802 and have used it with Berrie's UCA202 converter (which is what is in the tin) and, so long as you watch the levels, the rig has bugger all headroom, the sound is pretty good. Then my 802 has been perfectly reliable (but my 3 BCA2000s weren't!) no, it is the actual usage of the usb "system" that makes these mixers a poor choice for the home recordist. I have an A&H ZED 10, arguably one of the best "simple" 16bit usb mixers extant but even this is a bit of a PITA to use as a recording/track building tool (I don't, it runs into a 2496 sound card which comes out to another mixer).

But, if that is all you can afford and you need a mixer for other duties, carry on. We will still be here to help with any problems that might (ho, ho, ho!) arise.

Dave.
 
Okay, thanks for the update.

If you're also planning to use it for live mixing then, even though it's less than perfect for recording, then I can see the logic of the mixer. It might not last as long as a better interface but, as something to play with for a few years, fine.

That said, now that we know you want to do some live stuff, you may also want to reconsider the issue of effects. What we said about not recording with effects still holds--but, when performing, the ability to add a bit of reverb or whatever can give a more polished sound.
 
...yeah, a lot of small mixers are pretty badly designed and a PITA. What you need, ecc83 is a really BIG mixer, something like this:

221950d1298675953-new-studio-two-control-room-abbey-road-new-studio-two-desk.jpg

Big mixers are fun!
 
...yeah, a lot of small mixers are pretty badly designed and a PITA. What you need, ecc83 is a really BIG mixer, something like this:

View attachment 83039

Big mixers are fun!
Fork! I could not get that in my living room, leave off my "studio"! Anyway, Abbey R is just down the road from me and the guys said I could pop in anytime......!

Dave.
 
Largest I've ever used was a 56 channel Cadac for a live show and a few 48 channel consoles for both live and studio stuff. Technically my home studio digital mixer is also 48 channels but, being spread over 3 channel layers and a master layer I don't really count that!

But the serious point is that, a well designed pro mixer can be a delight to use. The PITA problems you've had are mainly down to the small mixers being built to a price and leaving out many of the routing options that you'd buy a mixer for.

Last I looked (admittedly a couple of weeks ago) there was a 32 channel Amek BC1 on ebay.co.uk. You NEED a mixer like that, Dave! :D
 
I'm not too concerned about the best quality at the moment.

It's a good thing you put "at the moment" at the end of that, because I guarantee you this will change, it always does. We've all said the same thing when we started recording. It's a drug and a deep addiction, I tell you. :)
 
"Last I looked (admittedly a couple of weeks ago) there was a 32 channel Amek BC1 on ebay.co.uk. You NEED a mixer like that, Dave! "
Gorn mate! All that site shows now is trainers and garden furniture.

Anyhooosiss, "I" do not need anything! I am not creatively musical. Oh I can widdle a bit, know a few chords and I am not a bad bass player when I practice (which is never!) but I simply do not have any urge to create music. Since son buggered off to La Belle France the kit lies dormant. Our "rig" was a Behringer 802 feeding a 2496 in one of two computers, best one being a 2x2.7G HP with 8G ram W7/64.
Monitoring is accomplished by a second mixer, a Wharfedale 16-2 that takes the 2496 feeds and shoves them over to a pair of Tannoy 5as. The 802 was, as I have indicated, upgraded two years ago to the ZED10 .
We also have a Teac A-3440 which son loves and I recently bought a second 2496 so that I could route 4 tracks to and from it. If he ever comes back to work here again I shall have to work out how to setup the routing in Cubase (le6) and Sonar (X1ESS)!

Meantime I content myself with being a bloody nuisance on forums.

Dave.
 
I would suggest that you try using a convolution reverb and impulses.

Here's a free convo verb vst you can check out:
SIR Audio Tools / SIR1

and here are some really nice impulses, also free.
Samplicity's Bricasti M7 Impulse Response Library v1.1 - Samplicity

In your recording software, set up an aux send and name it reverb. Load the sir vst onto the aux, and set the sir controls at 100% wet and 0% dry. Load one of the impulses from the library.

For each vocal track that you want verb on, send that track to the reverb aux. Use the reverb aux's fader to control the blend of the original dry vocal track(s) with the effected signal from sir. A general rule of thumb with verb levels is that if you are noticing it, its a bit too much. Back the level down until its more of an enhancement to the sound rather than specifically calling your attention to it.

Unless you are going for a super wet sound as an effect. In that case, go for it. there are no hard and fast rules. Use your ears as your guide, and decide what sounds good to you, and in comparison to reference tracks that have a similar sound which you might want to emulate.
 
I am getting together my first set up for home recording (just to mess around with myself on different instruments), and I've already explored whether getting an AI or a USB mixer would be best for my needs, and decided to go with a Behringer Xenyx USB Mixer. I know there are many downsides to this such as it consolidating all channels to one track when recording, but since I will never be needing to record more than one track at a time it is most cost-efficient for me.

As I'm deciding on exactly which model of mixer to buy, I've come across a question.

The mixer without built in FX [the Behringer Xenyx Q1202USB Mixer] is $30 less than the one with built in FX [the Behringer Xenyx QX1202USB]. (I don't yet have permission to post links here, but I plan to buy from Musician's Friend)

I definitely will want to add reverb when I record ukulele and possibly acoustic guitar, and wouldn't be using the built in FX for anything else. I'm not entirely certain what program I will be using to record with (maybe someone can suggest one), but I have used Audacity for recording directly from my soundcard and have Ableton Live 8 but haven't learned to use it yet. Is it worth it to pay the extra $30 for reverb from the board, or can I just as easily add quality reverb in the recording program? From what I understand about reverb, the reverb from the FX unit in the soundboard is digital anyway.

Thanks
Logan


Dear Logan,

Thanks for your questions about the Q1202USB and QX1202USB. It sounds like either of these mixers are great for your recording and live performance needs.

Whilst the reverb FX algorithm is quite impressive on the QX1202USB, you might prefer to spend your money on a pedal so that you can have hands-free control for your uke or guitar. An additional $30 for a KLARK TEKNIK designed FX unit is an incredible value as KLARK TEKNIK is a notable FX designer and manufacturer. It would give you a lot more options that sound really great. I agree that it's often best practice to record without effects, but sometimes the quickest method to laying something down is the best. It's great in the live setting as well.

The Tracktion DAW software is also now included for free with the Q1202USB. You can learn more about Tracktion on the Behringer website. (I'd post a link but it doesn't allow me since I'm new to this forum)

Personally, I utilize a x1204USB in my studio and love it. I record electric guitar, bass and lots of vocals from gospel to hip hop into Ableton Live. I'm really happy with the preamps and overall quality. The direct monitoring is really nice to have and not all interfaces offer that.

We also have just released the FCA610 and FCA1616 interfaces that are an incredible value with MIDAS designed preamps.

Feel free to post any more questions or send me a private message.

Kind Regards,

Andrew Luck
Product Specialist, DJ US
MUSIC Group | BEHRINGER
 
Last edited:
I would have to agree with RAMI here. When I started I had the "I just need SOMETHING to get started, I don't expect studio quality.." 4 audio interfaces and 2 mixers later I seem to have changed my mind on that fact.

I understand the "get something cheap now so I can get started" mentality but if you have an ear for music (and you must if you're trying this) you will quickly go from that to "this stupid piece of **** won't give me the ******** sound I want and now I'm going to throw it out the ********** window.. **** *&* && **&*&&*

Or at least I did.
 
Thanks again to everyone that took the time to share with me their opinion and experience. I think it's really cool that I can take a few minutes to post a question on a forum and receive so many helpful responses by he next day.

I'm going to go with the Behringer Xenyx Q1202USB Mixer (no FX). I think it will satisfy my needs for a long while, and through further research I've heard good thing about the mic preamps in it. Eventually as I, (or if I), get more serious about recording I will use an AI, and by then I will hopefully have a job and $50 won't be as much. After I get my mixer my next purchase will probably be some decent studio headphones.

I'll take a look in to all the DAW programs mentioned and see which one I like best.

If I run in to any more problems or have any questions I know where to ask = )

Logan
 
Thanks again to everyone that took the time to share with me their opinion and experience. I think it's really cool that I can take a few minutes to post a question on a forum and receive so many helpful responses by he next day.

I'm going to go with the Behringer Xenyx Q1202USB Mixer (no FX). I think it will satisfy my needs for a long while, and through further research I've heard good thing about the mic preamps in it. Eventually as I, (or if I), get more serious about recording I will use an AI, and by then I will hopefully have a job and $50 won't be as much. After I get my mixer my next purchase will probably be some decent studio headphones.

I'll take a look in to all the DAW programs mentioned and see which one I like best.

If I run in to any more problems or have any questions I know where to ask = )

Logan

^ Cool. The great thing about a wee mixer is that you will always find a use for it! If you buy a "proper" AI such as the NI KA6 (have I mentioned the KA6 in this thread yet?!) you can use the mixer to feed spare line inputs and get a stereo drum kit mix say. Or it can be used as a backup monitor controller, a "gatherer in" of sundry synths. Even, if you got "two rooms posh" a talkback system. If nothing else it can prop the door open while you carry in your X32 desk!

Dave..
 
Hi Andrew,
Can you ask Behringer why they have stopped putting a signal flow block diagram in their manuals please?

They always used to do this and they were a great resource to show people how things worked. In fact Berrie's got a lot of free publicity from me over the last five years or so because I used their manuals and diagrams in the forums but now you have stopped, I can't!

And, are those AIs being reviewed soon by anyone we know and trust?

Dave.
 
Hi Andrew,
Can you ask Behringer why they have stopped putting a signal flow block diagram in their manuals please?

They always used to do this and they were a great resource to show people how things worked. In fact Berrie's got a lot of free publicity from me over the last five years or so because I used their manuals and diagrams in the forums but now you have stopped, I can't!

And, are those AIs being reviewed soon by anyone we know and trust?

Dave.

It'll be interesting to see how the Behringer guy (if he responds) manages to say "We stopped including block diagrams because only antique old farts like you and Bobbsy ever used them" but makes it sound polite! :)
 
It'll be interesting to see how the Behringer guy (if he responds) manages to say "We stopped including block diagrams because only antique old farts like you and Bobbsy ever used them" but makes it sound polite! :)

Heh! Heh!
Well that's ONE reason. Another might be that they are using circuit configurations that might be a source of criticism? For example, it is becoming known that the practice of padding down a mic input to drive a line input is technically not the best way to do it and incurs a small noise and CMRR penalty. It just might be that Berries no longer want that shown? In practice of course virtually every budget mixer and AI use the technique and provided the mic amp is quiet enough no harm. Line sources are often synth outs or guitar amp EMu feeds, not the most pristine of sources anyway!

But those diagrams were SO handy! Of course you got the odd bod who said "Oh! I can't follow technical diagrams!" My rejoinder to that was "well you're gonna bloody haff T IF you want to move on in the recording world!"

I don't think you need MUCH in the way of technicals to do recording, the noise thread is a good example that the noob can well leave alone but I do think there is a level of understanding that they should grasp? Block diagrams are one (tis only the bloody Underground FCS!) and Operating Levels and a bit of decibabble another.

Dave.
 
my 2 cents worth.

Here's what I have found to work for me on a moderate budget for recording.

I have used the Xenyx 1202 FX (SPEND THE EXTRA $30 FOR THE EFFECTS) to record vocal with effects, comes out nice and clean on the Tascam DP-24 and the Zoom H4N. I record two separate channels by setting fader on one stereo channel to hard left and the other to hard right, and plugging each 1/4" main out into the two inputs on recorders. This gives you two independent channel recording. I find this really useful to go back and lay my tracks, vocals, harmonies, rhythm, bass, lead, etc.. against the scratch recording.

I've tried both software (LOGIC, GARAGEBAND, AUDACITY), and hardware recording (TASCAM PORTASTUDIO DP-24, ZOOM H4N).
Computer based recording always has latency issues (at least I have) and I prefer straight/clean recording with either the DP-24 or H4N. Sometimes I will use Audacity (good freeware recording program) or Garageband to mix down and add effects after recording and sometimes I just mix it on the DP-24, H4N's screen is too small for major mixing.
I have a Behringer x1832 I use when recording myself and another band member together. The x1832 has 8 separate channel outputs so that each channel has it's own feed into the DP-24, which also has 8 independent inputs. I have also found, through trial and error, that I can record the whole band and use the PA system for sound if I connect the rear channel outputs of 1832 to DP-24 inputs with 1/4" STEREO cables. Using mono cables to the recorder cuts the sound to the PA system. Not good for band practice.
Everything I read on the internet suggested using mono 1/4" and simply not plugging them in all the way, which led to it's own set of problems.

I have used the USB on the 1202fx and the x1832 but again, once the recording gets multiple tracks or numerous takes on it I have Latency problems. I've spoken to many who say experience this and some who say this shouldn't be and offer numerous suggestions, save, close/open program, use Mac, use PC, get a bigger system, get more memory, you need bigger CPU. I really don't like USB recording unless it's only for a few tracks and a once over recording. With the stand alone recorder, DP-24 or H4N, it's always ready, turn it on, hit record, record as many tracks, as many times as you like and it always works without fiddling around with settings, separate hard-drives, external equipment etc.

I have used Tascam Portastudio's, since 2000, and love them. I've had the H4N for 5 years and it has been a little work horse.
That said, I do like mixing it down with the computer.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top