A difficult decision . . . and a question

[nate_dennis]

Ok, I know I spend a lot of time asking questions about eventual rigs. I hate this more than you do. I promise. My life is starting to change and to open up a bit. As a result of this I'm strongly leaning towards getting back into recording.

Here's the sad part . . . I don't see a way for me to keep my rig analog. I move way too often, I don't have the funds to maintain, and I don't really have the space (and wont for a while.)

My main draw to analog was control and hands-on. So here is what I'm going to do.

I'm going to get an 8x8 computer interface and an analog desk. I'll basically be using the computer like a tape deck.

So here is the question(s)
Once I reach 8 tracks in the computer I will bounce them down to a stereo track. When it's time for me to bounce again (if it gets to that point) would there be a way for me to monitor the bounced stereo tracks without re-recording them? (I sure hope that makes sense.)

Also, can you recomend some mixers to me? I'm looking for, nice EQ, one or two aux sends, and inserts (preferably on every channel.) being 8bus is not super essential to me. I'll likely use a patch bay.

Thanks for any help you can give.

-Nate

 

[Lt. Bob]

Ok, I know I spend a lot of time asking questions about eventual rigs. I hate this more than you do. I promise. My life is starting to change and to open up a bit. As a result of this I'm strongly leaning towards getting back into recording.

Here's the sad part . . . I don't see a way for me to keep my rig analog. I move way too often, I don't have the funds to maintain, and I don't really have the space (and wont for a while.)

My main draw to analog was control and hands-on. So here is what I'm going to do.

I'm going to get an 8x8 computer interface and an analog desk. I'll basically be using the computer like a tape deck.

So here is the question(s)
Once I reach 8 tracks in the computer I will bounce them down to a stereo track. When it's time for me to bounce again (if it gets to that point) would there be a way for me to monitor the bounced stereo tracks without re-recording them? (I sure hope that makes sense.)

Also, can you recomend some mixers to me? I'm looking for, nice EQ, one or two aux sends, and inserts (preferably on every channel.) being 8bus is not super essential to me. I'll likely use a patch bay.

Thanks for any help you can give.

-Nate

I record that way basically. All analog mixer and outboard gear and a Fostex D1624 used like a tape deck except you can do simple digital editing with it.

A question ..... why would you ping 8 tracks down to a stereo mix? If you're using a 'puter you don't really have track limitations and if you're buying a mixer a 16 track isn't that expensive.

 

[miroslav]

Once I reach 8 tracks in the computer I will bounce them down to a stereo track. When it's time for me to bounce again (if it gets to that point) would there be a way for me to monitor the bounced stereo tracks without re-recording them? (I sure hope that makes sense.)

Also, can you recomend some mixers to me? I'm looking for, nice EQ, one or two aux sends, and inserts (preferably on every channel.) being 8bus is not super essential to me. I'll likely use a patch bay.

No...the Neve doesn't have all those high-tech, upgraded options like the Behringer....

Look at that...someone quoting me in their sig.



Like Bob said....no need to bounce down...just keep recording tracks into the 'puter. Even the most basic DAW app allows for a LOT of tracks these days.

For the mixer...what kind of budget?
You could always get a Behringer...in lieu of a Neve!

 

[nate_dennis]

I was going to bounce so that my 8input board could keep up with the computer has running. I'm thinking 3-500 for the board. I'm thinking an old tascam or something.

 

[miroslav]

You only need to do that when you finish all your tracks, and then go down an 8-track sub-mix if you want to bring it out to your board for the final mix, but you can still have dozens of individual tracks...it's just a sub-mix, not a "bounce down".
If you just use the board during tracking, and then do the mixes in the computer...just send all the tracks to a stereo bus in the DAW...and they will output through your board to the mixer or monitors.
That would be just a temporary stereo mix...but the tracks stay as individual tracks, not a bounce down, which would actually mix them together, permanently.

Making sense...?

 

[Lt. Bob]

I was going to bounce so that my 8input board could keep up with the computer has running. I'm thinking 3-500 for the board. I'm thinking an old tascam or something.

you can get a 24 channel Behringer for under 400 bucks with a USb which means there'll be other brands, if you hate Behringer, for around that same price or slightly more.

 

[nate_dennis]

Yeah, that makes sense. I guess, I'm just kinda.....dumb.

So your saying . . . record X number of tracks then at mixdown time, use 8 sub groups from the DAW to the board for summing/mixing.

Word.

What boards would you recomend with inserts on each channel and at least one send?

Does the M520 have those features?

 

[fstrat76]

I do the same thing except I also use tape for initial tracks.

I am using a Tascam M2600 24 channel 8 bus board. The M2600 has a separate monitor section on each channel strip so you can "flip" between input source and tape in's on the channel strip. The monitor section feeds the control room outputs.

I just send the computer audio interface outputs to the tape in's on the mixer. For overdub, I send the daw tracks to say outputs 1&2 as the stereo feed and use the monitor portion on the board to hear while sending the overdub recording to other tracks on the daw. No need to bounce. Works like a charm.

 

[miroslav]

I just send the computer audio interface outputs to the tape in's on the mixer.

So...are you initially recording to the DAW, and then dumping to tape?
Why not record to tape and dump to DAW?

 

[miroslav]

So your saying . . . record X number of tracks then at mixdown time, use 8 sub groups from the DAW to the board for summing/mixing.

Yes...that's how I mix all the time, though I have three 8-channel A/D/A cards in my computer, which lets me run 24 tracks out to my TASCAM M3500.
I rarely have to sub-mix anything in the DAW, as I find 24 tracks cover most of my recording needs.
So the DAW becomes basically my playback deck, and I'm mixing 24 tracks with my console and outboard processing. I mostly just edit in the DAW and do track comping and some "spot" processing....the final mix is done all OTB.

 

[nate_dennis]

Miroslav, what A/D/A cards are you using? I was looking at one of the 8x8 firewire interfaces. I really need portability, but I could build a rack with my stuff that would portable.

 

[miroslav]

I use Layla24 cards....there are the three external converter boxes along with three PCI cards that go into the computer.

The Firewire makes it easier, no need to install cards into internal slots.

 

[sweetbeats]

If you want portability then having an interface that utilizes USB2.0 or firewire is pretty handy especially if using a laptop. But then keep in mind there is a whole can of worms there with how the hardware is setup on the laptop and some constraints there that can sometimes make high data bandwidth processing sketchy. Not so much an issue with contemporary systems, but still something I keep in mind. I have a laptop and a desktop for DAW projects, the laptop for mobile work, and I was very particular about what laptop I used and how I set it up knowing the limitations that can exist when comparing a laptop to a desktop.

I don't know how portable you want the system to be.

I still feel the most stable interface protocol is a PCI interface, particularly if you are just talking about 8 x 8...stable and cheap if you go used. Something to think about.

+1 to everything alse said about submixing your DAW project for monitoring.

The DAW mixer (depending on your DAW software) is configurable, often times to as many track channels and subgroup channels, aux channels and even master channels as your interface and computer will handle.

When everything is hooked up I have up to 24 channels in and 22 channels out of the interface array, but I seldom use more than 8 or 10 channels in and 8 channels out. Really, if you are using the outputs during overdubs just for cue mixes you'd setup aux channels in the DAW mixer and output those as mono cue mixes or stereo cue mixes, and depending on how many artists need cue mixes then you are just using a handful of outputs from the DAW.

If you are not typically tracking more than 8 inputs at one time and only ever have 2 or 3 artists tracking at a time then an 8 x 8 interface will work fine and an 8 x 4 analog mixer...direct outs to the interface from each analog mixer channel and then your subs on the analog mixer can be used for all sorts of things...fancy cue mixing for inputs and then aux mixes from the interface can be brout into group returns to get live input and playback cue mixes during overdubbing...for my money I'd be looking at a Tascam M-308B, or an M-312B to get the additional auxes on the groups as well as the talkback section. There are lots of options.

So is your Carvin just too big physically to be your analog mixer?

 

[fstrat76]

So...are you initially recording to the DAW, and then dumping to tape?
Why not record to tape and dump to DAW?

Yep, that's what I do. Record to tape, dump to DAW, add any any tracks as needed and monitoring back from the DAW/Interface into the Analog Mixer. The M2600 has a 8 Aux's (Cue) plus the separate monitor buss so I have plenty of options, even bouncing back to tape if I really need to. 8 tape tracks plus a couple daw tracks as needed has been enough for me so far.

But I do like the routing flexibility; pumping 16 D/A into the M2600. Cue/Aux for submixes/monitor mix is mostly all I'll ever need (for now).

 

[miroslav]

Yep, that's what I do. Record to tape, dump to DAW, add any any tracks as needed and monitoring back from the DAW/Interface into the Analog Mixer. The M2600 has a 8 Aux's (Cue) plus the separate monitor buss so I have plenty of options, even bouncing back to tape if I really need to. 8 tape tracks plus a couple daw tracks as needed has been enough for me so far.

But I do like the routing flexibility; pumping 16 D/A into the M2600. Cue/Aux for submixes/monitor mix is mostly all I'll ever need (for now).

Oh yeah...for cue mixes, that's the way, though I rarely need cue mixes once the tracks are dumped from the tape deck into the DAW. I use my M3500 during tracking to tape, and that's when I need/use cue mixes...once it's in the DAW, I'm just editing and then mixing back out through the M3500.
Some day when I decide to track straight to DAW more often or as a regularSOP...then I'll probably be doing more like what you are doing for cue mixes.

 

[beebellmusic]

yee man thats cool

 

[nate_dennis]

So is your Carvin just too big physically to be your analog mixer?

I guess I don't understand this question. Sorry.

I definately would prefer to use, say a Delta 1010. However, I'm mostly thinking/working towards my time in Korea (which I hope will be coming up soon.) So I'll do guitars/bass/keys in my room, then I'll have access to drums/pianos other places. So, yeah, the portability is key.

 

[sweetbeats]

I guess I don't understand this question. Sorry.

I definately would prefer to use, say a Delta 1010. However, I'm mostly thinking/working towards my time in Korea (which I hope will be coming up soon.) So I'll do guitars/bass/keys in my room, then I'll have access to drums/pianos other places. So, yeah, the portability is key.

I'm a doof...got confused with another member trying to engineer a downsize.

For ultimate portability its a laptop and an interface and then if the interface has an onboard DSP mixer you use that for routing/patching/setting up cue mixes and then the DAW software for project mixing and subbing during overdubs. So that's the most portable...a laptop and a firewire/USB2.0 box with jacks. I've got one step past that with my digital rig which is a Yamaha 01X mixer/interface/control surface. I've got the I/O expanded with the mating i88x as well as a Presonus Digimax FS integrated via ADAT Lightpipe. But the 01X is the core component as far as the interfacing goes and I've done plenty of tracking using just it and the laptop which is an older Dell Precision M60 that has been tweaked for audio.

The priority of portability will push the decision to ditch analog outboard mixing altogether, or to compromise and have the hands-on analog component along with the digital tracking tools, or to use something like the 01X which still gives you some of the hands-on experience but it relatively portable compared to its features...all digital though. I had the 01X before returning to an analog front-end (mixer) and tape...I really, really like the 01X. Its well made, been stable for me, I'm very familiar with its operation and vast utility and its about the size of a Tascam 424...but my preference for sound is still analog. Of my digital I/O boxes my fav is the Presonus. It has more character and muscle in how it sounds...I believe its the same clock and pre's as the Firepod and FP10 boxes.

 

[fstrat76]

For portability, that pretty much does leave out an analog board. But a control surface with interface can be good for portability. I have the tascam fw1884 which I think is similar to the 01x. The 1884 has monitoring also, and I actually have the m2600 hooked up to it. However, the 1884 is really flexible also with a lot of features and buttons that can be customized and really works great as a control surface. Its very light and compact and easy to move around. It can also be used as a small pa mixer.

 

[miroslav]

There are some really small analog mixers out there (Mackie makes a few)...but I agree, if portability and a small footprint is the priority, you can't beat a basic computer/digital solution. Some sort of "all-in-one" would be my plan if I needed to be on the move and no formal recording space to set up anythin extensive.