A question about USB/Firewire mixers

[JPXTom]

When ur recording with these mixers, can u record different channels to different tracks, or does the usb out just take everything u have plugged in and send it out on to one track only? For example like the Alesis Multimix Firewire mixer, some of the yamahas.

 

[dgatwood]

When ur recording with these mixers, can u record different channels to different tracks, or does the usb out just take everything u have plugged in and send it out on to one track only? For example like the Alesis Multimix Firewire mixer, some of the yamahas.

Depends on the mixer. In the case of the Multimix, the USB version can only record the mixed content, while the FireWire version can record individual inputs. The USB 2.0 version doesn't say either way, but probably can record individual inputs.

Caveat emptor: using USB for more than about two channels of audio is not a very bright idea. USB wasn't designed for high speed data throughput, and USB 2.0 is no exception. At best, USB 2.0 is USB 1.1 on steroids---all the inefficiencies of USB, just faster.

 

[Will_R]

I'd lean towards firewire.

And most of them tend to send each input to a different track in whichever software your using.

If you find a unit you like the look just be sure to check on that specific one

 

[JPXTom]

How would u check? Ive looked at a few on the musicians friend, looking for a key to an answer..even in the reviews and stuff and still have none..just says USB/Firewire out...

 

[talontsiawd]

I have yet to see a usb mixer that can split tracks, i'm not looking for one, but i haven't seen one. If it's doable (which i'm doubting), it's definately not common. Most firewire mixers i have looked into use the fact that it splits tracks as a key selling point so thats going to be common.

 

[TimOBrien]

IMHO: USB is a 1/2" garden hose, firewire is a honkin 4" firehose.

USB is good for bursts of data transfer, firewire was designed specificly for high bandwidth movement of SUSTAINED audio and video (which is MUCH more intensive than audio).

Its rare to see USB handle more than 2ins/outs except when 'special' trick drivers are used. And the fact that there are very few units like that should tell you something.
With Firewire, you can just gang up multiple interfaces like my Motu to get over 60 simultaneous ins/outs guaranteed.

 

[NegadivOne]

IMHO: USB is a 1/2" garden hose, firewire is a honkin 4" firehose.

USB is good for bursts of data transfer, firewire was designed specificly for high bandwidth movement of SUSTAINED audio and video (which is MUCH more intensive than audio).

Its rare to see USB handle more than 2ins/outs except when 'special' trick drivers are used. And the fact that there are very few units like that should tell you something.
With Firewire, you can just gang up multiple interfaces like my Motu to get over 60 simultaneous ins/outs guaranteed.

Yup, firewire is the way to go. Most of the usb interfaces I've seen allow only 1 or 2 tracks.

 

[prestomation]

Theoretically, USB 2 is faster then Firewire 400 (480Mbps vs. 400Mbps), but USB is inefficient in how it shoves data around. Of course, Firewire 800 is much faster, but I have no idea which firewire most of those devices run on.


I find it extremely annoying that many of those mixers don't explicitly spell out how many channels go over the data bus...

 

[dgatwood]

Theoretically, USB 2 is faster then Firewire 400 (480Mbps vs. 400Mbps), but USB is inefficient in how it shoves data around. Of course, Firewire 800 is much faster, but I have no idea which firewire most of those devices run on.

Yeah, USB in practice ranges from about 340-400 Mbps, depending on application. So basically it's a toss-up with FireWire. The difference is that FireWire can "shove around" 400 Mbps without involving the CPU, while USB is eating a royal truckload of CPU cycles to do the same job.

I think I remember seeing exactly one FireWire 800 audio interface out there on the market. That's about the extent of it. For all practical purposes, the only devices that use FW800 are hard drives. The exceptions are so few they almost aren't worth mentioning.

FW400 is way more than most interfaces actually need. It can handle 86 unidirectional channels at 192 kHz/24-bit. Even the FireFace 800 I mention above doesn't come anywhere close to actually needing FW800, assuming they didn't do something silly. At best, the FW800 provides advantages if you are chaining more than one of them or are chaining a hard drive or something....