Behringer Or Soundcraft Mixer

[liamfraser280]

Hi guys.

I'm a guitarist (mainly acoustic) that also does vocals. I currently have an SM58 for recording that I borrowed from my English teacher (obviously a cool guy to lend this out: P). My creative x-fi sound card only has a 1/8 jack input for microphone. So I have to convert from xlr to unbalanced signal. The problem obviously being there is tons of noise and the pre amp in the sound card is terrible.

I was going to purchase an interface but I would rather buy a mixer that could be used in live situations in the future. I've tested the line in on my sound card and there is no noise until full volume - even then it's hardly noticeable. The mixer should be fine to go through this.

I've been looking at the Behringer 1002fx mixer which is £80 - has two microphone inputs and 100 effects, and also 4 stereo channels. http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/1002FX.aspx

I have recently come across a Soundcraft Notepad 124fx which has four microphone inputs, 4 stereo channels and 100 effects (which can be programmed slightly with a tap system... something the behringer does not have). This is selling for £130. http://www.soundcraft.com/products/product.aspx?pid=173

I have a fairly low budget so for Christmas I’m going to get:
A Shure SM57 (for my acoustic guitar) with a pop filter (to use for my vocals)
and a mixer - with some decent balanced xlr cables and so on.
In an ideal world I’d buy both a 57 and a 58 but they sound extremely similar on the shure microphone testing website.

I would really appreciate any ideas/suggestions on this. My main wonder is whether the extra £50 pounds will be worth the increase in pre amp/overall mixer quality.

Thanks,
Liam

 

[qrs]

Out of those two...I'd go with the soundcraft.
If I were you I'd also consider getting a USB or firewire mixer....that way you can avoid recording into your creative sound card, cause that sound card is mainly for general use like video games or something, and not recording.

For your guitar recording....check out some condenser mics. A condenser will be better to record your acoustic guitar.

I find the sm57 and sm58 to be exactly the same....just unscrew the sm58's top and you've got a sm57. Just my thought.

 

[liamfraser280]

Thanks for the input,

I think I'm leaning more towards the Soundcraft anyway, the Behringers manual is a bit weak. The Soundcraft one goes into detail about balanced/unbalanced cables and explains the mixer in much more detail.

In an ideal world a condenser would be good - but i'm 15 and live in a house with 4 other people. It would pick up too much background noise.

The sound card is actually quite good and is capable of recording at 24bit/92khz. It doesn't sound too bad at all - i've done a few loopback recordings and there is no audiable difference at all. I do agree that some kind of USB/Firewire based interface would be better. The thing is though... i've only just started recording music... so as long as i can get a half decent recording without any hiss i'll be more than happy. I still have a lot to learn about mixing and so on.

At my age... i cant really afford high end gear. Hopefully in the future though .

Also i can only afford what santa claus will bring me

 

[snellular5]

I would definitely say get some sort of condenser for the guitar. As long as you are in a separate room from them you are most likely fine unless they are banging on the walls

 

[liamfraser280]

Thanks for your input.

I could possibly consider a condenser.

However, i already pick up noise from them with a dynamic microphone - my brother and sister are 13 and are forever arguing . Even if the dog goes outside and barks at someone - that shows up in the recording - even with my window closed .

I do realise that a condenser microphone is something that would sound better than a dynamic microphone in this situation and it is most definetly something i will purchase in the future. I just chose to get a dynamic because everyone uses a 57 - they are very versatile and seens as i can only get one microphone. I thought that should be it.