Behringer X1222USB mixer USB output makes no changes

  • Thread starter Thread starter kilerb
  • Start date Start date
If I may?

First off, I agree that the Behringer usb mixer is not the best tool for home recording, but NOT because it is a "mixer"! More because it is not likely to be a very good Audio Interface. All the low priced usb mixers are 16bit only and not very good 16bit converters at that (I have an A&H ZED10 usb mixer and that IS a very good 16 bit device but I don't use it as an AI!)
There is also an inherent problem with Win7 and usb audio devices. Had it with the Zed.

But there is nothing wrong with a mixer per se! In fact most of the time they don't mix, you puts a mic into each input, pan hard left and right and record two discrete tracks, no "mixing" involved! Yes, each channel is going thru a vitual earth stage but any modern op amp working at near unity gain is going to add diddly to the signal.

Then, mixer mic channels are vastly more flexible than the majority of AIs. You get gain, EQ* FX send, pan, and a second level pot (AND an overall level pot/fader) ZERO latency monitoring by default. And of course you can have lots of other kit plugged up ready to go...
I have been running a mixer into a 2496 for years, was a Berry 802, now a the ZED10. Don't knock the format!

*Yup, not usual to EQ when tracking I agree but some bass cut is usually handy and VERY few AIs have a HPfilter.

Dave.
 
I imagine there'll be meetings about this.......

Don't worry, we'll get there.
 
The trouble with this on is that if you want a post that covers all the bases it quickly turns into a weighty tome like my sticky at the top of this forum. It's necessary to consider both how well the mixer can function as an interface (and most only send the two channels of the main outs to the computer) and also the routing options within the mixer for setting up monitoring etc. I don't believe I've ever seen a bargain mixer like the Behringer being discussed here that has sufficient routing options to be suitable. If you just want a way to have several things hooked up at once to save wiring--but only need to record one source at a time--then maybe. However if you need multiple simultaneous inputs the mixer you need will cost you a lot more--or need to be used in conjunction with a multi channel interface.

See? I'm already getting verbose. Sometimes it's just easier to say "don't buy a mixer".
 
Bobbsy said:
See? I'm already getting verbose. Sometimes it's just easier to say "don't buy a mixer".
Click to expand...

Apparently, it's not.
I'm getting challenged like I have some kind of hatred for or bias against mixers.
They just simply don't fit for most beginners.

Honestly, if this sugar character had come to you and said "I need a means of recording my voice; I want to hear reverb, but not actually commit to that reverb", would you have said "buy a small mixer with built in digital effects, then just turn the effects off and use a plugin?"

I imagine, (and hope), you'd have said "buy a small straight forward interface".

Now fair play, if that user has other requirements that a mixer satisfies, then fine, this is the exception.
I just don't see how two volume control stages, sends, pan pots etc are a selling point for this generation of people who just want to record a few discreet tracks then do some editing in garageband or whatever.

I do, however, see that the word mixer is incredibly appealing to a beginner, and how companies are totally cashing in on that.
It's no different to the vocal booth syndrome.
 
I just think it would benefit beginners to get them to question why they want/bought a mixer instead of just scaring them away from mixers. They will be better off in the long run.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
I just think it would benefit beginners to get them to question why they want/bought a mixer instead of just scaring them away from mixers.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with that.
I usually take the line that unless a buyer has a particular reason to want a mixer, they don't need a mixer.

You'll see that in some of my responses.
I'm paraphrasing but, it's usually along the lines of "Unless you prefer the hands on mixer approach, want to track to analog medium/sum to stereo, want to use outboard hardware, or need better routing/monitoring capabilities, you probably don't need a mixer.

The only reason I'm pursuing this is because I usually only give this advice when someone says they're going to buy one because the know it's an essential studio tool.
They usually throw up a link to a Behry USB mixer that's capable of two channel discreet recording, then talk about micing their kit with four-eight mics or whatever.
If that their opening gambit, I think my advice is sound.

I'm not saying this makes it right, but there's usually a string of people afterwards saying "+1 to that".
 
Steenamaroo said:
Unless you prefer the hands on mixer approach, want to track to analog medium/sum to stereo, want to use outboard hardware, or need better routing/monitoring capabilities, you probably don't need a mixer.
Click to expand...

I think this could be the stock answer to newbs about mixers.
 
I hope you're being genuine, BSG, because that is the angle I try to take.

Hell, I'd love a big old mixer and 24 channels of conversion, and a nice big rack of outboard gear some day.
I just don't have a suitable space for that right now.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
I just think it would benefit beginners to get them to question why they want/bought a mixer instead of just scaring them away from mixers. They will be better off in the long run.
Click to expand...

I know just the sticky to send them to! :D
 
Here's my take.

I think that, in most cases, a mixer (as opposed to an interface) is not necessary, specially for people new to home recording. Further, all it does is add a level of complexity to a process that already requires a significant learning curve.

I think also that, in most cases, someone new to home recording gets a mixer for no other reason than he or she thinks they need one, based on their preconceptions of what a studio consists of. Sometimes they get one because it looks good.

In most cases, someone getting and using a mixer is buying into a workflow that is redundant, inflexible and irreversible.

But I agree that there are times when a mixer is useful:

1 When you need to do a sub-mix because you have limited inputs on your interface;

2 When you are a tactile person who operates best with the physicality of a mixer

3 When the mixer of such a high quality that it makes sense to use it to achieve a particular sound.
 
There are other advantages to using a mixer but none of them apply to the entry level-main-stereo-out-via-USB which is what we're talking about most of the time.

Some of the biggest POTENTIAL advantages I see are:

-Setting up multiple monitor mixes for headphones. My mixer has 8 aux sends, each individually switchable between pre and post. I'm a firm believer that a good monitor mix can greatly improve performance so it's worth the effort to customise each one. Of course, for this to work you need a lot more than a basic Behringer.

-Direct outs from every channel are useful. I'd much rather set my levels using a 100mm fader than try to do 32 channels on a software mixer. Again--this is the domain of a "proper" mixer only.

-Similarly, I can route whatever effect (usually reverb) to musician headphones and still record dry. Well, I can. A basic Behringer can't.

-I have enough channels that I can dedicate a bunch to DAW playback for the "okay, let's see how this sounds" part of the session--doing a basic mix (on real faders with basic effects if I want). Again, easier than using a software mixer but not possible on most entry level mixers which only send one stereo mix back to the hardware mixer.

-The ability to use the mixer as a control surface for the DAW.

I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting.

However, NONE of that applies to entry level mixers which, frankly, just get in the way of the creative process. It's not just a learning curve--it's the total lack of flexibility in most beginner mixers which mean they physically can't do things or routings that are necessary.

...a lot of waffle to say that, for anyone just starting and/or with a limited budget, stick to going directly into a suitable interface.
 
I completely agree with the sentiments of the last 3 or so posters
Bottom line noobs: Don't buy a mixer for basic home recording....But!

Mention was made of someone wanting reverb (on cans?) but recording dry? Yes, this can be done with an AI routing an effected channel out of the PC but this demands an ability on the part of the noob to set this up and an AI/PC combination with low enough latency. Now people vary enormously in their tolerance of latency and what they can sing/play with but if they want/need the very lowest, many of the budget AIs will not cut it.

Another good reason for the noob to avoid buying a simple mixer is of course that it will not have any converters in it and they will have to use the computer's horrible OBS. Even those mixers that HAVE converters are, as I have said, not good and the monitor return signal is often noisy.

But this whole debate points to one thing IMHO. NOOBS! Do your homework! Come here and ask before you spend $ One! (but if you SHOULD see a Berry 802 in Cconverters for $20, snap it up. And if you see a Soundcraft Compact 4 or 10? Have their hand off!).

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