Best cheap "real" 4 bus, digital mixer for 4 separate channels and my studio build..

Screaming Eagle

New member
Best, cheap mixer USB or FW for 4 separate channels or more to DAW ..my studio build

Hello all!
Come follow my studio bulid!
This is my first post here, or anywhere on the internet really..

-First-

I am looking for a cheap temporary multitrack digital mixer with 4 separate channels going into my DAW (minimum). It will be temporary, so I want a cheap one that doesn't sacrifice sound quality, as I will be replacing it eventually.

Currently, I have two old little mixers. I am using a Behringer UB-502 to either record 2 seperate channels, or "live style" with 5 mics mixed down to two independent tracks at a time. I can then "bounce" or overdub infinite stereo tracks on top. Until I can get my 32 track mixer, I just want to buy something to use until then. Something that can get me up to at least 4 or 8 individual tracks into the DAW. So what is the best to tide me over until I can afford a giant 32 track???

I want a mixer with interface not just an interface because;
1: I will be recording 80% in an old school "live style" where the levels and channels will never change. (I can just walk in and press record without having to set levels or anything in the DAW)
2: I will be sending a mix to tape (sometimes just two tracks of ribbon mics), then re-importing them to the DAW as two mono tracks.
3: 80% of the time I will be playing also, so all adjustments will be in post.
4: Idealy I could have a digital "backup" recording per film protocall (though we rarely use these pre-mixed tracks, they are invaluable when needed).
5: If I will have a mixer anyway, I want to cut down on lines and connectors, adding an interface would add two more anologe connectors to each track.
6: Monitoring for mono, mixing down ..and headphones

-Background-

I have been slowly building up my arsenal this way (piece by piece). I just rewired my whole house. I have circuits everywhere!! I have played music for around 25 years. I did some rock records and some film sound recording through the Nineties mostly on tape and a little early digital stuff. I did a little sound recording in the film industry around 2000-2005 mostly on a sound design 788t to protools/final cut, but then I switched to another department fulltime for the last 15 years (though I still interact with the Sound Dept. constantly). I do however have lots of experience editing and working with computers and analogue hardware.

The style of music I will be recording is all over the map, although 80% of it will be Swamp Pop and R&B recorded in the "Cosimo Sound", which was the predecessor to Motown, Chess, Stax and the Muscle Shoals "live style". There will be some Wrecking Crew inspirations (in overdubbing).

The other 20% could be anything! Living here in New Orleans I have played everything from the extremest punk/metal to acoustic and experimental stuff and all the way back to swing! I would love to be able to help a lot of local "starving artists" I know as well, who still play every style you can imagine (and every instrument).
Mainly; vocals, snapping, clapping, guitar, bass, drums, horns, piano, fiddle, slap bass and acoustic music, "bluegrass recording style". My main focus though is dialing in that 50's "soul" and 40's "swing", "live room" sound like Cosimo Matassa had (without an Ampex 300). Long story short, I have always been meaning to set up a studio in my house and well, now our band has a ton of songs and it is time to start!!

I have learned in life, that if you set a goal and work towards it piece by piece, you get old so fast that before you know it you are there!!
I have spent the last two years reading everything I can on here and at "gearslutz" to come up with a plan. My objective with this post is to present this plan and hopefully I can avoid making mistakes and wasting money.
~ ~ ~ ol Buddhist saying
"Knowledge is learning from your mistakes, wisdom is learning from others mistakes"

-The Plan-

A 32 channel mixer w/ timecode to record 16 tracks and send 16 tracks. It will all go to my computer and also 2 mixed tracks will go onto tape (with the possibility of sending just the 2 ribbon mics live style) while it all still goes to the computer also. When I sell my current deck and upgrade to a 2" 16 track tape machine (then 15 tracks plus timecode would also go to tape).

20% of the final mixs will be "modern recording style, or be 48k for film ADR.
80% of the final mixs will go from 24/88 WAV to mono 45 RPM record mastering.

I plan to run "a snake" under the house from my mixing room in the back, to two junction boxes in two other rooms about 40' away.
It is detailed on the floor-plan.
The snake would contain;
16 balanced lines in
12 TRS out (6 headphones)
4 RCA (audio)
2 RCA (video)
2 USB
An Ethernet or two

-The Rooms Acoustics-

Ideally I can use five of the rooms for recording (C,E,F,H and I) their sizes are in the floor-plan.
"H" and "I" are both hot, live rooms.
"I" will be my "main live sound room", "E" is a hallway perfect size and sound for a vocal booth,
"C" Is on it's way to being completely dead and
"F" is balanced about half as dead as "C" (or mostly dead), but it slightly bleeds into "E" and "I".

My goal is to use "i" as my main room for live sound from two ribbon mics, while every other channel mics an instrument or an amp. Having the other rooms is nice because right now I can put my guitar amp in one room "F", bass in another "C", vocals in the hallway with the PA micd in "H" and all of us with drums in the big room "i". This allows an old school live room mix or control over every instrument separately. This is perfect to lay down a full live mix then overdub just the vocals. ...or a thousand other overdub tweaks.

I have about half of the snake cables right now and just need to build the junction boxes and get two Cascade Fat Head Ribbon mics and a digital 32 track mixer w/ timecode. And one day a "big fat" tape recorder. Rewiring the house actually cost more and was the biggest expense I forsee. I pretty much have all the rest finally!!!

-The Arsenal-

Powermac desktop and a few PC's w/soundcards

2 crappy mixers
Behringer UB-502 5in/2out
Fostex FD4 4in/2out (weird ol thing)
Z600 (old Taec church tape deck w/new heads)

-Mics-
SM 58
SM 61
Neuman KM 184
MXL D.R.K
(The band has a few more 57 and 58s)

Buying 2 "paired" Cascade Fathead ribbons next, also want two RCA 77's, or two U-47's!!!
*What other mics and mic preamps do you recomend?


-Instruments-
vocals
snapping/clapping
guitar di, vintage tube amps and solid state
drums
horns
piano
banjo
fiddle
mandolin
steel guitar
slap bass and some electric bass di and cabs

**Full acoustic groups and swing groups Live/"bluegrass style"

***Film sound adr/overdubs at 48k



Thanks for all the years of help when I was just creepin the site and thanks in advance!!!
Cheers and Beers!!!
Da Drunken Eagle
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    774.6 KB · Views: 113
Last edited:
Availible Multitrack Mixers for 4 chanels or more to DAW (short list)

No matter how many different searches I have tried, this question is not answered anywhere on the web!

It seems it is because of marketing, the companies are intentionally vague with their description of the USB outputs' capabilities (some being stereo only, others being full 16 track usb 2.0). I will do my best to compile a list relevant up to 2016 and constantly update this post. I have begun calling and emailing manufacturers and amazon sellers for this information.

I have never posted to any kind of social media or forum before now. I have used forums like this for 20 years though. The one thing that has been useful is the ability to find answers to these type of questions, neatly in one thread. This will be my goal detailing my whole studio build here, from 2 tracks all the way to 32!


A:
Behringer
Xenyx UFX1204 USB/FireWire analog mixer 12-input 16 digital outs $400 new
Also records 16 seperate WAVs to DAW and also to a usb backup drive (not included)

B:
Alesis
MultiMix 16 USB 2.0 16 tracks 18 digital outs $ 200 new
Bad preamps/noisey if USB
**Also a 8, 12 and 24 model $80/$140/$200 used/refurb
FireWire sends 16 WAVs to DAW, some USB 2.0's do as well, but beware some do stereo over usb

C:
Yamaha
Old N Series FireWire
N8 and N12 16/16 in/outs over FireWire $200-400 used
Looks awesome! Great preamps on 8 xlr 8 trs, all digital, 16 tracks to DAW including effects, interface controls.
Would love to hear reviews on this unit and its DAW interactivity

D:
Peavey
N/A

E:
Mackie Onyx 820i , 8 channel via usb $400 new
First choice -EXCEPT-
Major problem with decible drop (firewire problem) and software problems

F:
Zoom
R16 Multitrack, 8 digital outs/ 16 in recorder only $300 new
**Also an 8 and 24 model

---Interfaces---

1:
Tascam
US 16x08. $250

2:
Behringer
U-PHORIA UMC404 $100

3:
Lexicon
Omega $ $130

4:
Akai
Professional EIE $250

5:
Behringer
UMC1820 $ 200

6:
Focusrite
FCA1616 $250

7:
Steinberg
UR series
Ur44, 4x outs usb 2.0 $300
Ur824i, 8x usb 2.0 $800


---Old Firewire---

21:
M audio
nv 10, 10x FW outs $300 used

22:
Yamaha
N8 fw $250

23:
Alesis
I04 4 $150 used

24:
Alesis
I0 26 8 analog/16 digital FW $150 used

---Other Old Devices and soundcards---

25
AKAI EIE is reported to record four channels in Audacity 2.1.1 using the Windows WASAPI host in Device Toolbar

26
Alesis io4 is reported to be able to record four channels in Audacity 2.1.0 using the Windows WASAPI host in Device Toolbar.

27
Echo Digital Audio: AudioFire8, AudioFire12 and AudioFirePre8 and Layla3G (Unconfirmed)

28
Edirol UA 101 USB interface

29
ESI soundcards and interfaces

30
M-Audio Delta 66 - With old drivers 5.10.00.5057v3, can record four channels at once using the "Multi" device. Later drivers 6.0.2.5.10.0.5074 reported not to allow more than two-channel recording with Audacity. A disadvantage of the older drivers is that it is not possible to adjust the input level in Audacity or the M-Audio patchbay - levels have to be adjusted externally before the soundcard.

31
M-Audio Delta 1010

M-Audio Delta 1010LT - With drivers from August 2007 or earlier (5.10.00.5057), can record up to eight channels at once using the "Multi" device. Later drivers reported not to allow more than two-channel

32
Presonus FP10 Firewire interface (formerly called "Firepod")

33
RME Multiface II + PCI

34
Tascam US-1641 (requires USB2.0 ports on the computer) - Reported that only 2 channels available in Audacity with 2.xx driv

...filling in the blanks through updates
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    774.6 KB · Views: 78
Last edited:
I will expand on what MJ stated. If you get an interface, a 4 channel or even higher, you run your snake from tracking room to interface, set your levels for tracking and mix in the mixing room. While the mixer looks cool, unless it brings something to the table like nice pre-amps, or outboard routing capabilities, a mixer is really not required. Plus, what you would spend on a cheap mixer (which most low end USB mixers on send out two channels) you could get a decent 16 channel interface (Tascam model comes to mind) and not spend extra for something you probably don't need.

But read the stickies and you will understand better what your options are.
 
Thanks MJ and DM60

Thanks MJ and DM60.

Great sticky!! I understand the difference (thanks to this page and gearslutz). I was hoping to find a multitrack mixer that can send 4 individual WAV tracks to my DAW. I created this posting and this account, because I have spent the last 3 weeks reading product manuals for every digital mixer made in the under $400 range looking for firewire. I would love to spend $200ish on this temporary mixer (new or used). I may sell it when I get the 32 track, or I may keep it for live shows and one offs, like live recordings and film sound.

My impasse seems to be the stupid usb!! I never understood why usb took off, I have always used firewire or optical (but hey, I also never got why vhs beat out betamax, which we still use in film) ; )

I was hoping for a recommendation and salvation from pouring more hours into finding and reading these manuals!

Reading all the instruction manuals for the mixers I found that;
1: not every single "usb mixer" can only send 2 independent tracks (some are stereo some are multitrack)
2: many made 5 to 10 years ago have firewire, which can send 24 independent tracks, more than what I need, but hells yeah I will use all 24 (is there an exception to this)
3: not sure on the amount of tracks possible through optical.
4: (unrelated) if 24 tracks is the maximum for firewire, how will I get 32 tracks in and out on my future 32 track?

This makes me want a used old one with firewire, if there are not some modern versions.
Are there?
Am I missing something?

What would y'all recommend for a cheap mixer with multitrack interface to get me from 2 tracks up to at least 4?

Other Requirements:
2× phantom power
At least 4× balanced xlrs, or trs or a combination of at least 2 of each.
A mixed out to send to tape (or backup)
*Timecode would be bonus points here, but I can live with out it until I get a fatter tape recorder

Thanks all!!!
Eagle
 
Last edited:
It really isn't about USB, it is more to do with the market. I have a Tascam 1800 interface, 16 channels, USB. Not a problem. Unit cost about $250 when it went on sale. Its replacement, the US-16x08 cost about the same. It is USB, so USB can handle more than two, but most manufacturers are only making two channel outputs for mixers. I assume they figure people are recording live and the mix is the mix, so it is final, verses a home studio.

Home studio, the levels are set for tracking and the mixing is done inside the software, not many people use a mixer board since you fuss with the faders inside the DAW. Henceforth, on the low end, not much demand really. Plus the extra mixing hardware just adds to the cost. Without motorized faders to set to the project, the mixing board become even more of a PTA (I have something of a MIDI mixer and have to reset the faders to match up with the software). Again, no real demand at the low level.
 
Thanks once again DM60!

You just sent me "back to the drawing board" with my firewire/usb research in the mixer manuals ; )
I will compile a list of what mixers I find with "real 4 bus" outs capable of more than 4 channels (preferbly firewire/usb). If anybody owns one or has recomendations, I'm all ears.

I was just looking at that interface you use the other day! I went back and read the buyer reviews and specs since you recomended it. In theory that could work, even when I get my 32 track, since I would only ever be using 16 tracks at once going into the computer! Everyone praises its preamps too!! Though it would have some real issues as well for my application. It could work, but just not on the current path I am taking. I am not ruling out changes to that path though.

PS: great song!
I love the drum sound, it has that airy, live room sound!!

What kind of guitar pickups are those?
And how does your device send 16 channels (via 1 usb)?
 
Last edited:
It used to be USB was good for 2 channels and firewire for anything serious. But something changed in the last few years. Drivers, cpu's, I don't know, but manufacturers are running 16 channels through USB without a problem. And that's USB2.0, not even 3.0.

I had the 1800 before (traded down with someone who could use it more than me) it's a great little interface. The interface itself has 8 mic inputs, 6 line inputs, and two digital inputs (SPDIF).

I'm in the camp, also, that you don't need a mixer.
 
FireWire, USB 2.0, PCI, Optical ...or

I am most likely going FireWire.
With my film background I have technical reasons.*explained below


I am stalking these four mixer/interfaces below on ebay. **
"A" is my first pick, but $400 minimum.
"C" has great preamps, but other issues.

I placed a $60-80 bid on "B" an Alesis 8 firewire which can do 10 channels into the DAW (2 mixed down). It has 8× bal phantom powered ins, crappy pre-amps and only 24/44 or 48 (i need 24/88) but temporarilly for $80!! Why not?

Speaking of preamps, which interface has the best???
Why do you need them for recording?



**
A:Behringer
Xenyx UFX1204 USB/FireWire analog mixer 12-input 16 digital outs $400 new
Also records 16 seperate WAVs to DAW and also to a usb backup drive (not included)

B:
Alesis
MultiMix 16 USB 2.0 16 tracks 18 digital outs $ 200 new
Bad preamps/noisey if USB
**Also a 8, 12 and 24 model $80/$140/$200 used/refurb
FireWire sends 16 WAVs to DAW, some USB 2.0's do as well, but beware some do stereo over usb

C:
Yamaha
Old N Series FireWire
N8 and N12 16/16 in/outs over FireWire $200-400 used
Looks awesome! Great preamps on 8 xlr 8 trs, all digital, 16 tracks to DAW including effects, interface controls.
Would love to hear reviews on this unit and its DAW interactivity


--or--
M Audio 1010 soundcard $75 10 ins via pci faster than usb 2.0, but no preamps only 0db in without any interface

_____________________________________________________________________________________


* FireWire, USB 2.0, PCI ..Optical

--FireWire 400 (IEEE 1394)--
It can transfer data between devices at 100, 200, or 400 Mbit/s full-duplex data rates (the actual transfer rates are 98.304, 196.608, and 393.216 Mbit/s, i.e., 12.288, 24.576 and 49.152 megabytes per second respectively). These different transfer modes are commonly referred to as S100, S200, and S400.

Cable length is limited to 4.5 metres (14.8 ft), although up to 16 cables can be daisy chained using active repeaters; external hubs, or internal hubs are often present in FireWire equipment. Unibrain and others offer pro quality cables up to 10 meters (33'). The 6-conductor connector is commonly found on desktop computers, and can supply the connected device with power.

The 6-conductor powered connector, now referred to as an alpha connector, adds power output to support external devices. Typically a device can pull about 7 to 8 watts from the port; however, the voltage varies significantly from different devices.Voltage is specified as unregulated and should nominally be about 25 volts (range 24 to 30). Apple's implementation on laptops is typically related to battery power and can be as low as 9 V.

Improvements (IEEE 1394a) was released in 2000, which clarified and improved the original specification. It added support for asynchronous streaming, quicker bus reconfiguration, packet concatenation, and a power-saving suspend mode, arbitration accelerations and arbitrated short bus reset

--Comparison with USB--
While both technologies provide similar end results, there are fundamental differences between USB and FireWire. USB requires the presence of a bus master, typically a PC, which connects point to point with the USB slave. This allows for simpler (and lower-cost) peripherals, at the cost of lowered functionality of the bus. Intelligent hubs are required to connect multiple USB devices to a single USB bus master. By contrast, FireWire is essentially a peer-to-peer network (where any device may serve as the host or client), allowing multiple devices to be connected on one bus

The FireWire host interface supports DMA and memory-mapped devices, allowing data transfers to happen without loading the host CPU with interrupts and buffer-copy operations. Additionally, FireWire features two data buses for each segment of the bus network whereas, until USB 3.0, USB featured only one. This means that FireWire can have communication in both directions at the same time (full-duplex), whereas USB communication prior to 3.0 can only occur in one direction at any one time (half-duplex).

--Huge Files and Video--
Many digital video recorders have a "DV-input" FireWire connector (usually an alpha connector) that can be used to record video directly from a DV camcorder ("computer-free"). The protocol also accommodates remote control (play, rewind, etc.) of connected devices, and can stream time code from a camera.

USB is unsuitable for transfer of the video data from tape because tape by its very nature does not support variable data rates. USB relies heavily on processor support and this was not guaranteed to service the USB port in time. The recent move away from tape towards solid state memory or disc media (e.g. SD Cards, optical disks or hard drives) has facilitated moving to USB transfer because file based data can be moved in segments as required.

--USB 2.0 vs PCI and PCIX--

USB 2.0
theoretical max transfer rate is 480 Mbit/sec = 60 MByte/sec. Real world max data throughput rate is about half that. ***

PCI
theoretical max transfer rate is 128 MByte/sec. Real world data transfers max out around 90 MByte/sec.

PCI was 133 MB/s. PCI-X enables 266 and 533 MB/s PCIe (e for Express)

***USB is a packetized multipoint serial protocol with start bits, stop bits, ECC bits, and a lot of CPU overhead. 480 Mb/s represents the timing of individual bits moving through the wire. Real world throughput is roughly half that, 240 Mb/s or 30 MB/s. Uncompressed 720x480, 30 fps, 4:2:2 video is close to that so USB2 is likely to have problems with it. ****Video file size chart below for referance. (Can anyone provide an audio version I can insert here ?)

****HDTV rates
MPeg4 (H.264, VC-1, WMV-HD, DivX, etc.) 4-8 Mb/s = ~0.7MB/s
HDV format 25Mb/s (34Mb/s total) = ~ 4MB/s
DVCAM-HD 100Mb/s = 12.5 MB/s
HDCAM 144 Mb/s (video) Video and Audio up to 450 Mb/s = ~56MB/s
HDCAM SR 440Mbps Video and Audio equals approximately 600Mbps = 75 MB/s
Note that all of these are sustained rates. USB and PCI devices are are often spec'd in burst rates***

In my film experiance with "huge" HD files I do everything on "pro quality" only FireWire cables and now Thunderbolt.

I would assume that if you are transfering over 10-12 individual tracks at 24/88, (24/96, or even 24/196) that you could run into problems. I have read both good and bad results in these forums.

How do you do it?
What do you use to transfer 32 individual wav tracks with 24/96?
 
Last edited:
take it from someone who made a costly mistake with the mixer, (me) I bought a SX-4882, ditch the mixer idea. you can do so much more with a good interface. most of the good interfaces are stackable, so you can expand later if you want. I just got rid of the mixer and went to a UR-824 interface. I wish I had went the interface route from the start. :D
 
The UR-824 looks like a really nice interface.

To OP, here why that is a nice suggestion. It has 8 inputs with pre-amps, if you are still doing analog, it has 8 outputs. That is pretty nice. What is better, it has two ADAT extensions, which allows for expansion. It would take a while for you to outgrow this. The only downside is the price, which is not bad, but you may feel it is out of your range.

I can recommend the the Tascam 16X08 and the price is very reasonable. It is probably not as good as the UR, but for $250, wouldn't be a costly mistake if you wanted to upgrade.

I don't know the Zoom, but from what has been reported, many like them and the R16/24 behaves as a mixer. You get a portable tracking machine, a mixer and an interface. Might be the way to go if you really want a mixer. I looked at them and decided the Tascam, laptop and DAW (Reaper) would serve my purpose better. But I could see it being a viable option.
 
Key factors when choosing your interface

Merry Christmas all!!!

Lucky me, the girlfriend is away with her family for five more days!! I just got a ton more cables for my snake in the mail. I hope to record (with my crappy 2 channels to the DAW) some practice tracks and hopefully update this post some too. All of this "forum time" the last two weeks has really cut into my songwriting and recording. So I'm going to try to get some tracks down, but I will try to keep this up to date.

For anyone reading this "studio build thread". Before I move on to the next step "choosing and hooking everything up to your DAW".
Lets talk more about mixers and interfaces!!


A: Which interfaces (or mixers with interfaces) have the best preamps?
B: Why would you need preamps for recording?
C: Any thing, or features to consider when choosing your interface.
 
A: Which interfaces (or mixers with interfaces) have the best preamps?

Neve, SSL. Well, those don't have built in interfaces, but they have the best preamps.

B: Why would you need preamps for recording?

Because line inputs don't have enough gain and instrument inputs aren't balanced.

C: Any thing, or features to consider when choosing your interface.

Enough inputs of the right type(s) (mic, line, instrument), handy features like additional headphone outputs etc.
 
The needs for video and audio as far as connection and performance are quite different man. Audio recorded in real time requires a different set of needs from a PC than video does. It is not fair to consider compare the two and what a setup requires. A high end gaming computer can and many times sucks for audio recording. I would recommend using two separate 'purpose' built computers for each. Anyway...

I actually have 2 UR824's. One nice thing about that for me is the integration with Cubase but also the fact that you can input 24 tracks via USB and ADAT all controlled from one unit. There are no designated 'LINE' inputs, but there is a -26dB pad on each channel which kinda takes the already clean preamps out of the equation when using outboard gear. I wouldn't necessarily say this is optimal, but it does not take away from what most of us would consider effective. I use a Vintech X73i as my 'sweet channel' via the UR824. No noise issues which many relate to gain staging when adding an external preamp through an interfaces built in ones.

Your budget, your future needs and what you expect the outcome to be is what I feel you should be concerned with.

You will likely not get any better sound from a $1000 interface when compared to a $500 one or $300 for the Tascam 16x08. More inputs and preamps=more expensive typically but I had the Tascam US1641 and US1800 before upgrading to the 824's and did not notice a huge difference in the stock preamps. Though 5% of every step in the input chain ads up. Even the under $200 interfaces are still worthy for most basic recordings. Preamp gain levels, noise levels and ASIO drivers (or lack of them) seem to be the issues with the lower end interfaces.

USB 2.0 and Firewire are not worthy of arguing points of quality or performance. They are both able to handle the audio. And both can have issues with crappy controllers or chipsets on a less than desirable computer.

IMO is that you will get best results by using a decent interface with the amount of inputs you need on a system built for audio recording. Record with good instruments in a room that sounds good. If it doesn't sound good on the way in, then treat the room and/or change the instruments to make it sound good. When it comes to the point of mixing and mastering the audio there is much more involved with how you hear what you have recorded. And that also applies to what you are hearing on the way in. If the room you are listening to 'what you are recording in' has issues with buildup or cancellation of certain parts of the frequency range as every room does, then you are just guessing at what is going to work.

Bottom line: Take every step possible within your budget to get the best sound from whatever you are recording. That includes quality of instruments and gear amplifying them (don't forget the performance), the room it is recorded in, mics, and interface. Most important is the first two. Tone to begin with and what the room does to the sound of it. Many miss this step and kill themselves trying to fix the impossible. Room treatment is actually not that expensive (cheaper than high end plugins) if you know where to start and buy the right materials.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top