how is an analog mixer invloved with a DAW rig

N

n8tron

New member
I've been in the box since I started music, but I'm wondering exactly how people incorporate their analog mixers in with their daws and the benefits. I know people mix in analog but I'm not sure how its set up.

for example, do you have all the outputs from your interface going to different channels on the mixer to be mixed then summed and recorded to a stereo file?

do you need a mixer with outputs for every channel to assign each input/output in the daw? (this I would imagine must be nice because you could still do automation and have control over the overall volume on the mixer) the only trouble is all the mixers with an output for each input are way over my price range.

so how exactly do you use an analog mixer in your mixing/recording process?
 
Yes, all channel inputs and outputs from the DAW must be kept separate.

I have 3 rack mounted mic preamps with 8 channels in each. They also have A/D converters built in which sends them out via ADAT cable to my computer, 8 channels in each cable. (I could use the mixer mic pres but they don't have digital converters.) At the computer, I have a pci soundcard with 6 ADAT plugs, (3 for input and 3 for output.) I can record up to 24 channels simultaneously.

The output works the same way in reverse except I send each channel to the analog mixer. In the computer, I set the software mixer all flat and on unity. I could bypass that mixer altogether but I need it to make use of any plugins. I also insert hardware effects and stuff from the analog mixer. I have the best of both worlds there. The final 2 track mix from the analog mixer goes back to the computer DAW for recording. (...Or I could route it straight to any other rack mounted recorder.)

I monitor everything using the SPDIF outs on my pci card and/or the 2 track output from the analog mixer. I have a Central Station to direct traffic for my monitors and headphone amp.

Are you lost yet? :D

RawDepth
 
Last edited:
I use an analog console for mixing from DAW. As far as inputs, I don't use the console's preamps. I have stand alone preamps into a patch bay for that. I can use hardware processors along side plugins simultainiously in real time and have limited automation by using volume and panning envelopes.
 
sikter said:
Are you talking about Home recording?
Any pictures...
Click to expand...
This is not the right forum for home pics but you did ask so, I'll slip one in. (I will store it off-forum so if anyone doesn't really want to see it, they won't have to.)

Studio Photo
 
RawDepth said:
This is not the right forum for home pics but you did ask so, I'll slip one in. (I will store it off-forum so if anyone doesn't really want to see it, they won't have to.)

Studio Photo
Click to expand...

Its so pretty...but why not mix in a sequencer? This is probably a stupid question but I'm kinda confused when it comes to mixers.
 
TelePaul said:
Its so pretty...but why not mix in a sequencer? This is probably a stupid question but I'm kinda confused when it comes to mixers.
Click to expand...


some people would rather have a hands-on approach rather than use a mouse. Also, there are analogue imperfections which a digital environment cannot emulate, which is often labeled "warmth". in also allows an easier implementation of analogue outboard gear.


And most people say that digital summing is inherently flawed when compared with analogue summing.
 
TelePaul said:
Its so pretty...but why not mix in a sequencer? This is probably a stupid question but I'm kinda confused when it comes to mixers.
Click to expand...
I won't answer for RawDepth, only for myself, but there's two (and potentially three) big reasons in my book for usong the analog mixer:

1.) Mixing by typewriter and mouse sucks compared to having an actual control surface dedicated to the art of mixing. Things like automation and editing are great in the computer, but for the meat of the actual mixing process, having everything right at your fingertips can't be beat. (IMHO)

2.) The analog hardware mixer also make a great interface for chaining in real analog iron in the form of EQ, dynamics and delay. Plugs are wonderful, but boxes are too, and you can't put a box in the box.

3.) This one does not apply to all mixers, but it certainly does to the finer ones: there's just no substitute in sound for a good quality analog summing amp. While there is some variation in the quality of summing (mixdown) algorithms used in NLE DAW software - some better than others - even the best of them doesn't compare to the sound of a good analog summing amp.

G.
 
I use a Mackie 1604 in my set-up. I have the inserts connected to half-normalled points on one of my patchbays which I can then patch to one of my two Laylas. I also use some outboard preamps (Octane, DMP3) which go direct into the other Layla. I have outputs 1&2 of Layla 1 going to one of the 1604's aux returns for monitoring on my passives and for sending headphone mixes from the control room to the studio.
 
n8tron said:
I've been in the box since I started music, but I'm wondering exactly how people incorporate their analog mixers in with their daws and the benefits. I know people mix in analog but I'm not sure how its set up.

for example, do you have all the outputs from your interface going to different channels on the mixer to be mixed then summed and recorded to a stereo file?

do you need a mixer with outputs for every channel to assign each input/output in the daw? (this I would imagine must be nice because you could still do automation and have control over the overall volume on the mixer) the only trouble is all the mixers with an output for each input are way over my price range.

so how exactly do you use an analog mixer in your mixing/recording process?
Click to expand...
There will always be arguments about which is better, analog or digital. Each one seems to have a few advantages over the other as well as a few weaknesses. In the end, it all boils down to personal preference.

In another forum, I posted results from an interesting experiment although, I am not sure if it really proved anything. Read message #9.

All I know is, when I started using my mixer, I also started using my ears more instead of constantly watching the affect on the waveforms.

RawDepth
 
RawDepth said:
Yes, all channel inputs and outputs from the DAW must be kept separate.

I have 3 rack mounted mic preamps with 8 channels in each. They also have A/D converters built in which sends them out via ADAT cable to my computer, 8 channels in each cable. (I could use the mixer mic pres but they don't have digital converters.) At the computer, I have a pci soundcard with 6 ADAT plugs, (3 for input and 3 for output.) I can record up to 24 channels simultaneously.

The output works the same way in reverse except I send each channel to the analog mixer. In the computer, I set the software mixer all flat and on unity. I could bypass that mixer altogether but I need it to make use of any plugins. I also insert hardware effects and stuff from the analog mixer. I have the best of both worlds there. The final 2 track mix from the analog mixer goes back to the computer DAW for recording. (...Or I could route it straight to any other rack mounted recorder.)

I monitor everything using the SPDIF outs on my pci card and/or the 2 track output from the analog mixer. I have a Central Station to direct traffic for my monitors and headphone amp.

Are you lost yet? :D

RawDepth
Click to expand...


so to cut it down to basics:

a/d converters -> multi channel recording on computer -> each track to mixer -> 2 track final recording in computer

?

for some reason I had this vision that everyone was going through a mixer then recording on your computer, this makes more sense so you don't even need separate outputs on your analog mixer.

do I have that right?
 
n8tron said:
so to cut it down to basics:

a/d converters -> multi channel recording on computer -> each track to mixer -> 2 track final recording in computer

?

for some reason I had this vision that everyone was going through a mixer then recording on your computer, this makes more sense so you don't even need separate outputs on your analog mixer.

do I have that right?
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct.

The only reason people want those individual outputs on each mixer channel is so they can make use of the mic pres in the mixer. Traditionally, studio mixers had excellent mic pres and they were the only mic inputs. Mic signal went into the mixer mic pre, (but not through the entire mixer channel,) it looped back out to a multitrack recorder, then back to the mixer channel again (during playback) for EQ and effects.

Those extra outputs, (among other features,) are what separates a studio mixer from a live PA mixer.

Each channel will likely have...
XLR mic in
Line level in
Tape out
Tape in
Channel Insert

RD
 
RawDepth said:
Yes, you are correct.

The only reason people want those individual outputs on each mixer channel is so they can make use of the mic pres in the mixer. Traditionally, studio mixers had excellent mic pres and they were the only mic inputs. Mic signal went into the mixer mic pre, (but not through the entire mixer channel,) it looped back out to a multitrack recorder, then back to the mixer channel again (during playback) for EQ and effects.

Those extra outputs, (among other features,) are what separates a studio mixer from a live PA mixer.

Each channel will likely have...
XLR mic in
Line level in
Tape out
Tape in
Channel Insert

RD
Click to expand...

mmmmm....hi... :confused:
I have seperate outs on my mixer for other reasons.
One of them being, for example, to record a drum kit with more than 2 channels (maybe 6), or live performances, (maybe 8 direct or 16 channels, subgrouped), into my soundcards.
Also, for monitoring, the desk gives me infinite options for feeds and volumes into the monitors or phones.
Maybe I understood you wrong (?), but seperate outs on my desk makes my studio extremely useable/flexible for my shit.....and maybe considered indispensable by some?
PS...and my pre's suck!!
Regards,
Superspit.
 
superspit said:
...I have seperate outs on my mixer for other reasons.
One of them being, for example, to record a drum kit with more than 2 channels (maybe 6), or live performances, (maybe 8 direct or 16 channels, subgrouped), into my soundcards...
Click to expand...
You have the freedom to use them any way you wish. If it makes life easier in the studio or it helps you to accomplish your goal then go ahead, have your way with it. There are no rules in recording.
superspit said:
...Also, for monitoring, the desk gives me infinite options for feeds and volumes into the monitors or phones...
Click to expand...
Yes, most have almost infinite routing abilities, monitoring abilities, subgrouping, and choice of metering sources. Many larger consoles even came with patch bays built in to make inserting more painless. Again, the idea was to provide the engineer with the luxury of accomplishing almost anything.
superspit said:
PS...and my pre's suck!!
Regards,
Superspit.
Click to expand...
Mine too.

About two or three years ago when I decided to start buying up home studio gear, I was also saving up to buy a house. I placed myself on the tightest budget on the planet for audio gear. I bought only the very cheapest of everything just to get started. Now that I have the house and finally settled in, I am slowly upgrading one piece at a time. I try to buy something once every few paydays. Right now I seem to have an odd mix of cheap crap and mid level stuff. But I'll get there eventually.
RD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top