Mackie ONYX 1640 or Allen Heath MixWiz 16

[SouthSIDE Glen]

i've thought about getting a control surface to control levels/pan/automation/etc., but what i would LIKE is to be able to send multiple tracks back to the onyx w/o having to buy another whole set of converters. if mackie offered an upgraded FW card in the future that supported this, i'd be all over it.

I'm with you on that. But - and I am only surmising here - I suspect it would take more than just an upgraded FW card to accomplish that with their current design. It would, in fact, require the equivalent of exactly what you don't want to buy outboard; a whole 'nother set of converters.

Could they be put on an upgraded FW card? Yeah, probably. Problem is you gotta have something on the other side of the slot in which the card sits to accept those extra 14 or so return channels. In other words, the Onyx itself would need to have the internal wiring to route those extra 14 feeds from the interface back to the top of its channel strips. I'm not sure that it is currently internally designed that way.

Maybe it is? I don't know. But it's something to consider/look into when putting one's hopes on a possible future development down that road.

G.

 

[BushmasterM4]

Give me an example of why you would want more returns back to the onyx1640? I admit Im a newbie to the home recording scene, but I am learning fast. I know there is a company or person (not sure) who will modify your 1640 so the firewire sends are post eq. That way you use the 1640's eq in the recording process.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Give me an example of why you would want more returns back to the onyx1640?

The basic idea is to be able to multitrack record to digital (the way it can now ith the FW interface), but then to be able to mix and sum those tracks back in analog.

G.

 

[Ironklad Audio]

But it's something to consider/look into when putting one's hopes on a possible future development down that road.

definitely...i mean, i guess even if mackie had to make a rackmounted expansion thingy or something, it seems like it would be a smart move to make further down the pipeline, in order to extend the usability and lifetime of a product that they've definitely put a lot of resources into designing and marketing - maybe a deal where users of the current FW card could trade it in for one that'll send 18 channels both ways? only time will tell...

Give me an example of why you would want more returns back to the onyx1640?

because the way it sits now, only your main mix goes back to the mixer so that it can be sent out to the monitors/phones/whatever you want to use for playback, or for recording the mix off of the console

this forces people like me have to do all their mixing in their DAW, using plugin EQ's and compressors and the like. sending a bunch of tracks back out would allow the user(me) to patch individual channels into individual processors and mix on the console itself, where all the faders and pan knobs that are sitting inches to my right may actually be of some use...aside from monitoring while tracking of course

 

[BushmasterM4]

The mackie does offer a DAW interface on the back. Whether its pre or post eq I dont know. I do use the mixer itself for monitoring purposes during recording. That way I can send what ever mix I want to each floor monitor during recording. I dont have to use the 2 channel return for that. I mean the beauti of it is its a live mixer with descent firewire options. I imagine as I learn more and grow both knowledge wise and money wise I will opt for a system that gives me static controls. But for now Im happy with my set up.

 

[xstatic]

Bushamster, what Ironklad is describing is not possible with the current Mackie design without purchasing seperate hardware. What you are describing is using the Mackie's aux sends to create monitor mixes AS you are doing the recording. What he is describing is being able to use multiple channels on the Mackie AFTER things have been recorded. With the way the Mackie is currently setup you would only be able to send 2 channels form your DAW back to the Mackie which is virtually useless if you want to do your mix outside of your DAW using real hardware.

Glen is also right in that the Mackie would have to undergo a complete overhaul in order to be able to return more channels to it. Not only would it need to have additional D/A involved, but it would also need some way of routing all of the new D/A to selected channel inputs. This does not seem very feasible as an upgrade, but more likely as a whole new design that would undoubtably cost considerably more.

If I had a Mackie and wanted to mix outboard, I would just get a soundcard that supports the features I need. You could track through the Mackie and its firewire if you want, and then come mixdown change the driver you are using in your DAW to support using your soundcard since you probably will not be able to keep both the mackie and your soundcard initialized simulataneously (at least not without some possibly serious issues). It seems to me that you would actually have to purchase a soundcard rather than just converters. If you do get converters instead, you would have to make sure that they connect to your DAW in such a way that they utilize drivers to be recognized by your DAW application and windows (most likely a firewire connection). If you were to just buy converters, than you would probably not have a way to route the tracks from your DAW to the converters.

 

[BushmasterM4]

Agree.