Pro's and Con's of using a Live sound mixer for recording

[Cion761]

Hello guys!

I'm hoping to buy a new board in the next month or so. I'm upgrading from a Behringer MX9000. I'm looking at digital, however I love analog, and the "bling factor".

I was looking at a couple of big boards, live sound mixers from Allen & Heath. I was looking at the GL4000, GL2800 & GL3300... 40-48 channels.

I was hoping some of you guys can break down the pro's and cons of recording and mixing (hip-hop & R&B) with a live mixer (particularly the above) or suggest a large (affordable) console in that size.

I cant find much online breaking down the difference. I did read live boards EQ's and Pres are flat and bad for recording, but that was one post.

Please help me understand if I can use this type of board.

Thanks!

 

[gecko zzed]

The "bling factor" is one factor you can consider in selecting a new console.

My main live mixing desk is an A&H 428, which, when all is said and done, is pretty boring looking and un-bling . . . kind of industrial grey with red ends. But I didn't get it for its looks. I got it because of the quality of sound and its functionality . . . and its price.

So what desk do I use for recording? Well, er . . . none. A mixing desk is not necessary for recording, and there is no point in me using the A&H as part of my recording set up. Because I use an eight-input Firepod, the 28 inputs on the A&H are wasted (well, all but eight of them).

There are a few occasions when I need more channels than I have interface inputs, for example, doing a live mix of a large band. In that case, I may call upon the mixer so that I can do a sub-mix of, say, the kit, then feed this into the Firepod.

You may have read somewhere that "live boards EQ's and Pres are flat and bad for recording". I don't know if that's true or not. It probably isn't, but either way, I don't care, because I don't use any EQ when tracking.

I'm not sure why you need "40-48 channels". Is that for live mixing or recording? If it is for recording, you will need to think about how you are going to get 40-48 channels in and out of whatever you are recording to.

 

[moresound]

You have a built in monitor router with a live console when using it for recording.

I use a Yamaha PM1800a for recording and it is great. Though half of the 32 channels are never used ... it's ok with me.

 

[michaelst]

I have a Midas Venice 320, on which I had the Direct Outs set up to be Post-gain, post-insert, pre-EQ, pre-fader. I feed the direct outs to an Alesis HD24. I then transfer the tracks to a PC and remix with N Tracks software. The direct oputs allow me to record the signal without it affecting the live sound - I get a live performance with a studio sound. If something sucks, or a mistake is made, I have the musician re-track his part, and I insert it in the appropriate place in the song, and no one is the wiser.

I get the energy and spontenaity of a live performance, with the studio ability of fixing mistakes. It's the best of both worlds.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

I often use a mixer when recording more than one performer at a time. It's useful for multiple zero latency monitor mixes. But for rap aren't you usually just recording one rapper at a time to some beats? A simple interface would be adequate for that. I would spend my money on a variety of good mics and maybe a cool preamp or two.

 

[Farview]

The main difference between a live console and a recording console is the features like direct outs, recording outs, tape inputs, etc... recording mixers just have features that make routing to and from tape decks (interfaces) easier. where as live mixers will have fewer sub busses, but possibly more Aug sends...

 

[dudernut]

But for rap aren't you usually just recording one rapper at a time to some beats? A simple interface would be adequate for that. I would spend my money on a variety of good mics and maybe a cool preamp or two.

That's what I was thinking. Unless the R&B you mentioned is going to be a large band and you are recording it live, then a digital interface is really your best option. If you are routing this all to a computer anyway, it all becomes digital anyway. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but you are not retaining any desirable analog quality by going straight from an analog mixer to a computer. If you are actually thinking of going reel-to-reel, that is a bold (but possibly rewarding) decision to make, and it will obviously the acquisition of much more gear. For your purposes (and most home-based engineers), this is likely not the ideal option. Keep the Eurodesk for your bling. Out of curiosity, what type of sound card are you routing your current mixer through?