Thoughts on a Mixer

  • Thread starter Thread starter moosensquirrel
  • Start date Start date
M

moosensquirrel

New member
My band of youngin's wants amateur recording for a demo album. Actually, more to the point, they just want recording, but I see things a little more realistically. :p

I've really been looking into purchasing a Mackie Onyx 24-4 mixer. Or I could save a whole lot of money and go with a Soundcraft MPM 20/2 mixer.

We have roughly a thousand dollars budgeted for this, flexible in either direction. If everyone plugged in at once, we'd have four vocals, two electrics, two acoustics, piano, keyboard, bass, mic for misc. percussion, and a moderate mic set for the drums.

What do you think?
 
Allen & Heath GL2400. A little more than the Mackie but is very versitile. But the most important feature of the A&H is that it is an inline mixer meaning that there is a direct output for each channel. If you decide to do a descrete 24 channel recording you are set. Also A&H has a great rep for good sounding mic preamps. I had the 16:2 mix wizard and it was a very nice board.

ac
 
Mackie question...

As far as the Onyx mixers go. If you buy the firewire card, can it output everything to a separate channel in a DAW, or are you stuck with your stereo or submix?
 
Solaris:

If you buy the Firewire card, it outputs all sixteen channels separately, not the the stereo main mix. Supposedly, it can send all sixteen to a computer without stuttering, which could be disastrous for your mix. It sends each channel post-gain, but pre-EQ, so your recorded tracks aren't damaged by EQing for a live setting. There is a "mod" that changes the send to post-EQ, but it depends on you.

In my opinion, $450 is a lot to pay for recording several instruments at the same time when you generally want to record separately anyway. You should probably consider it only if you plan to seriously record live shows.


Acattoir:

The Mackie Onyx 24-4 has three DB-25 connectors, sending a balanced signal of all 24 channels pre-fader and pre- or post-EQ. Also, if you slide a mono 1/4" cable into the first detent in any channel's Insert, you can pull the post-gain, pre-EQ signal without interruption. (If you slide a mono 1/4" in further, it pulls the sound and interrupts the signal in the board; if you use a stereo 1/4", it draws and returns the signal for use with external signal processors.)

I don't know the exact definition of "inline", but I think Mackie pretty well covered it, although I don't exactly plan cashing out two grand for a hard disk recorder. Eek!

As for the pre's, I was surprised to read (read, sorry, not hear) that many consider the Onyx preamps to be comparable with Allen & Heath. I always that that A&H was in a different league! One or two descriptions phrased it as though the Onyx preamps were actually cleaner and less colored than A&H GB-30 pre's. But they also said that this coloration gives much of the texture to the sound, which could be preferred. The negative description for Mackie could then be "sterile"?

Sorry for being so nit-picky about all the little details. You're probably thinking first, why did I even post, and second, why doesn't this kid get up from his computer to go out and listen to these himself? As for the first, I very much appreciate your thoughts. I'm really trying to develop an understanding of the products from people who aren't trying to sell them to me. I had mentally ruled out A&H from my list, but I'll take another look. Thanks again!

And as for the second part, you're right. I over-research and under-listen. Bad Habit. :o
 
Tell me you didn't put that together for me just now. :p
 
My band of youngin's wants amateur recording for a demo album. Actually, more to the point, they just want recording, but I see things a little more realistically. :p

I've really been looking into purchasing a Mackie Onyx 24-4 mixer. Or I could save a whole lot of money and go with a Soundcraft MPM 20/2 mixer.

We have roughly a thousand dollars budgeted for this, flexible in either direction. If everyone plugged in at once, we'd have four vocals, two electrics, two acoustics, piano, keyboard, bass, mic for misc. percussion, and a moderate mic set for the drums.

What do you think?
Boris, darlink, You say your objective is to record these guys, yet you mention nothing about the gear or actually recording these guys and instead talk a bout a mixer. There is a bit of an implication here that you want to live mix everything on the fly and record just the stereo live mix.

Unless you have plenty of isolation between instruments, and your band is really tight, I don't see you recording acoustic guitars and drums at the same time, along with four simultaneous vocals (just for two examples.) You have that many parts to record, you're probably going to want isolation and overdub capability.

I'd recommend against limiting yourself to that option. I think you need another hat. For $300 less than the price of a 24-channel Onyx you could instead pick up two Focusrite Saffire Pro 26s and give yourself 16 tracks of analog (plus beaucoup digital) direct in to a computer-based workstation. That should be *plenty* of I/O for the kind of project you're talking about. From there you can work your mix around to your heart's content after the fact instead of being stuck with a stereo mix that you cannot un-mix or dub.

G.
 
WhiteStrat...

2 things, whitey...

1) I dig the new avatar. Mr. Clean...software pirate?

2) You should commission an artist to redo "Thoughts on a Mixer." I see museums lining up for the rights to house it.

Freakin' hilarious man.
 
2 things, whitey...

1) I dig the new avatar. Mr. Clean...software pirate?

2) You should commission an artist to redo "Thoughts on a Mixer." I see museums lining up for the rights to house it.

Freakin' hilarious man.

Thanks! Mr Clean was an old avatar (y'know, the bald guy theme) from before I was Kojak/Telly Savalas. I was getting ready to move on to Bald Brittany when True "piratized" Mr. Clean for me in honor of the upcoming Talk Like A Pirate Day. So I'll keep 'im til at least then.
 
Ahh crap, I thought you said "thoughts IN a mixer" ....... baahhhhhh whatever..
 

Attachments

  • thoughts.webp
    thoughts.webp
    4.5 KB · Views: 117
I've said it before & will say it again...listen to/harken to/pay attention to Glen - even without the Natashia accent he's makes spytacular sense.
 
Gosh. I feel hijacked. Heh.

Glen, you raise several valid points. I'll try to have my thoughts organized:

1) Thank you for acknowledging my pseudonym. On one forum, people started referring to me as "Moosen". I find this disheartening. After I graduate from Whatsamatta U., I'll make it my first priority to educate others of Jay Ward's wondrous productions.

2) Yes, I was a little light on the details. To be honest, this was intentional. I've had my posts go unnoticed on several forums because my initial questions were too long (although not quite thislong). You could say my theory is to bait them in and only then provide details.

Never mind the numbering. It gets too complicated.

- - - - -

History (Skip of it is too much)

You could call this the somewhat-applicable portion of my life story. If you find it Clinton-esque, maybe I could find a publisher.

I started taking piano lessons around six, but my attitude kept me from learning. But by age eleven or so, I discovered I wasn't so afraid of the alternative realm of playing chords for less traditional music. My ear for music has been a benefit, to the point that my piano teachers got frustrated when I'd play by the sound and feel of music rather than the notes. I would literally memorize my songs so I could look at my hands rather than look at the music. I've played on and off with various church and school worship teams since I was twelve, first trying a guitar in middle school. I've never had a lesson, but I'm competent playing rhythm acoustic in the keys of E, G, A, D, and sometimes C. :) I just absorbed the two theory classes I took at Bethel University, where I also spent a year chipping at a boulder with some much needed voice lessons (I have a lot to learn). I took one semester in lessons for marimba and vibes, and another in handbells. I sang in their choirs, including when one choir performed for our governor Tim Pawlenty's reinauguration ceremony. I can keep a beat on a drum set, and I've played bass on stage twice.

My sound engineering experience began in the fifth grade when I took turns running sound for a small church's morning kids service. I was the only kid to figured out how the paster made his voice echo with the built-in effects processor. I watched in awe as seventh graders helped with the adult sound, and it wasn't long before I was mixing for my small Christian school's chapel when I wasn't playing keyboard. I drooled over Musician's Friend catalogs on long car rides and during lunch at school. When I was thirteen or so, I was going to be mixing for another one of my middle school's annual drama productions. The drama teacher was planning to rent a soundboard because the PA equipment in the school's basement was so poor, but I told her that I had been planning on buying one, and that maybe she could give me the budget from renting a mixer to help me buy one. She agreed and gave me $100 of the $250 I paid for my first mixer to show up on my doorstep, A shiny Behringer "14 channel" console with six preamps and an effects processor to boot. Months later I bought more, vacuuming my mother's floors with a vengeance so I could send away for Nady loudspeakers, a 900 watt amp, a 31-band graphic EQ, etc. I haggled the interest rates on peanut-sized loans from my dad, and when people asked what it was all for, it didn't matter that I couldn't answer them, because I was a child with a dream. I was involved in pioneering a youth group that rented a small room every other week on the upper story of an aged YMCA building. We primarily used my gear, carted with the drums every week, upstairs to the room, and then downstairs to our small trailer of outdoor, winter storage. We called the group '6:54' because we met six minutes away from where the adults of the church communed on Wednesday nights. Although our small service liked visitors, it was unusual to have less than half of those present on the worship team. They joked about G being the "key of worship"; they frequently ate at the Wendy's across the street after the gear was repacked. We had no budget for cases or rackmounts, and my beloved sound system was showing some wear and tear. I began attending a different youth group, a gathering of 600 or more where I was able to complement the worship with the church's intelligent lighting system costing $65 grand or more, and I fell into the routine of mixing for the same church's middle school group which met on Sunday mornings, adopting as much expertise and delegating authority as anyone who was willing to work for free. I catered to those short-lived generations of middle schoolers for about two and a half years before forgetting why I was there and what I was really doing it for. My own gear sat on the cement floor in my parents furnace room, among old stacked suitcases and unused furniture. My mother complained weekly about the space I was abusing with my junk, and I regretted ever buying it. I spent so much money, also the prodigious number of hours I put into research for these things. I was switching jobs and switching schools, more into photography than music, hardly playing anything anywhere and generally feeling disconnected and rejected. Bands don't appreciate sound techs, nobody that would want my help could pay for it, and it seems any related purchases I make become shameful mementos of of unguided, childish ambitions, which cuts deep for someone would do anything to find ambitions now, but it all seems too foolish to bother with.

Eight months ago, I get a call asking to play keys for a weekend retreat. I say yes, we practice, and the other musicians start to feel we are a band. They apply for church sponsorship and look into budget recording studios. It's almost cute the way they think we'll 'make it big'.

...but it's better than nothing, right?

- - - - -

Back on Subject

My Behringer board died long ago, and my Nady gear is functional, but dreadful. I'm using a six channel powered board with crackling volume knobs and frequent loud pops that could be damaging. Recording into my computer with or without the board presently causes too much hiss.

Yes, the chief concern is amateur recording, but we're on a budget, and the band expects to practice and potentially perform with whatever mixing device we buy. A computer might work for practicing or live shows (ick), but it would need to be one used only for the band's purposes, not double as a household computer like our current one does. I feel the other band members would prefer something a little more tangible. Additionally, the band members would prefer to avoid future channel limitations. I see twelve channels as the absolute minimum, sixteen plus preferred.

We have a small room dedicated for band gear in my basement, but if we practice in there with drums, it will be just chaos. We'll frequently practice there without drums, though, and if we decide not to go the budget studio route ($55 an hour), we'll record in that room too. There's a snowball's chance in Phoenix we'd be able to make a decent live mix, so I'm suggesting to them we record one part at a time.

The gear I have: E-MU 0404 PCI, which is a duplex soundcard with only two analog inputs. On the computer, I have a recent (and legal!) version of Acid Music Studio, and I recently bought Cakewalk 2002 off eBay for only a few dollars. It is old, but it has full recording functionality even up to converting MIDI to staff music and acting as a virtual mixer. As for other gear, my cables are cheap, some new and some ancient. Out of the six Nady mics I bought years ago, five still work. (Buy one for $25, get two free! Order now from Musician's Friend! :rolleyes:)

Budget: We received an offering of $523 during a small concert/worship service, and my father was kind enough to agree to match any donations to us up to the first thousand. The rest of the band immediately sees this as $1,046 cash in hand and more to come (don't count your chickens...), and they agreed that we should spend $1,000 on a soundboard, possibly less, but $1,200 at the absolute max. They are envisioning an analog mixer with 16 to 20 channels; I think I could persuade them otherwise if this really isn't best for the band, but it might be tricky. Next on their list is probably drum mics on the cheap.

One last element to complicate things further. Without proof reading this post, I can't be sure how much my tone expresses this, but I don't have a lot of faith in 'The Band'. Partially cynicism, partially experience. I see a lot of people start things without carefully evaluating whether or not they can finish: I fear the divorce rate in this country, yet I come to respect those slow plodders who make it around the last bend of the marathon not because they expect to win, but because they wanted to finish. Diligence just seems hard to find these days. The lead singer of our band probably has the least to bring to the table, but she happens to be the girlfriend of the drummer, the one who generally picks our gigs and our song sets. Guitar-Girl-as-an-identity is going to school two hours away, and our rhythm acoustic seems a little more passive in the decision making process, but he gets just as excited about these things as the others. That leaves me, the keys player, transposer of songs and electronics expert. None of us really know how to write songs, and none of us have been acting as a clear leader. Unlike the others, I don't think we're going to make it big. I'm reminded of Tom Hank's "That Thing You Do" more often than I'd like. So honestly, what happens to our joint-owned gear when the band eventually splits. I don't want any of us to think negatively of the others years later because he got that gear and the other didn't, etc. It's possible I'd be more involved either with music or engineering later in life, but I'm really not sure. I could offer to buy the mixer or interface or whatever half out of my own pocket and only half from the band fund, on the condition that "if" the band splits, I would get to keep the mixer. But is that something I really want? I don't have unlimited spending myself, and who could predict whether or not I'd regret it down the road like I regret my Behringer mixer and Nady amp?

What would you do?
 
After I graduate from Whatsamatta U., I'll make it my first priority to educate others of Jay Ward's wondrous productions.
Again? That trick NEVER works. ;)
Yes, I was a little light on the details. To be honest, this was intentional. I've had my posts go unnoticed on several forums because my initial questions were too long.
Yeah, one thing I have yet to figure out is why there are so many people that hang out on text-based forums that object to reading. Kind of like someone who's allergic to peanuts hanging out at Jimmy Carter's house. I alway imagine just what it would have been like if things were like that back in 1864 and people wrote letters like we now write text messages. The entire award-winning Ken Burns documentary on the Civil War - not to mention our entire historical record of the war - would, in it's entirety consist of "War 5uckz." (Rhetorical question of the week, BTW: What good is a spell checker in a world where most people who use them insist on spelling half their words with numbers?)

So anyway, it sounds like you're talking mixer mainly because you need to use it double-duty as a PA mixer as well. If so, that does make sense. And yeah, the Onyx is a very nice choice.

However, a mixer does not a decent recording setup make. Those Nady mics are probably simply not going to give you the quality that they will be expecting. Perhaps they work well enough for live, but for recording, frankly, they are going to sound like "Buy one for $25 and get three free" microphones. Can you record with them? Sure. Will the recording be OK? probably, if you do things right. Will the recording be demo-quality or as good as those guys will expect it to sound? I'll bet not.

What this means is that to make a decent-quality demo recording, you'd probably need more of an investment than it sounds like you're ready to make. You can easily spend 2x or more of the price of that Onyx on mics alone, without even breaking a sweat doing it. Heck, if you listen too long to us here, we'll have you spending the price of that Onyx just for one microphone. Easy.

Which leads us to...
I can't be sure how much my tone expresses this, but I don't have a lot of faith in 'The Band'. Partially cynicism, partially experience. I see a lot of people start things without carefully evaluating whether or not they can finish
...
None of us really know how to write songs, and none of us have been acting as a clear leader.
...
What would you do?
You sound like a smart, level-headed man. If I were you, I'd listen to my doubts. No manager, no producer, no songwriter is a recipe for nothing but in-fighting amongst members of a band that plays only cover music that won't sell much because it *is* cover music. And because you guys are - by your own observation - fair-to-middlin musicians and not not kick-butt/stop-the-presses performers who can perform covers well enough to make them desirable to the public.

Whit I would think about would be convincing then to spend $55 of your cache for an hour in the studio to knock off the tracking on one song. Bring the raw tracks back on CD- or DVD-ROM, load them into Acid or Cakewalk an d bring up a rough mix for them to hear. Nothing special, just a basic "faders up" mix.

Ostensibly you tell them it's to check the studio out, but ulteriorly it's to show them that this studio had x-amount of dollars invested in gear, acoustics, and engineering experience, and this is how they sound. Do they really think they sound that good from a 3rd party perspective of a good recording? And if they do, are they ready to spend a whole lot more than $1500 or so on a single mixer to do so? And even then, are they willing to have the patience it will take to cover the long learning curve you have ahead of you on how to get your tracks to sound as good as they do from the studio?

Or, you can just take a more direct route. The above one sounds like fun to me, just to see looks on their faces when they hear themselves, but I'd probaly prefer the direct one: ask them "Why?" Other than two or three of the seven sins, maybe. And what is their game plan?

ANNOUNCER: Will our heros get their mixer? Will they go ahead and record? And who are that short pudgy guy and tall skinny gal hiding in the shadows?

BORIS: Who are you calling short?

BULLWINKLE: Yeah. And who are you calling a gal?

ANNOUNCER: Find out next time on...

"The Tracks Of My Tears"

or

"Are We Good Enough or Badinov?"

G.
 
Last edited:
Part of me is tired and frustrated. I've already spent so much money on sound gear, this band probably won't go anywhere, etc. On the other hand, it would help the band, the band would be helping me buy this gear, I hope it will be used in some form of ministry even if it isn't our band, and buying gear is just so much fun. :)

Well, I've looked at getting an interface for recording and then a small-format mixer for potential live shows, but it's pretty tough to find two that would work well together.

A mid-format mixer can easily be in-line, and the EQ and routing options add so much! Not to mention room to grow across the mixer's channels or my personal growth as an aspiring engineer. But they're so pricey and still need an interface!

It's been a nightmare trying to get the band together for a gear/budget talk-only practice, but I just spent an hour and a quarter on the phone going over options with who I consider to be the band's most prominent member.

So my current favored components consist of the following:

1) Mackie Onyx 24-4

Why I like it:
- 20 mono channels (= big)
- Onyx preamps, 'Perkins' EQ (= quality)
- 100mm faders
- 4 band EQ, both mids sweepable
- 6 auxiliaries
- 4 LED metering per fader
- Uninterrupted output via inserts or DB-25
- Bus compressor (hmm, must learn to use)​

Why I think it is a good choice:
- I prefer analog mixing to digital
- Room to expand, both channels and purposes
- [Relatively] No sacrifices (i.e. things I'd later regret not getting in a mixer)​

2) Echo AudioFire12

Why I like it:
- Sufficient channels (could daisy-chain if needed in the future)
- Channel metering
- High sample rate
- Incredible analog-to-digital conversion (from what I have read)​

Why I think it is a good choice:
- Not anchored to our mixer like Mackie's Firewire interface
- I'm not paying for features I don't need (preamps, digital ports, etc.)
- I'm hoping the same quality converters as a hard disk recorder, but for a whole lot less cash​

3) R0de NT1-A

- Sounds like it has incredible value
- Very dexterous uses (vocals, electric cabs, cymbals, room mics, etc.)
- 10 year warranty!
- Maybe hits the 'sweet spot' in the market for price/performance ratio?​


It looks like I'll also need a solid rack. I'm also tempted to get an external compressor or two, as well as a couple Shure SM57 mics. I may need to upgrade my recording software, or I may not. And maybe a year or so down the road, I personally (sans band) could buy a pair of Adam A7 active studio monitors for mixing, mastering, and my personal 'listening room'.

I envision the Onyx 24-4 living out a long, happy existence mostly unmoved from its throne in our practice room, high and remote within the room to protect it from physical accidents, and protected by a dust cover when not in use. Unless I start playing the quality cables game, I really don't see a weak link in this amateur studio chain.

Well, what do you think? Other than it being a lot of money and recommending a good interface over a mixer, are the products well chosen and well matched?
 
Well, what do you think? Other than it being a lot of money and recommending a good interface over a mixer, are the products well chosen and well matched?
Looks pretty good, with only a few questions or comments.

First, as an owner of a couple of Rode NT1s, I'd say it would be very much worth your while to spend $200 more to get something far superior to it: ElectroVoice RE-20. Yeah, it may be twice the price of the NT1, but in the grand scheme of your gear list, it's just a small percentage of an increase, yet it will give you so much more. The Rode is not a bad mic, but it does have a characteristic sound that does tend to get a bit hot in the high freqs. It's (IMHO) best as a special purpose mic - when you need the specific sound that an NT1 gives you, go for it, other wise save it for when it's called for.

The RE-20, OTOH, is a great general purpose mic that works well on vocals but is also very versatile; enough to work decently on almost anything from horns to drums. Also, a much a more rugged mic than most of the cheap Chinese condensers (of which the NT1 is one), which I'd - as a general rule - try to avoid, especially if you want to use it both in-studio and live.

One can never have too many SM57s :D.

Also, as far as the whole mixing in analog vs. mixing on the computer thing goes, I understand your feelings and am not going to disagree, but you gotta remember that if you are recording to computer, that you're going to need to go back out to the mixer if you want to mix on the mixer. This means two things: that you have to have at least as many DAC channels coming back out of your interface as you have ADC channels going into it, usually more. The Echo has 12 outs, meaning that you'd be limited to mixing 12 channels at a time. Maybe that's sufficient enough for you, but you gotta think about that hard; this would include potential alternate take tracks, punch-in tracks, etc. Not to mention headphone and mix monitor feeds. Actual track counts can add up quickly. Just something to consider is all I'm saying.

G.
 
Back
Top