why mixers?

[minofifa]

I see alot of posts about people using analog mixers in their DAW's and I am just wondering as to why. I am not trying to put down mixers at all, or anybody who uses them, It's just that i have never seen the need to use a mixer in my setup so i would like to know what people use them for.

One of the most common uses seems to be the preamps, everybody wants lots of preamps... for me, i would rather get a multi I/O soundcard in a rack and have a few rack pre's right underneath. Other people use them for their flexible routing options but this can be done the same with a decent sound card with multiple I/O. Also there is not much point in running a bunch of outs and ins, switching from digital to analog and back for the use of outboard gear, unless you have some high quality stuff. For example i wouldn't put my signal though two A/D, D/A degredations for the ability to use my behringer compressor, i would rather use the capable compressor that comes with sonar. I find the pan and EQ to be pointless on a mixer as well, not because they suck, but just because you can do all of that stuff within software and have the full ability to "undo" anything you need to.

I like the idea of having the control of a mixer, but i think i am going to hold out and save for something like the mackie control universal that controls the software insted.

 

[LemonTree]

Some mixers aren't worth having. Many mixers are.

Say you want to track a whole band...that's a lot of pre amps if you don't have a desk.

Didital EQ...mhmm, ok but it's easier just to dial in on the desk not to mention the actual sound quality.

Then there's digital summing V analoge summing

I personaly like the hands on feel of a good mixing board, not to mention that each and every one has its own individual sound characteristics (sp?) then there's the routing capabilities.

I track through a 24 channel analogue console A/D into the computer. Then I can do all my editing, fades, mutes...I use software gates and sometimes compression. Once everything is tracked I mix back out of the computer through the desk where I'll apply my outboard effects, reverbs, delays, compression and the like and record direct from the desk to DAT. from DAT back into the computer for a bit of mastering then it's burnt to CD. So I'm goin through 3 stages of audio conversion A/D from console to computer then D/A from computer to console, then A/D from console to DAT machine. then the final D/D transfer from DAT back to the computer.

D/D I don't count and recording at 24bit 48KHz and keeping it that way right till I burn the final mix to CD you'd need pretty highly tuned ears to notice a difference.

If anything using an anologue console takes away the sterility of a sole digital domain...hiss is good. Repeat, hiss is good

 

[funky1]

i was about to submit my own question when i saw this, so i think ill just tag along...
i'm looking to get my very first soundcard and ive been looking around... i need someting simple that can record 1 or 2 tracks in high quality. to which i can record additional layers... mainly acoustics and vocals...

so am i better off getting something like a delta 44 or 66 or even and audiophile, attaching it to a decent mixer and recording like that.

or should i invest an m-audio firewire, or omnistudio, that has everything "built in" and saves me the hassle of a mixer?
---------

thanx funky1

 

[Jim Y]

With a true multitrack recording studio DAW, rack pre's or intefaces including pre's would, I expect, be the "pro" way to go. However, for the home/project studio with only a 2in2out soundcard, a mixer provides a very convenient centre for everything.

I have dedicated channels on my mixer into which my synths, mics, guitar pre-amps etc are always connected. A mixer with a seperate extra stereo out bus can be used as a 'record send' - just switch whatever you're recording to that bus which of course feeds the line-ins of the soundcard.
Of course, this is largely a waste of a mixer, I'm actually only using it as a bunch of pre's and a routing controller - but I don't actually know of a more cost effective or convenient way of doing the job.

I wouldn't underate the "bullshit" effect of a nice looking console. Nothing impresses a client or visitor more than this centre-piece. Doesn't matter how good your racks are - a mixer says "recording studio" to most people.

 

[Farview]

It really depends on what you record. If what you do involves mainly keys, drum machines, vocals, and an occasional live instrument, you are only tracking 2 tracks at a time. If you have someone come in with a 20 piece drumset plus electronics, your setup wouldn't do. I've used 23 mics on a drumset and still needed to record scratch bass and guitar. (and come up with 3 different headphone mixes) I needed the board. But to do all the overdubbing, I never used more than 4 inputs at once after the drum takes.

 

[minofifa]

23 mics on one kit??? wow that must have been fun to edit.

if you needed three headphone mixes, why couldn't you just plug three sets of headphones into the outs on your soundcard and use the software mixer to send out the mixes. I am just asking as i don't even know if you can do that with a soundcard's mixer software, i just assumed thats how it works for say the E-MU 1820's software.

now with outboard EQ and effects. how do you now if youi are going to like the EQ settings after you have all your tracks? if you record the raw tracks and EQ em in the software, you can adjust them later. if you EQ outside, you are stuck with the signal that results. Same with like delay, what if there is a part in a song that you want to have a certain delay, but not in others, you are going to need one hand to control that, 2 more hands to "ride the faders", a couple more to set the EQ. I am not critisizing anybody's workflow here, i just have never used analog / outboard recording methods. They seem like more work to me but obviously they have their purpose as that is what many pros have used (and still use).

 

[Track Rat]

I think my console just plain sounds nicer than mixes I get out of the box. Plus it's WAY faster to work on than software. I can get a headphone monitor mix setup for a six person band a whole lot faster with the console vs software. I like software for what it does best; editing. With my setup, I can use hardware and plugins side by side. And it looks a lot cooler too.

 

[HangDawg]

Up until recently I've been mixing in the box. This was due to many things like lack of a good console/outboard gear/cabling. But I just did my first re-mix of a recently recorded song. It was recorded on an HD24. On mix was done in Nuendo, the other through a Soundtracs PC 32. The difference really is night and day especially when it comes to eq. The analog mix, even though the first one had some issues, still sounded much better than the Nuendo mix.

 

[minofifa]

With my setup, I can use hardware and plugins side by side. And it looks a lot cooler too

ya the lava lamp really adds a finishing touch! very nice

So how exactly do you guys mix out of the box? once you have your tracks recorded and edited in, say sonar, do you assign each track to an output on your soundcard? and from there each soundcard out is routed to the appropriate mixer in? then you hit play in the software and adjust the EQ and faders accordingly? finally, the stereo output goes out of the mixer and into a DAT or computer?

hmm that makes sense. One thing that stikes me as time consuming is how well you must have to know the song though. In the software you could quickly add a node to a volume envelope if you wanted a volume decrease or something. As well you could draw envelopes for varying delay, reverb and EQ. With the out of the box method, if you forget to tweak something at the right time in the song, you would have to start all over no?

 

[Farview]

So how exactly do you guys mix out of the box? once you have your tracks recorded and edited in, say sonar, do you assign each track to an output on your soundcard? and from there each soundcard out is routed to the appropriate mixer in? then you hit play in the software and adjust the EQ and faders accordingly? finally, the stereo output goes out of the mixer and into a DAT or computer?

hmm that makes sense. One thing that stikes me as time consuming is how well you must have to know the song though. In the software you could quickly add a node to a volume envelope if you wanted a volume decrease or something. As well you could draw envelopes for varying delay, reverb and EQ. With the out of the box method, if you forget to tweak something at the right time in the song, you would have to start all over no?

You assign each track or group of tracks to an output, send it to the mixer.
All the automation you can still do in the computer. (fader moves) If you aren't any good at mixing on the fly, you can assign an aux send (in the program) to a physical output and apply the delay (reverb, etc.) to that channel.

You can record the results back into the computer or an dat machine or whatever else you have lying around.

 

[mshilarious]

I used to use a mixer but don't anymore. I think mixers work on the low end and the high end (like that pic above), but in between in the box is great. I've got 24 channels in, although I only use 16 right now. I've got 12 going out. I can mix 32 channels with dynamics, EQ, & effects, no problems.

I like to have all the automation on the PC. I can set up any routing I want pretty quick (and save it), and there's no patchbay or cables to worry about. I never have to clear the board to switch from tracking to mixdown. Best of all, I like not having a giant console in my very small room--my desk is 16"x26", just big enough for an LCD, keyboard, and mouse (and my beers, which I don't have to put on the floor). Try that with a 32 channel mixer!

 

[Farview]

23 mics on one kit??? wow that must have been fun to edit.

Edit? There was no need to edit, he played the parts right.

 

[deepwater]

I think my console just plain sounds nicer than mixes I get out of the box. Plus it's WAY faster to work on than software. I can get a headphone monitor mix setup for a six person band a whole lot faster with the console vs software. I like software for what it does best; editing. With my setup, I can use hardware and plugins side by side. And it looks a lot cooler too.

Pic must have been after a Party. Are those bottles only 1/2 empty?

 

[minofifa]

Edit? There was no need to edit, he played the parts right

wish i knew a drummer that could play the parts right.

like i said before, i do like the idea of a physical box in front of me to control my mix, but i like the idea of a fake mixer like the mackie control universal. Does anybody do it this way?? specifically does anybody have experience witht he mackie? is it worth the hefty price tag?