Help: Setting up a studio

[dougal]

[quote name='jake_tenfloors' post='919646' date='Aug 9 2010, 02:15 PM']Those are good but the built in preamp on the channels aren't the best.[/quote]

Do we think that this:
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/behringer-ada8000-ultragain-8-channel-a-d-and-d-a-converter--18218"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/behr...onverter--18218[/url]

is compatibile with this:

[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-audio-profire-lightbridge-31-in-36-out-firewire-lightpipe-interface--36419"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-au...nterface--36419[/url]

then?

Obviously we'd prefer this:
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-audio-octane-8-chan-mic-pre-with-adat-optical--36422"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-au...-optical--36422[/url]

but there's a good £300 difference...

[JakeBrownBass]

[quote name='dougal' post='920552' date='Aug 10 2010, 12:22 PM']Do we think that this:
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/behringer-ada8000-ultragain-8-channel-a-d-and-d-a-converter--18218"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/behr...onverter--18218[/url]

is compatibile with this:

[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-audio-profire-lightbridge-31-in-36-out-firewire-lightpipe-interface--36419"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-au...nterface--36419[/url]

then?

Obviously we'd prefer this:
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-audio-octane-8-chan-mic-pre-with-adat-optical--36422"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/m-au...-optical--36422[/url]

but there's a good £300 difference...[/quote]

Yeh that would work.

Have you thought about the presonus model that i posted??

[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/presonus-digimax-d8-8-channel-mic-preamp--48499"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/pres...c-preamp--48499[/url]
Its about double the price of the behringer but cheaper than the m-audio. But they have better quality components & pre amps.

[Beedster]

[quote name='Beedster' post='919267' date='Aug 9 2010, 08:34 AM']Thanks Charic, yep, I've been looking there a lot, thinking of running this

[url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/m-audio-projectmix-i-o-control-surface-with-motorized-faders--30083"]http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/m-a...d-faders--30083[/url]

into a Mac running protools. Good start?

Chris[/quote]

Hi guys

Thanks for all the responses.

Sorry, the above post was the wrong link, I'm looking to run this:

[url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/mackie-onyx-1620i-and-avid-m-powered-pro-tools--74873"]http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/mac...ro-tools--74873[/url]

into this:

[url="http://www.dv247.com/configure/31"]http://www.dv247.com/configure/31[/url]

Which I think (hope) will give me sufficient capacity for my needs over the next few years, that is, starting from home and eventually moving into a dedicated space once we've found the right one.

I've a couple of questions about the above

1. Anyone know of any issues with the Mackie?
2. The iMac is not really upgradable. I'm no expert on computers, so am at the mercy of those who are! Given its current performance (3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 3MB cache, 4GB DDR3 1066MHz SDRAM, 1TB Serial ATA HDD, Slot-load 8x SuperDrive, ATI Radeon HD 4670, 256MB Graphics, Bluetooth 2.1 & Airport Extreme, running Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard), is this going to be sufficient to do the job in the short-medium term (i.e., in the 3-5years I anticipate it will take before I look to buy another)?

Cheers

Chris

[Beedster]

[quote name='dougal' post='919432' date='Aug 9 2010, 11:33 AM']It's probably a bit noddy given what's already been said in this thread and your potential budget, but I found the following really useful:
I think a mixer is useful in the situation for impromptu recordings: I rather like the look of the projectmix.[/quote]

The book's on order, many thanks. Agreed re a mixer, I think it's still faster than using a mouse, or at least with my hand-eye coordination it is!

[quote name='charic' post='919495' date='Aug 9 2010, 12:29 PM']You could find 8 channels very limiting. What kind of budget are you looking at for a mixer?[/quote]

[quote name='charic' post='919506' date='Aug 9 2010, 12:33 PM']But Digital Village are very good with customer service and Warrantys tend to last a long time (my last piece of kit has 4 years warranty) which is worth a lot of money to a studio situation.[/quote]

[quote name='charic' post='919511' date='Aug 9 2010, 12:39 PM']Its more hassle though (and money). Personally I would have a 16 channel mixer, without automation. I love the look of the mackie onyx series but im unsure of the budget.
This
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/mackie-1604-vlz3-series-compact-mixer--38504"]Mackie 1604[/url]
or
[url="http://www.dv247.com/mixers/mackie-onyx-1640i--67613"]Mackie 1640 onyx[/url]
would be my choice without further research.[/quote]

Thanks for the replies Charic. I was looking at a budget below £1000 but would like one that works synergistically with Protools. I had looked at the M-Audio that I linked originally but settled on the Mackie after doing some homework. You've recommended the model(s) above that I'm looking at, what would you say are the advantages I'd actually notice of the higher spec model? I'd love to spend and spend on this but there's a balance to be reached between getting the tools for the job in the control room (and spending sufficiently to do so), and not overspending at this stage only to find I have to economise on those aspects of the build closer to the sound source (acoustic treatments, mics etc).

[quote name='jake_tenfloors' post='919541' date='Aug 9 2010, 12:59 PM']Have you thought about the M-Audio Lightbridge??

You can make a great expandable set up using ADAT.

[url="http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/ProFireLightbridge.html"]http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/ProF...ightbridge.html[/url]

Then using up to 4 presonus preamps for 32 channels of recording.

[url="http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=48"]http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=48[/url]

Then getting a dedicated controller as apose to a controller/interface mix. For example, Euphonix MC Control.

[url="http://www.euphonix.com/artist/products/mc_control/"]http://www.euphonix.com/artist/products/mc_control/[/url]

My uncle recently got one of these and they are so good. So easy to use and makes everything really simple, especially with the touch screen.

So to get a 32 channel recording set up, its comes to about £2700. Which is alot of gear for the money

EDIT: Forgot to say, the control surface is for MAC only afaik.[/quote]

Thanks Jake, I'll take a look this evening. I love the fact that there's so many ways of doing this, but it makes decision-making an issue!


[quote name='ironside1966' post='919636' date='Aug 9 2010, 02:05 PM']Why pay good money for a desk for the price of a good desk you could get some great preamps.[/quote]

Fair question. I prefer to use manual controls, is that a fair enough answer! I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise, but as I don't particularly like using a mouse and keyboard, and just kinda understand desks, it seems the best approach.

C

[charic]

Which ones are you considering mate? Mackie stuff is an industry standard and I have nothing but praise for them in general because most importantly I have never had anything go wrong on me (Ever!) from them. The 1640 would be my ideal purely because of the 16 xlr inputs through a firewire is great. However I dont think theyre automated sliders. Not entirely sure though. Ive never found a HUGE advantage in automated sliders anyway if Im honest. But they may just be because of my mixing style. Not really done sound engineering for quite a while now tbh.

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='921524' date='Aug 11 2010, 12:48 PM']Which ones are you considering mate? Mackie stuff is an industry standard and I have nothing but praise for them in general because most importantly I have never had anything go wrong on me (Ever!) from them. The 1640 would be my ideal purely because of the 16 xlr inputs through a firewire is great. However I dont think theyre automated sliders. Not entirely sure though. Ive never found a HUGE advantage in automated sliders anyway if Im honest. But they may just be because of my mixing style. Not really done sound engineering for quite a while now tbh.[/quote]

Hiya mate
I was looking at buying the Onyx 1620i, and I guess the direct comparison I need is with the Onyx 1640i. What would be the real benefit of opting for the latter? Automation isn't a huge issue at all, compatibility and ease of use with Protools is (or will be).
Cheers
Chris

[charic]

Biggest difference that I know of is the 16 xlr inputs as opposed to 8 xlr inputs and then some stereo inputs.

16 identical channels is ideal imho I really struggle with the 8 that I have on my korg d888 when I want to record in a band situation.

[charic]

Theres also a difference in the firewire output the 1640 is 16x16 and the 1620 is 16x2. Not quite sure of the relevance mind. I know these feel like real quality btw, find a digivillage near you and have a fiddle to make sure mind

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='921546' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:05 PM']Biggest difference that I know of is the 16 xlr inputs as opposed to 8 xlr inputs and then some stereo inputs.

16 identical channels is ideal imho I really struggle with the 8 that I have on my korg d888 when I want to record in a band situation.[/quote]

Lovely, thanks, that's as I thought. I must admit I'm struggling with the dilemma of spending more on more I/Ps and then finding I only use eight of them recording the fairly sparse sound we have (although you can use a lot of tracks making something sound sparse!). Logic suggests I think ahead and don't limit myself, but then my drive for relative simplicity (and economy) says work around it.

I have to admit I'm not overly sure about the relevance of 16x2 and 16x16 firewire, which seems to be the other significant difference?

Chris

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='921556' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:13 PM']Theres also a difference in the firewire output the 1640 is 16x16 and the 1620 is 16x2. Not quite sure of the relevance mind. I know these feel like real quality btw, find a digivillage near you and have a fiddle to make sure mind [/quote]


[quote name='Beedster' post='921560' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:16 PM']I have to admit I'm not overly sure about the relevance of 16x2 and 16x16 firewire, which seems to be the other significant difference?[/quote]

LOL, glad it's not only me! Anyone else able to enlighten us?

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='921556' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:13 PM']I know these feel like real quality btw, find a digivillage near you and have a fiddle to make sure mind [/quote]

I phoned them and they don;t keep stock, which is annoying but understandable I guess. There's a few used ones around (and some 'B-stock' at really cheap prices on eBay, for example [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/B-Stock-Mackie-ONYX-1640-Premium-Analog-Mixer-/170524988438?cmd=ViewItem&pt=UK_Mixers&hash=item27b414d416#ht_2055wt_1137"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/B-Stock-Mackie-ONYX-...#ht_2055wt_1137[/url], which has been used at a trade fair and is offered with a one-year warranty), but I think that, along with the computer and software, this is too important a link in the chain to risk buying used (I meant to reply to your post above on this, reliability and warranty are indeed important issues)?

C

Edited August 11, 2010 by Beedster

[ShergoldSnickers]

[quote name='Beedster' post='921453' date='Aug 11 2010, 11:45 AM']....into this:

[url="http://www.dv247.com/configure/31"]http://www.dv247.com/configure/31[/url]

Which I think (hope) will give me sufficient capacity for my needs over the next few years, that is, starting from home and eventually moving into a dedicated space once we've found the right one.

I've a couple of questions about the above
.... The iMac is not really upgradable. I'm no expert on computers, so am at the mercy of those who are! Given its current performance (3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 3MB cache, 4GB DDR3 1066MHz SDRAM, 1TB Serial ATA HDD, Slot-load 8x SuperDrive, ATI Radeon HD 4670, 256MB Graphics, Bluetooth 2.1 & Airport Extreme, running Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard), is this going to be sufficient to do the job in the short-medium term (i.e., in the 3-5years I anticipate it will take before I look to buy another)?

Cheers

Chris[/quote]
Apple have just upgraded the iMac line-up, so it may be worth asking about a package that includes the newer models. So what's changed? Faster processor moving to the i3 from the Core 2 Duo and faster graphics processing.

I'd go go for the i5 processor model (quad core processor) in either the new model guise or at a reduced price if it's still the old range they are offering - if you can beat them down on price over this. Worth asking them if they would knock something off for an older model.

The quad core processor will give you not only more processing power, but also some future-proofing for advances in software. No matter how powerful a machine we buy, the application developers soon find a way to fill the headroom you thought you had. If you want to go the whole hog, there is an i7 processor iMac, but the i5 is a good choice for overall cost effectiveness. The 27" screen is absolutely gorgeous and on its own would cost a small fortune. You are going to be doing a lot of squinting at this screen - having a good one really makes a huge difference.

Upgradeability. I've asked numerous PC friends what they've upgraded on their machines within the lifetime of the machine. Very little. RAM is the most frequent answer - the iMac is upgradeable here. Hard disk drives - some have put internal drives in, most went for USB externals. Only one friend upgraded the graphics card.

So, I've really not missed any lack of upgradeability compared with my PC owning friends. If I was a serious gamer I might, but then I'd get a gaming console.

You'll get a year's warranty, but it is worth looking at getting the Applecare deal that extends this to three years for £139. I had to use this on my previous iMac and it was a no quibble deal. It got fixed and returned quickly with no fuss and no cost - pickup and delivery back all included.

[Beedster]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' post='921601' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:50 PM']Apple have just upgraded the iMac line-up, so it may be worth asking about a package that includes the newer models. So what's changed? Faster processor moving to the i3 from the Core 2 Duo and faster graphics processing.

I'd go go for the i5 processor model (quad core processor) in either the new model guise or at a reduced price if it's still the old range they are offering - if you can beat them down on price over this. Worth asking them if they would knock something off for an older model.

The quad core processor will give you not only more processing power, but also some future-proofing for advances in software. No matter how powerful a machine we buy, the application developers soon find a way to fill the headroom you thought you had. If you want to go the whole hog, there is an i7 processor iMac, but the i5 is a good choice for overall cost effectiveness. The 27" screen is absolutely gorgeous and on its own would cost a small fortune. You are going to be doing a lot of squinting at this screen - having a good one really makes a huge difference.

Upgradeability. I've asked numerous PC friends what they've upgraded on their machines within the lifetime of the machine. Very little. RAM is the most frequent answer - the iMac is upgradeable here. Hard disk drives - some have put internal drives in, most went for USB externals. Only one friend upgraded the graphics card.

So, I've really not missed any lack of upgradeability compared with my PC owning friends. If I was a serious gamer I might, but then I'd get a gaming console.

You'll get a year's warranty, but it is worth looking at getting the Applecare deal that extends this to three years for £139. I had to use this on my previous iMac and it was a no quibble deal. It got fixed and returned quickly with no fuss and no cost - pickup and delivery back all included.[/quote]

Thanks SS, good spot on the newer iMac models, I didn't realise DV247 are still offering the older ones. I'm certainly tempted to get the i5, and the 27" screen (you've picked the importance of that!). I'm increasingly aware that 25% of my budget could be gone on computer, software and desk, before I've looked at monitors, glass, mics, cables, acoustic treatments, and any building/infrastructure work, but I guess that's probably about right?

Do you think I should buy the computer directly from Mac or from DV247. Not much in the price, but there could be important differences in other issues I guess?

Chris

[charic]

[quote name='Beedster' post='921566' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:20 PM']I phoned them and they don;t keep stock, which is annoying but understandable I guess. There's a few used ones around (and some 'B-stock' at really cheap prices on eBay, for example [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/B-Stock-Mackie-ONYX-1640-Premium-Analog-Mixer-/170524988438?cmd=ViewItem&pt=UK_Mixers&hash=item27b414d416#ht_2055wt_1137"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/B-Stock-Mackie-ONYX-...#ht_2055wt_1137[/url], which has been used at a trade fair and is offered with a one-year warranty), but I think that, along with the computer and software, this is too important a link in the chain to risk buying used (I meant to reply to your post above on this, reliability and warranty are indeed important issues)?

C[/quote]

Digital Village offer a 4 year guarantee I believe. They will usually get it in for you to try out if you ask them too... Which branch are you contacting out of interest. Duncan at cambridge is brilliant

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='921624' date='Aug 11 2010, 02:10 PM']Digital Village offer a 4 year guarantee I believe. They will usually get it in for you to try out if you ask them too... Which branch are you contacting out of interest. Duncan at cambridge is brilliant[/quote]

That's good to know (although I don't think that's what I remember from the website so I'll check it out). I might well give Duncan a call - Cambridge is a bit of a hike from down here I'm afraid!

[ironside1966]

How good do you want your studio to be, 40 grand can get you some great kit, most of the suggestions are project studio stuff, Mackie makes great budget desks and you should be quite happy for many years with one. But think on in a couple of years time will you be happy or are you going to want I would say the best but a good desk can cost more than a house so let’s just say Pro studio quality.

[Beedster]

[quote name='ironside1966' post='921635' date='Aug 11 2010, 02:21 PM']How good do you want your studio to be, 40 grand can get you some great kit, most of the suggestions are project studio stuff, Mackie makes great budget desks and you should be quite happy for many years with one. But think on in a couple of years time will you be happy or are you going to want I would say the best but a good desk can cost more than a house so let’s just say Pro studio quality.[/quote]

Thanks mate, I want it to be good, but it's going to be an evolving process. I envisaged a £20k total for two reasons, firstly, it's what I think I can reasonably put into such a project without adversely affecting other areas of my life (and her ability to buy shoes), and it's a sum I can probably raise without paying interest at this point (I don't have a big salary). I want to be able to record myself, my band and a few other friends' bands competently and with some 'feeling' (so the physical environment of the recording areas is important), and I want the results to sound professional. We play on a mix of acoustic and electric instruments, and we tend to record live, so the acoustic dynamics of the space, the mics, and the listening environment/monitors will be very important, and could soak up a lot of the cash. I take your point re the gear above being project level, but this is a project, albeit one that I hope will grow over the years into something more. My main aim at present is to get gear at a level which will get me started on all fronts (performance sound quality, recording quality, playback quality), and allow me to develop as and when. I anticipate that I would be looking to upgrade the desk and the computer in 4-5 years, by which time I'd hope the space itself would be pretty perfect.

Out of interest, what desk would you recommend?

Cheers

Chris

[ShergoldSnickers]

[quote name='Beedster' post='921620' date='Aug 11 2010, 02:09 PM']Thanks SS, good spot on the newer iMac models, I didn't realise DV247 are still offering the older ones. I'm certainly tempted to get the i5, and the 27" screen (you've picked the importance of that!). I'm increasingly aware that 25% of my budget could be gone on computer, software and desk, before I've looked at monitors, glass, mics, cables, acoustic treatments, and any building/infrastructure work, but I guess that's probably about right?

Do you think I should buy the computer directly from Mac or from DV247. Not much in the price, but there could be important differences in other issues I guess?

Chris[/quote]
25% of your budget? Hmmmm. It is amazing what you can get away with. We did our last album in a smallish fairly dead rehearsal room, all live. All on a Korg D888 8 track digital recorder. We dumped the raw tracks into Garageband and edited things and mixed there. Really simple, really immediate and kept the dreaded 'Why are we still setting up after two hours?' syndrome at bay. Not really sure about the DAW package as a percentage of the overall costs, but it seems about right to me in context.

DV247 may be the better bet as you'll be able to build a relationship and hopefully get lots of recording specific questions answered. That's what I'd be aiming for...

[ironside1966]

[quote name='Beedster' post='921648' date='Aug 11 2010, 02:32 PM']Thanks mate, I want it to be good, but it's going to be an evolving process. I envisaged a £20k total for two reasons, firstly, it's what I think I can reasonably put into such a project without adversely affecting other areas of my life (and her ability to buy shoes), and it's a sum I can probably raise without paying interest at this point (I don't have a big salary). I want to be able to record myself, my band and a few other friends' bands competently and with some 'feeling' (so the physical environment of the recording areas is important), and I want the results to sound professional. We play on a mix of acoustic and electric instruments, and we tend to record live, so the acoustic dynamics of the space, the mics, and the listening environment/monitors will be very important, and could soak up a lot of the cash. I take your point re the gear above being project level, but this is a project, albeit one that I hope will grow over the years into something more. My main aim at present is to get gear at a level which will get me started on all fronts (performance sound quality, recording quality, playback quality), and allow me to develop as and when. I anticipate that I would be looking to upgrade the desk and the computer in 4-5 years, by which time I'd hope the space itself would be pretty perfect.

Out of interest, what desk would you recommend?

Cheers

Chris[/quote]


TL Audio M4 24 Tube Mixer Console
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/tl-audio-m4-24-tube-mixer-console--27771"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/tl-a...-console--27771[/url]
This is a lot on money but this boy go, s no where you will have something like that for keeps.
Also Toft Audio Designs ATB 16 or Audient ZEN16MPMF
I would personally use pre amps as there is less to play with just set the levels and your off, I have seen sessions where bands record them self’s and spend far too much time playing with the desk, if it sound wrong move the mic not fiddle with a desk. Whatever you go for you will get used to it.
FOCUSRITE ISA828 ISA 828

My gear is roughly at the level you are thinking of getting (project studio) I have been happy with it for a few years but the weakness in my studio is still the acoustics and my ability, even though I am a ex pro live sound engineer and on a second year Music tech Degree who gets all A s and firsts (I am not boasting just trying to make a point]

Edited August 11, 2010 by ironside1966

[Beedster]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' post='921669' date='Aug 11 2010, 03:03 PM']25% of your budget? Hmmmm. It is amazing what you can get away with. We did our last album in a smallish fairly dead rehearsal room, all live. All on a Korg D888 8 track digital recorder. We dumped the raw tracks into Garageband and edited things and mixed there. Really simple, really immediate and kept the dreaded 'Why are we still setting up after two hours?' syndrome at bay. Not really sure about the DAW package as a percentage of the overall costs, but it seems about right to me in context.

DV247 may be the better bet as you'll be able to build a relationship and hopefully get lots of recording specific questions answered. That's what I'd be aiming for... [/quote]

I agree, there's part of me that wishes I could stick to my old Zoom 8 channel recorder for this! Simplicity is a virtue for sure, but as Einstein said, everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler, and what worries me is that I might go for just a little too much simplicity at the technology end whilst perhaps spending too much time and money elsewhere.

DV247 it is, a good point


[quote name='ironside1966' post='921675' date='Aug 11 2010, 03:16 PM']TL Audio M4 24 Tube Mixer Console
[url="http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/tl-audio-m4-24-tube-mixer-console--27771"]http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/tl-a...-console--27771[/url]
This is a lot on money but this boy go, s no where you will have something like that for keeps.
Also Toft Audio Designs ATB 16 or Audient ZEN16MPMF
I would personally use pre amps as there is less to play with just set the levels and your off, I have seen sessions where bands record them self’s and spend far too much time playing with the desk, if it sound wrong move the mic not fiddle with a desk. Whatever you go for you will get used to it.
FOCUSRITE ISA828 ISA 828

My gear is roughly at the level you are thinking of getting (project studio) I have been happy with it for a few years but the weakness in my studio is still the acoustics and my ability, even though I am a ex pro live sound engineer and on a second year Music tech Degree who gets all A s and firsts (I am not boasting just trying to make a point][/quote]

Thanks, I'm definitely wanting a mixer at this stage, I just feel comfortable doing things that way, although it's perhaps the feeling that in a couple of years I might be wanting to go another way that's deterring me from spending too much as this stage! I think a reasonable spend on a mixer at this stage is up to £1500 with a view to either a serious upgrade once I have a fixed facility and the need fro such an upgrade has been demonstrated, or when I feel the need to do things another way.

I must admit I do still like the M-Audio [url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/m-audio-projectmix-i-o-control-surface-with-motorized-faders--30083"]http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/m-a...d-faders--30083[/url], which is perhaps cheap enough to take a hit on? How do you think it compares with the Mackie?

C

[mike257]

[quote name='Beedster' post='921560' date='Aug 11 2010, 01:16 PM']I have to admit I'm not overly sure about the relevance of 16x2 and 16x16 firewire, which seems to be the other significant difference?

Chris[/quote]

Hey Chris, sounds like a really fun project, it's got me thinking about giving my setup a long overdue overhaul!

The difference in the Firewire interface is this:

The 16x2 means you can send 16 channels in to your computer from the desk, but all that comes back is 2 channels, typically your final mixdown. You will have full individual control of channels when recording, but your final mix will still have to be done 'in the box' with the mouse.

The 16x16 means you have 16 channels in to the computer, and 16 channels coming back out. With this, you could record the full band, and then at mix time, treat the Mac like a tape machine and return all 16 channels to your desk individually for an analogue mixdown, sending the results back into the computer for final master. You could still apply all your insert effects in the box, and potentially route the aux sends back in to apply VST send effects, whilst keeping your actual mix in the analogue realm of your desk.

It's a big difference in the workflow - if you prefer mixing on faders and knobs, the 1640i might be worth the extra spend!

Mike

[Beedster]

[quote name='mike257' post='921847' date='Aug 11 2010, 06:11 PM']Hey Chris, sounds like a really fun project, it's got me thinking about giving my setup a long overdue overhaul!

The difference in the Firewire interface is this:

The 16x2 means you can send 16 channels in to your computer from the desk, but all that comes back is 2 channels, typically your final mixdown. You will have full individual control of channels when recording, but your final mix will still have to be done 'in the box' with the mouse.

The 16x16 means you have 16 channels in to the computer, and 16 channels coming back out. With this, you could record the full band, and then at mix time, treat the Mac like a tape machine and return all 16 channels to your desk individually for an analogue mixdown, sending the results back into the computer for final master. You could still apply all your insert effects in the box, and potentially route the aux sends back in to apply VST send effects, whilst keeping your actual mix in the analogue realm of your desk.

It's a big difference in the workflow - if you prefer mixing on faders and knobs, the 1640i might be worth the extra spend!

Mike[/quote]

Hi Mike

Many thanks, I assumed it was something like that and yes, I do prefer that approach. How do you think the M-Audio box above (which, if I'm correct, can be run as a 16 channel mixer with 14x18 firewire) compares with the Mackie 1640i?

In other words.........., FIGHT

[url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/m-audio-projectmix-plus--m-powered-pro-tools-8--46105"]http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/m-a...-tools-8--46105[/url] v. [url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/mackie-onyx-1640i-and-avid-m-powered-pro-tools--74872"]http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/mac...ro-tools--74872[/url]

C

Edited August 11, 2010 by Beedster

[charic]

My pick would be the mackie for definate. Id suggest getting both ionto store. Talking them both through. Feeling for quality etc.

[mike257]

I haven't got experience of using the M-Audio stuff, but looking at the specs, the Mackie has a win with the number of preamps on board - the M-Audio only gives you 8 inputs unless you also pick up some kind of preamp with an ADAT output (The Behringer ADA-8000 mentioned further up is the absolute cheapest option, or something like a Focusrite Octopre would be a snazzier alternative).

With the M-Audio, the mixing experience will be a middle ground between desk and computer - it'll be less 'hands-on' than the Mackie as you've only got 8 faders and a bank of assignable knobs, so there's still a fair amount of button/mouse pushing to do, but you've got the motorised faders, and total recall and repeatability of your mixdowns. You won't have the same control over tone shaping when tracking, because you're missing the Mackie's channel strips, but the integration with your Mac is tighter, and you'll have the hardware transport controls etc.

The Mackie is going to give you (assuming you're only running 16 channels) a complete analogue mix experience, but you are stepping away from some of the functionality in the computer to do it (automation/recall/processing). Also, it's worth bearing in mind that you're adding an extra round of conversion, digital to analogue and back again, in taking the mix out of the box, so you're losing a certain amount of quality each time. I don't know how good the convertors are in the Mackie desk, but it will impact on the sound.

There's pros and cons both ways, I guess it depends on your preferred way of working, but the M-Audio seems a decent middle ground between old-school and computer-based for the mixing - with the £300ish price difference you could shop around for a used pre-amp and get your full 16 channels input.

Of course, this is all in my humble opinion, and I haven't used the kit in question. If you can get to a dealer and have a play with the M-Audio control surface, you'll get a better feel for how the DAW integration will help you out, and how much you'll miss all those knobs!

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='921862' date='Aug 11 2010, 06:35 PM']My pick would be the mackie for definate. Id suggest getting both ionto store. Talking them both through. Feeling for quality etc.[/quote]


[quote name='mike257' post='921868' date='Aug 11 2010, 06:43 PM']I haven't got experience of using the M-Audio stuff, but looking at the specs, the Mackie has a win with the number of preamps on board - the M-Audio only gives you 8 inputs unless you also pick up some kind of preamp with an ADAT output (The Behringer ADA-8000 mentioned further up is the absolute cheapest option, or something like a Focusrite Octopre would be a snazzier alternative).

With the M-Audio, the mixing experience will be a middle ground between desk and computer - it'll be less 'hands-on' than the Mackie as you've only got 8 faders and a bank of assignable knobs, so there's still a fair amount of button/mouse pushing to do, but you've got the motorised faders, and total recall and repeatability of your mixdowns. You won't have the same control over tone shaping when tracking, because you're missing the Mackie's channel strips, but the integration with your Mac is tighter, and you'll have the hardware transport controls etc.

The Mackie is going to give you (assuming you're only running 16 channels) a complete analogue mix experience, but you are stepping away from some of the functionality in the computer to do it (automation/recall/processing). Also, it's worth bearing in mind that you're adding an extra round of conversion, digital to analogue and back again, in taking the mix out of the box, so you're losing a certain amount of quality each time. I don't know how good the convertors are in the Mackie desk, but it will impact on the sound.

There's pros and cons both ways, I guess it depends on your preferred way of working, but the M-Audio seems a decent middle ground between old-school and computer-based for the mixing - with the £300ish price difference you could shop around for a used pre-amp and get your full 16 channels input.

Of course, this is all in my humble opinion, and I haven't used the kit in question. If you can get to a dealer and have a play with the M-Audio control surface, you'll get a better feel for how the DAW integration will help you out, and how much you'll miss all those knobs![/quote]

Thanks again guys. Yep, the Mackie gets my instinctive vote, but there's this little part of me that thinks that the M-Audio represents the future of mechanical/IT recording integration whilst the Mackie is kinda rooted in the past, and that on that basis I should focus my efforts on the M-Audio? If it was a genuine 16 track the M-Audio would be a no-brainer to be honest, but I have an instinctive reluctance to run boxes into more boxes (probably a legacy of my education in analogue and therefore an anachronism in the digital age), but this pushes me more towards the Mackie.

I need a drink! Or I need M-Audio to introduce a 16 channel (or Mackie to get a little more Pro Tools friendly interface)!

Off to the pub for some serious thought!

C