Define "good"....

It's a budget-oriented piece of gear.... it may be usable for its intended market, but it's not going to put Neve or API out of business anytime soon!

Here's another way to look at this. I have some of the finest equipment ever made for the recording industry. At the same time, I'm rather envious of folks like yourself. The equipment and software available today blows away anything that was designed for the mid-level market just a few years ago. Remember it takes money to make money. But it doesn't take much to make music. You have to tailor your recording and mixing requirements to your budget and to who you're going to try to sell it to? For home use personal enjoyment anything will work well. If ya know how to use it. Then it comes down to recording your friends bands for a couple of bucks? You might need to make a more worthy investment? You're talking about low-end equipment to begin with. And it's all quite fine, quite good as was said for its intended purpose. You cannot drive your car from California to Hawaii, usually. Of course we know some that can. But at what price? Not just money but personal injury and the possibility of death the good possibility of death the most likely possibility of death. So are ya going to the moon or are you going to McDonald's up at the corner? One requires rocket propulsion. The other one gives you... rocket propulsion.

But here's the good news. The sonic integrity of evenness new low-end stuff is far more than adequate to make very good sounding reasonable rock 'n roll recordings with. Want to record that Verdi Requiem? You might not want to use that equipment? Great for rock 'n roll however. You can even use it for Christian music. I promise I won't tell the devil what you're doing with it. That sounds backwards? Won't tell the devil?? Well maybe? Anyhow it's usable and 100% adequate for the enthusiastic semi pro home studio. I've made recordings with that stuff. I put those recordings right next to other recordings I had the $10,000 stuff on. Put them together side by side in the documentary filmed for television and you can't hear the difference. Even though I can. It really makes no difference. Because the equipment works and that's all you need it to do. As mentioned it won't exactly sound like my Neve & API stuff but it does when I'm engineering on it. That's why ya can hardly tell the difference between the two different recordings of the same person. And guess what? No matter how good the equipment might be or how poor it might be, I'm still only using SHURE SM & Beta 58's/57's and that's about it. Love them. First picks. Can't live without them. Keep a leaking and keep on tweaking. I figure I'm ready for a Timex out?

I've been known to purchase equipment for which I really don't give a damn what the printed specifications might be? I already know what is inside making it work. And the cheap stuff uses chips. Even the expensive stuff uses chips. And they both use the same chips. So why is one $250,000 and the other one is $250? One is just bigger than the other. Bigger you understand what that means? Like in more. But they all have those chip like sounds. Some folks insist on tubes from the bygone era. I prefer transistorized circuits designed in the 1960s-80s and that's about it. Though I also would work daily on state-of-the-art $250,000 digital consoles and then happily use a Barringer six input, PA mixer head amplifier to record my friend and that sounds every bit as nice as the recordings I did with her with my $150,000 investment in only the really good stuff. Ya know the really really good stuff. The stuff I could never afford. Just got real real lucky as I saved some money to chase my dreams and career goals. Doesn't matter if you use it right. It's going to be streamed on the Internet isn't it? And did anyone provide you with a $30,000 upfront contract? Right. None of us. Nothing to worry about then.

I have selected some of my equipment purchases based solely upon what I needed the gizmo mixer/console thingy to do. The ones with chips I know what they sound like. They sound like chips. Perfectly good. Can't push'em. Don't top out, on the levels. Some chips popular in the late 1970s and beyond have a certain classic sound about them. Some of the newer chips produced today I think, have a lot more zing to them. So do you want Xing? Or do you want classic? And that's just the chips. That I decide how many inputs and outputs and what kind of capabilities I must have. If it is low-cost industrial proconsumer? Fine. I know what will work for me. It will pass audio and I will be able to do my job. Sonic quality and integrity? It will sound like any other $600-$250,000 similar piece of equipment. That may have been a little bit misleading a figure? Yes $600 up to $250,000 will sound the same in professional hands. But we all know that it doesn't sound the same. See that's the cool thing about being in the audio engineers club. You get to tell everybody what sounds better than what Joey thinks sounds better who thinks they know what Madeleine thinks sounds better and ya get a pie in the face of 22 divided by seven. Or was it the other way around? I forget? Two pi R. squared? I remember something about that? But that really doesn't change my engineering any. It won't change yours either.

Go for it.
Mx. Remy Ann David

cheers man thank-you for the info ha-ha, much appreciated!..:)

I'd rather put more money on good Control room studio monitor than on headphone system. Musician will still be able to play a great performance even if what they hear is not so great, as long as they know it'll sound good on the track. My priority is always the quality of the end product first. Then if I get extra money, I think about better headphones and more confortable chairs etc... ;)

Hello ppl, i wonder if any of you can help me? i was thinking about getting the ([[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.behringe…"]Behringer[/]="http://www.behringe…"]Behringer[/] minimon800) mainly for the talk-back feature on it)

I can't speak for anyone else here of course.....but I would never, not in a million years, buy a console "mainly for the talk-back feature"...

Donny,
it's a headphone Amp not a console ;) But your right, we can't buy because one feature, it must suit our needs ; the fonctionnality and quality we can afford at that time...

DonnyThompson, post: 401689 wrote: I can't speak for anyone else here of course.....but I would never, not in a million years, buy a console "mainly for the talk-back feature"...

Hey Donny thanx for the reply)...its not (expensive) and it would also let me connect other stuff too if need be..:)

pcrecord, post: 401694 wrote: Donny,
it's a headphone Amp not a console ;) But your right, we can't buy because one feature, it must suit our needs ; the fonctionnality and quality we can afford at that time...

Hey pcrecord thanx for the reply much appreciated) it's a mixer matrix with talkback ect...just wanted to know what it woud be like running other equipment through it monitors ect.. for what it does it's very cheap, even if it was just for the talkback function..:)

you're not likely to get any type of a serious response here (or anywhere else for that matter) in respect to anything made by Beerslinger. i googled the piece you mention and it seems to be just fine for what you want. any product at this price range is going to sound the same as other similar products. the difference will be in features, connectivity and functions. so just look for something that suits your needs the best.

bottom line is it's so cheap you are not going to get hurt no matter what the outcome is ... i find most people who get into recording at the bottom end of the scale will do a few projects and then put the gear in the closet or sell it on CraigsList. there's an abundance of this stuff there. before you purchase new, you should check the CL listings in your area .. you might find one for half what you would expect to pay for it new.

Kurt Foster, post: 401713 wrote: you're not likely to get any type of a serious response here (or anywhere else for that matter) in respect to anything made by Beerslinger. i googled the piece you mention and it seems to be just fine for what you want. any product at this price range is going to sound the same as other similar products. the difference will be in features, connectivity and functions. so just look for something that suits your needs the best.

bottom line is it's so cheap you are not going to get hurt no matter what the outcome is ... i find most people who get into recording at the bottom end of the scale will do a few projects and then put the gear in the closet or sell it on CraigsList. there's an abundance of this stuff there. before you purchase new, you should check the CL listings in your area .. you might find one for half what you would expect to pay for it new.

Hey Kurt thanx for the reply much appreciated)...ha-ha, yeah i know what you mean, ive never bought anything Behringer before and didnt really want to ha-ha, but for the price it seems pretty cool,...but then again ive also got a little Tascam 414/ mixer that i could use for talkback ect..coming from my main mixer, and using a 58 mic and a set of headphones plugged into it)...that's another option i guess?.. cheaper still ha-ha..:)

if you have an extra channel on your main mixer (as you call it) just plug a cheapo mic into it and route it to the phones aux and mute the main output to the tracks ... turn it on and off as needed. just be careful to have it muted to the phones when tracking so the monitors don't bleed into the phone mix and the talent doesn't hear you when you say things like "man, they suck!."

Kurt Foster, post: 401736 wrote: if you have an extra channel on your main mixer (as you call it) just plug a cheapo mic into it and route it to the phones aux and mute the main output to the tracks ... turn it on and off as needed. just be careful to have it muted to the phones when tracking so the monitors don't bleed into the phone mix and the talent doesn't hear you when you say things like "man, they suck!."

Ha-ha,..i was thinking of taking the outputs from my BR unit and then running them into the aux inputs on the Tascam and using the Tascam's mic input and headphones for talkback ect..think that should work?...:)

I'm just wondering how big your set up really is. Do you really need a talkback? On that type of budget most people record and track in the same room. There's nothing at all wrong with that. I personally try to keep things as simple as possible. Put that extra change into a piggy bank and save up for a new mic/preamp/amp/plugin.

hueseph, post: 401742 wrote: I'm just wondering how big your set up really is. Do you really need a talkback? On that type of budget most people record and track in the same room. There's nothing at all wrong with that. I personally try to keep things as simple as possible. Put that extra change into a piggy bank and save up for a new mic/preamp/amp/plugin.

Hey hueseph, thanx for the reply)..it's not a massive set-up, but i can track in a separate room, and the talent singing in another if need be...that way i can turn my monitors up a little bit more without getting feedback, plus i don't have to wear headphones ha-ha!..:)

No, No, No

This device tries to be a monitor controller, a headphone system, & a talkback station. Let's take them one at a time.

Monitor controller -
There seems to be no nice way to operate this thing with calibration. Although it is really nice to have a detented control with 1 dB calibrations, that isn't completely necessary. I just wish there was some nicer artwork. You are limited to using one of those breaks in the markings as a reference and measuring where the other breaks come out. That's awkward. There are a large number of fairly inexpensive home audio devices that do a reasonable job of this. Why couldn't Behringer?

Headphone distribution -
I may be wrong on this (I hope I am!) but it looks to me like everyone hears the same thing. You don't want that. I use 6 channels of monitoring in my fairly simple system..... a stereo loudspeaker pair for the control room, one channel of lead vocalist ISO, one channel of lead vocalist guide/click track, one channel of overall mono mix for everyone else, and one channel is spare - I can use it for anyone who needs a special ISO like a guitarist doing DI who needs to hear what effects I am putting on him with my Eleven R. I create those 2 loudspeaker and 4 headphone feeds in my DAW. I have 8 boxes with two faders each for the talent to use to adjust their own levels from the feeds that I route to them. The MON800 box doesn't even begin to address my fairly simple system. I can't imagine working with the talent hearing the same thing as the producer/engineer.

Talkback -
I guess this box is barely ok with this, but it could be much better. For starters, how about a short gooseneck for the microphone? Also the talkback is going to suffer from the lack of headphone distribution. You can create a large amount of feeds in your DAW, only limited to how many DACs you have in your interface, but they all are useless to you because this box will bottleneck you. You will end up talking to everyone at once. It would have been nice to have at least 2 crosspoints, one for SA and another for the lead ISO. Also I assume there is no hope of interlocking this thing with a recording GPI to lock out SA when you are recording. (see footnote)

My recommendations: save your money for something nicer or even better, build something yourself.

FOOTNOTE: If you want to play with interlocking without spending the big money for something like an Avid Sync I/O, check out the Punchlight relay switchbox. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.punchlig…"]News | Punchlight[/]="http://www.punchlig…"]News | Punchlight[/]