If you're only using those two mics, to capture the whole band and record from the master (stereo) bus of the Soundcraft. I would get me a Sound Forge 6.0 or 7.0 and Echo Layla 24/96 audiocard.
Both because you're not using the onboard M-Box micpre's and the Layla 96k conversion, should be smoother than the M-Box's.
The M-box is plagued with latency and does not excell at anything (suposed to have nice, uncolored micpre's though), its not a realtime multitracker.
The classical music recording world, relys on fewer channels and higher sample rates than the pop/rock world does(up until now anyway).
Just my view on it :w:

Thanks for the reply. It seems the MOTU 828 mkII would be a better option than the Echo Layla would be..?

I'm still pretty comfortable with getting the 2 channel M-Box. At first I'll only be recording stereo but with a mixer I'll be able to add more mics too. It's in my price range. Eventually, I may upgrade to the 002 rack or the motu 828..

I'm concerned about the M-Box latency you describe though. Anyone else experience this?

Well you dont have to worry about the M-Box's latncy, if you're only going to be working with 2 channels, recorded simultaniencly(is this correct spelling).
This is, maybe a good option, the M-Box that is. But then I would skip the Soundcraft, so as to have as few components in the chain as possible.
Just out of curiousitty, why would the Motu be a better solution than the Layla?

Good point about keeping the mixer out of the chain, I figured that way though I could outgrow two mics quicker...also, I don't want to rely on the M-Box micpre's either.

As far as the MOTU v. Layla, I've had my eye on the MOTU for a while, I just don't have the cash to get it at this moment. I just noticed that for the price of the Layla, I may as well just get the MOTU I wanted in the first place! :)