If you specifically want a mixer then go for something in the Onyx i series or the Presonus StudioLive or the Allen Heath ZED R16. The Mackie CFX line is not as good as the Onyx line. The VLZ3 is decent enough but the preamps in my opinion are not as good as the Onyx series.

The monitors are going to be just studio monitors or are you wanting gig speakers? The two will not be the same.

Thanks for you reply

The presonus studiolive and the allen heath zed r16 are too expensive for me at the moment.
The monitors are going to be mainly studio monitors. Exist any speaker that can be usable both for studio and gig?

No. Studio monitors have a completely different design purpose. KRK makes some studio monitors that are decent. Mackie makes some powered monitors for clubs etc.

ok, thank you
I'll check the KRK's.
Another question. What about the Alesis multimix firewire 16? It's cheaper than the onyx but is much worse?

The Alesis is a POS.

Excuse my ignorance but.. what is a POS? It's a control surface? Does it mean it can not be usable without a computer?
thanks

piece of .....

jeje ok, I'm not anglophone, thanks

All in one devices such as those mixers with internal analog to digital converters and a computer output are certainly well thought out, integrated devices. Sort of like a large Recreational Vehicle Motor Home that come in various sizes. As compared to having a pickup truck towing a Recreational Vehicle Trailer.

Personally, I prefer to have external analog to digital converters to the computer. And separate consoles/mixers/preamps for their unique quality sound. Being able to use the same computer audio interface with different mixers/consoles/preamps will give you a wider choice of colors from the same line level analog to digital computer audio interfaces. So it gives you a better baseline to compare different audio devices by keeping your analog to digital computer audio interface consistent or the same. And this can also be a more economical way to go and to grow. You can increase your versatility by replacing and/or adding on to an existing mixer. Whereas, investing in a better analog to digital converter may improve sound quality but not your versatility. A difficult decision for many to say the least. But then again, some of this is based upon technical knowledge, proficiency & experience. So sometimes, the smart thing to do is remember that LESS IS MORE. Which may point you to one of those integrated mixers with a computer audio interface built-in to depending upon your technical knowledge & proficiency.

I am practically the most unpractical, practical engineer.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Also make sure if the model of Onyx you are looking at records individual tracks/channels versus just the main fader.

I'm absolutely new at audio recording, so my technical knowledge, proficiency & experience are null. I'm not thinking to mount a recording studio, so I'm not sure that my setup will grow up...

I've checked the Onyx: 16x2 FireWire allows for simultaneous streaming of all channels, auxes and master L/R

Thanks for your comments

That is true for the 1640i, but I do not believe that is true for the 820i. The 820i only records the main fader. Page 7 of the 820i manual states this.

This brings up a good point. Download and read the manuals of any gear you are thinking about purchasing. This can save a lot of wasted money on things that can't do what you want them to do.

Back in the day before the Internet, I would go to my professional equipment supplier and ask if they could open one of the boxes so I could read the manual first. Of course, I also knew what I wanted and the specifications were the last thing I would look at. That's because I never purchased a piece of equipment solely based upon its specifications. That's particularly because if it was a piece of professional equipment, I would expect it to sound like a piece of professional equipment. And better looking specifications didn't mean it would sound better.

I enjoy combining the worst with the best to come up with something professionally good.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Thanks for the advice. I was looking at the 1220i manual: Flexible FireWire routing with up to 12 channels pre/post EQ, aux sends and master L/R routable to computer which means I can record all channels separately, no?
I can't look at technical specs because I don't know which values are better or worse

Yes, the 1220i will record all 12 individual sticks plus L-R main fader.

Ok, thanks for all replies.
I think I have decided to buy an onyx 1220i. I will tell you something about it.

And about microphone, wich is best for vocals? I'm not a singer and I will use it for pop-rock and jazz music:
AKG D5, Shure SM58 or Sennheiser E840?

About vocals, I think the best thing you could do is get a descent condenser mic, pop filter screen and set up a vocal booth. Our vocals always sounded bad until we got a rode ntk condenser. We closed off a corner of the carpeted room by wedging a sheet of hard foam insulation in a corner. Creating a dead space and taking away room sound is probably more important with vocals than which mic you use.

The two most widely used microphones for vocals are both dynamic mics and not condenser. Shure SM58 and the Electrovoice RE20. The runners up especially for live use are all dynamic mics too. Condensers are sometimes used in a studio but that is more dependent on the room, the voice, and the style of music.

Sorry, just thought i'd share my experience what worked for us.

It isn't a problem. It's just a condenser frequently causes more problems than it fixes unless it is in specific instances. By the time one shelf eqs the average condenser it would be better to start with an SM58. For commercial voice overs etc there is much more flexibility to tailor things because it isn't sitting in a mix.

For hip hop the king of the heap is an SM7b

I guess i just always saw the 58's for p.a.'s and the stage, and u87's in the vocal booth and drew my own conclusions. Never even tried to use a 58 to record vocals. The condenser's are harder to set up right. That sm7b does look nice. It's a bit more than a crappy interface ;) But good mic's and placement seem to be the most important.

One has to be careful of drawing conclusions from music videos. Many times thats just for show. Other times a singer might insist on a mic and the engineer will throw up an additional but just use the one. What the singer doesn't know won't hurt them. Also even in a studio the 58 had been used on more pop vocal tracks than any other mic. If you talk about classical music then the approach changes somewhat and you are more likely to see a U87 or ribbon but even then a trusty SM58 is not without value.

I prefer SM58 for most vocals. Occasionally, I may use a condenser, I may use a ribbon. When I want something better than the SM58, I'll grab a Beta 58. Sometimes an SM 7, (original issue). But that's really close to a SM58. People argue that with me but if you know where the capsule is in the 7, it doesn't matter if your lips are touching the foam. You are still better than 1 1/2 inches from the capsule. With the 58, you are within 1/4 inch of the capsule which certainly produces a different sound. Match the diaphragms up in the same plane, no bass roll off, presence switch on, on the SM 7 and you have a 58 at 3 times the price. One of the things I do recommend is a foam pop filter on top of the SM58. Not one of those nylons stocking thingies, unless they smell good. The SM 7, was perfect on Michael Jackson. It's been perfect for Steve Tyler of Aerosmith & Bono of U2, should be fine for you also. You use a condenser microphone when you want that kind of sound. It certainly doesn't work with everybody. It might sound good on everybody but frequently you'll have problems placing them in the mix where you want them. In the studio, we've done shootouts with SM58's against Neumann U 87's and found we could virtually interchange with those and still achieve a similar quality of sound to our original release 87's. No fooling. So during tracking sessions, where we may have wanted a 87, we only had 2 of those and we would just start using 58's. They really are one of the worlds greatest recording microphones and one of the best bangs for the buck. Hard to believe a $100 microphone can compare to a $3300 microphone, but it does. I know that seems nearly unbelievable. And it gets better yet when you feed it into really nice preamps like Neve, API's but hey, even on a Mackie.

I should be working for SHURE?
Mx. Remy Ann David

Ok I see that the sm58 is a good microphone and not expensive, I'll take one. Thanks for your explanations and experiences