you had me at hello......

Sounds like quite the dilemma, do you already have some sweet sounding preamps?

I don't. I figured that the hd192 would have reasonably good ones.
JJ

I guess with that question posed, would it be better to go with a 24io and a couple good pre-ams? I'm basically thinking around a total of $5k whichever ways I would go.
JJ

:D

Greetings JJ,

The HD192 is a good unit but I thought I'd point out that it doesn't have any mic preamps - the XLR connectors are line level.

24io or hd192

It's a big fat world of recording equipment, some versatile mics and preamps are usually the first links in your recording chain those represent at least 50% of what you hear after you capture the sound. If you are going to do your mix downs on a computer I would find out where in my chain is the conversion between analog and digital. That's where you either get a fat juicy steak or hamburger. Enjoy your lunch!!!!

Spy wrote: The HD192 is a good unit but I thought I'd point out that it doesn't have any mic preamps - the XLR connectors are line level.

Oh, thank you...
I had forgotten that xlr doesn't always mean mic-pre. I guess the hd192 is pointless, then, if I'd have to get separate pre's or a mixer. I'd just save space and money and go with the 24io.
So, then that poses a new comparison to mixer vs. rack pre. What are the advantages to using a mixer for rough mix/record vs. using the pc for rough mixing/record?
JJ

Well...
I've been looking and looking and if I weren't going with a console, then I'm more heavily considering 1 or 2 896HD's. All 12 channels are mic pre's and it would be ready for the road with a laptop, which is a big plus.
Now, another wrench has been introduced. What about just getting a Tascam dm-24 or dm-3200? In both instances, it can connect directly with firewire. I would prefer 24 mic pre's, but 16 will suffice, I'm sure.
Will this do like 4-5 different headphone sends like a normal mixer will? I didn't see the normal sub/aux/vca faders and controls, although it may just be because that's done in software, now. I saw 4 1/4" jacks called "assignable sends". I would assume that's what I'm thinking of, but I'm not sure.
JJ

Don't forget, just because a soundcard/interface has "preamps" doesn't mean they are actually "good." Your recordings will never sound any better than your preamps (and mics) will allow.

You mention using a mixer for rough mixes; what are you planning on using to do the actual mix: in the box, or on an analog mixer?

I understand that the pres on a mixer or interface aren't going to be of the same quality as a $5000 tube or something, but I figure that, as in most things, you can get 75%-90% of the quality with 1/2 the price. It's that last 15% that you pay for. Of course, the quality of the mic would come into play as well as the quality of the singing/playing.
I don't plan on cutting Best Buy cds, but maybe do some demos and do a lot of speaking engagements. Also, I figure there will be some mastering with files that are already recorded, therefore the quality of the pres wouldn't be an issue.
As far as mixing is concerned, I wasn't quite sure the steps if someone wanted to come in to cut a demo, let's say. I assumed that you would record a rough copy, where the whole band had a good cut of a song, that they could walk away with. From talking to a studio friend of mine, I gather that they actually walk away with the mastered product. I figured that you might spend a couple of days in mastering, but I guess that's not the case. You just overdub a couple parts, mixdown, etc...
JJ

Would it be worth considering a Mackie Onyx board with the Firewire option? Up to 16 channels of decent mic preamps that plugs direct to your PC or laptop for recording.

The Onyx was actually my very first idea, but I just keep hearing people talk about how crappy mackies really sound. I know the 24x8's are supposed to be the most common board or something, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's very good. That's the main reason why I was looking at the tascams.
JJ

doubleJ wrote: The Onyx was actually my very first idea, but I just keep hearing people talk about how crappy mackies really sound. I know the 24x8's are supposed to be the most common board or something, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's very good. That's the main reason why I was looking at the tascams.
JJ

I don't know much about these mackies, because I've never used one, but I know that some studios will use only Mackie. The talk I hear is that they are durable, and sound fantastic. The sound school near me, for instance, will only use mackie mixers.

I'd be interested to hear some input from people here who have worked with mackie mixers before; in regards to sound quality, pre's, etc...

The first hand reports I've heard from the Onyx units is they're much improved over the VLZ generation.

It also depends on what you're doing. When recording with Mackies I've always pulled the signal out of the inserts. The complaints folks have with Mackies is the EQ and lack of overhead in the summing bus - not an issue the way I used them.

The preamps aren't grand, but I've made a number of recordings and did not have any complaints. I now use an A&H Mixwizard. The sound of the preamps is very similar, but the A&H do a little better with transient sounds and I like the EQs better. I also like the direct outs on every channel.

Also - everything I'm saying here about Mackies is regarding the VLZ or VLZ pro models. I have not used an ONYX. If I am to believe what I've heard, the ONYX mixers are NOT comparable to the VLZs - they are significantly better.

If the onyx has firewire out, why would having direct outs matter, for interfacing to the pc? Is the firewire post-fade?
JJ

doubleJ wrote: If the onyx has firewire out, why would having direct outs matter, for interfacing to the pc? Is the firewire post-fade?
JJ

No, the firewire out's are not post-fader. They are post gain, but pre everything else. This is handy if you are going to do a lot of live recording and FOH at the same time. For a recording console though, it doesn't seem to be the best thing ever. For instance, you cannot insert any effects (comp, eq, etc...) that would be Firewired to your DAW because the channel inserts are AFTER the firewire outs. Also, you cannot use the channel strip EQ on your recorded tracks, only while mixing FOH. Really, the Onyx is a small format live sound mixer that happens to track the raw signal to a DAW via Firewire.

There is one workaround. You could, through patching, send the signal (with the effect on the channel insert) to another channel and then the Firewire outs would pick it up, but if you need 8 channels with effects/eq (outboard) then you've just used up all of your 16 channels.

Honestly, that's how I figured everything worked. Originally, I assumed that you did a rough mix that people could take home with them. Then you did your mastering from the raw tracks, doing compression/effects/etc... on the computer.
It's still kind of a toss-up. I really like the space saving advantage of not having a console. In that respect, having something like the motu 896 is really appealing. On the other hand, it is nice to be able to have your hands on the faders. Honestly, I've even considered a motu and the tascam 24-channel daw controller. But, at that point, why not just have a mixer?
Hehehe...
JJ

doubleJ wrote: Honestly, that's how I figured everything worked. Originally, I assumed that you did a rough mix that people could take home with them. Then you did your mastering from the raw tracks, doing compression/effects/etc... on the computer.

JJ

I hate to be a nit pick, but you seem to be confusing mixing with mastering. The part where you take the raw tracks, apply compression/eq/effects/adjust individual channel volumes is just plain ole "mixing," typically mixing down to a single stereo channel to be specific. Mastering is where you take your stereo mixdown and give it to the engineer/wizard who makes it sound pretty, punchy, and clear. :wink:

Oh...
I figured mastering would be making each track sound its best, then mixing down and doing any last bits to the mixdown. I guess in a live scenario, all that would be mixing. I thought studio would be different. Mind you that I have absolutely no studio experience. I've done foh many times, so I kind of think in terms of that, a lot.
JJ

doubleJ wrote: If the onyx has firewire out, why would having direct outs matter, for interfacing to the pc? Is the firewire post-fade?
JJ

Direct outs would not be significant in the Onyx. At the time I bought the A&H, the Onyx was not an option. I record with a 24i, so the direct outs are real handy.

In looking at this stuff, I came to a realization that what I want simply isn't made. Seriously though, how hard can it be for a company to make a 2u interface with 12 mic-pre's? You get 12 xlr, adat optical, coax, and aes i/o. You would have a complete 24 i/o and you could mark it for $2k. Give it 15 segment meters on the front and you're golden. Make it firewire and expandable to 96 channels. Of course, you'd want the analogs to be 24/192 and the digitals to have independant src.
But can that really be that hard to do, or is there just no market for it?
With that being said, I just realized that the 896hd that I was looking at is 8 mic-pre's. Is it twice as good as a firepod? It has 8 mic-pre's, too, for nearly 1/2 the price. Plus, it's 1u. So, it doesn't have the meters. Oh, well.
Now on to the onyx. What in the world was mackie thinking when they made onyx foh mixers without a firewire option? If you could hook the 2480 to a pc, then that would pretty well take care of things. It's just one little slot.
JJ

How 'bout a pair of these:
http://

I hadn't really thought about 8 channel mic pre's, although it doesn't really seem that beneficial, for the price. If an 8 channel with firewire was $500, then it would seem better. The question would be, though, would a $1000, 8 channel, be any better than an 896hd or an onyx?
JJ