| Author
|
audio interface or a smaller one and a mixer?
|
JohnnyBGood
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
37
Posted : Aug 28, 2008 12:16:29
|
Hello everyone, I'm not new to this site but this is my first post here.
I'm building my home studio and ran across the following dillema:
is it better to buy a "light weight" audio interface (thought about presonus firebox) and a separate mixer (soundcraft compact10), or would an interface with more I/Os (firestudio project, for example) and a software mixer be better?
the firestudio project is of course a better card with better freq response and lower jitter...
help please? |
|
|
Medea
Aedem/Medea
Started Topics :
127
Posts :
1132
Posted : Aug 28, 2008 12:30
|
I would go for soundcard with big amount of inputs.
Less commutation - less quality loss when recording from analog sources, and less hassle with cables.
Also, you get all benefits of the realtime multi-channel recording.
Although, mixer is a handy thing for use without computer. http://soundcloud.com/aedem |
|
|
|
sly
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
183
Posted : Aug 28, 2008 12:42
|
firestudio is surely nice.
but it depends how profesional your studio will be and what kind of hardware you're using...
and what do you mean with software mixer? daw's already have mixers or do you mean a controller (but this has not much to do with audio interface)?
i have a mixer and interface in one. for my purposes it's good. simple but enough for my synth and some audio inputs...
if you are not sure, soundcard comes first. mixer without a good interface you can forget. but it's really about the amount of synths and money you have. |
|
|
|
piko_bianko
Oxya
Started Topics :
57
Posts :
974
Posted : Aug 28, 2008 12:46
|
BUT.. first of all visit presonus forums to be sure if u can use one with your system
firestudio is really incompatible with lots of stuff (not only fw cards)
u can't imagine!
i had troubles in the commercial studio for about 3 months, and had to moderate my whole system according to firestudio's functionality...
but.. worths it
extreme |
|
|
|
vegetal
Vegetal/Peacespect
Started Topics :
19
Posts :
1055
Posted : Aug 28, 2008 13:09
|
|
Nerdkiller
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
71
Posted : Nov 7, 2008 18:55
|
I have the same issue as he had.
I have recently bought a novation remote 61 sl and I want to put my m-audio ozonic and korg padkontrol away.
Mostly I use my notebook and the controller to build my tracks at home. Not going to put my gear on the road until I solve a few things.
Question is... Do I need a soundcard for better output or is my notebook's sound card enough for what I do? Eventually I might record vocals and guitar samples.
Jesus loves you...
But the rest of us think you're a tranny. |
|
|
|
psyaudionamics
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
546
Posted : Nov 11, 2008 03:26
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-08-28 12:30, Medea wrote:
I would go for soundcard with big amount of inputs.
Less commutation - less quality loss when recording from analog sources, and less hassle with cables.
Also, you get all benefits of the realtime multi-channel recording.
Although, mixer is a handy thing for use without computer.
|
|
ur right on the spot Medea, I got rid of the mixers in my studio and haven't looked back the audio quality has been boosted to bout 80% dead serious now days i use no mixer, my
set up is two RME fireface's 800 daisychained and one Alesis AI-3 this is the best set-up for direct input recording i could afford, took a while to get the cash but the amount of business generated back has been very rewarding, in terms of quality and speed mutitrack recording, hell now if i could set-up a space in the garage for recording rock bands that would seriously rock since thats one kind of clientele which id like to have, plus i love rock  I think that would expand my business and knowledge, but to try to fit a whole rockband, amps and drum kit in my room now is totally impossible...
my best advice is to not rush the equipment purchases if ur a serious musician, cus in the long run you will regret it, wait some time or get a extra job for 3 months and you'll be fine... sometimes in order for u to move up u gotta take a step back, forget the mixer unless ur going for a SSL, too expensive though for the majority in here, but who knows maybe some in here can afford it best bet a Allen & Heath, and between analog and digital go digital analog is gonna degrade ur signal unless u spend the bigggg bucks... Im personally 100% satisfied with my set-up and it was all carefully planned and executed... also how much hardware gear do u have? do plan in buyiing more stuff soon? put ur money in quality equipment dont cut corners you'll regret it in the end Johny, by the way Johny welcome to the forum i read u stated ur new in here
hope u can share and expand ur knowledge with us, just thought i send a warm welcome  to this great forum the best in the whole WIDE WORLD  Cheers
Ps. lots of souncards now days bring a software mixer included with the hardware the RME's have it, Motu's have it and the Echo Events have em too, also worth mentioning if ur in a tight budget the Echo souncard are a hell of bang for ur buck plus they are SUPER! stable
I got a Echo Gina and it never has given me any problems and the recordings on them were
quite pristine for what u pay, give a shot if ur in a tight budget just to get started i recomend em over any M-audio or other crap out there. |
|
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Nov 11, 2008 12:12
|
Nerdkiller - By all means, a good interface will improve your sound, input and output. If you're using a PC notebook, your integrated sound has to go through a messy, high latency path with a cheap D/A converter to get to your output. Mac integrated audio is much better but still not nearly as high quality as a good interface. ASIO = direct communication between sequencer and interface.
OP - There is no perfect answer, and they both have their pros and cons. Both of these options only apply to those who need to record more than one stereo signal at a time, so don't spend a lot on either unless you're going to be recording from several channels (i.e. recording drums, several synths simultaneously, mixing a live band, etc.).
Benefits of a mixerless rig (w/ multiple i/o interface or sound card):
-Ability to record several individual tracks at once.
-Less spacious setup, usually rack mountable.
-Usually more cost effective than an equivalent interface with 1-2 stereo ins and a quality mixer.
-You can always edit your mix later on. Once you record a mix from an analog mixer, it's all in one stereo signal, and you'll have to record it again if you change your mind about the track levels.
-Realtime use of software effects on every individual channel.
-If you buy a mixer, you'll usually need to buy another decent interface with 2 stereo outs to play live anyway. Especially true if you're using a mixer and a PCI card/interface.
-The quality of your recording doesn't depend on the mixer between the source and interface. Analog gear isn't very transparent, and an analog mixer may add noise and color to your sound. You might like it, you might not, but you'll get a much cleaner sound going straight from the source to your interface (or A/D, then to interface).
Benefits of having a mixer:
-Most digital mixers can act as a mixer (with custom routing options), control surface, and interface simultaneously. In most cases you'll pay a lot more for one than buying an equivalent setup of separate parts, but some like to have it all in one console.
-It's easier to apply a high end A/D converter when you have all of the tracks you intend to record mixed down to one signal. If you use an interface with several analog ins, you're relying on its integrated A/D, which I personally wouldn't trust the Firestudio Project with (if you're a quality snob). This isn't a problem for me because I would just create and bounce one track at a time anyway.
-Easier to implement hardware effects and processors, and many mixers have built in digital fx.
My OPINION on the subject: In 95% of applications *in electronic music*, analog mixing consoles are a dead technology. Their only real use is for recording drums and mixing live bands. They had a place in the studio in the days of mixing a live band on the spot and cutting the recording direct to disc, but I think we've moved on. There are too many digital options to consider to take everything back to analog mixing (i.e. ADAT, s/pdif, AES, etc.).
Also note that multi track recording with synths isn't possible without one MIDI out for every synth you intend to record simultaneously. You'll need a MIDI interface with as many outs as synths you intend to record simultaneously. Pretty obvious, but in case you didn't know/realize...
You believe in the users?
Yeah, sure. If I don't have a user, then who wrote me? |
|
|
|
|
