mixer vs audio interface

Get that song on tape! Errr... disk?
User avatar
Pingu
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5793
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: Malmö, Sweden

Re: mixer vs audio interface

Post by Pingu » Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:07 pm

You would also need a pretty fancy computer to record 24 tracks at once...
"Anything that doesn't take years of your life and drive you to suicide hardly seems worth doing." - Cormac McCarthy

User avatar
northern_dirt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:03 am
Location: Scarborough

Re: mixer vs audio interface

Post by northern_dirt » Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:57 pm

fuzzjunkie wrote: mixers like this...Mackie makes a better one...or look at Yamaha...do have an analog to digital converter (which is what an audio card does) but this one accesses the computer via USB, which generally doesn't handle more than 2 tracks at a time well, and not more than 4 without choking. I don't know this device, but I would guess that although you can track and mix live with more than 2 tracks (up to the 24) it would be a stereo mix that goes to the computer...so all the above is partially correct :D

to have the full 24 track output from the mixer, you would need an audio interface that supports 24 inserts. Mackie makes a digital mixer with a Firewire connection that does this. To track more than 2 tracks with this mixer you'd need dedicated PCI or PCI-e audio cards that can be used in conjunction with each other...such as the Apogee Symphony or RME Hammerfall cards...or there might be M-Audio or other low end cards available.

or as Orang said "....when you have a mixer that can send multiple outputs, you'll also need an audio interface than can accept multiple inputs in order to be able to record more than the standard two channels at once. When you have an audio interface that can do that by itself, you don't need an additional mixer."
This mixer he is looking at has a firewire version.. thats $100 cheaper than the USB one
'cleanest, best pleasure'

ugly casanova
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3880
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:50 pm

Re: mixer vs audio interface

Post by ugly casanova » Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:28 am

that means if i have a mixer with several outputs i also need a soundcard with a lot of inputs. that would make sense. i could use the soundcard only to get the same effect for less money.

i think i'm gonna get an interface with enough inputs to record a band 'live' and mix them digitally...  :(

User avatar
Pingu
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5793
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: Malmö, Sweden

Re: mixer vs audio interface

Post by Pingu » Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:25 am

Or you could spend all your money on one great condenser and record Trinity Session-style  ;)
"Anything that doesn't take years of your life and drive you to suicide hardly seems worth doing." - Cormac McCarthy

ugly casanova
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3880
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:50 pm

Re: mixer vs audio interface

Post by ugly casanova » Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:39 am

okay another question comes up:
what do you guys think of USB condenser mics?

like the samson C01U

User avatar
northern_dirt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:03 am
Location: Scarborough

Re: mixer vs audio interface

Post by northern_dirt » Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:01 am

Killamangiro* wrote: okay another question comes up:
what do you guys think of USB condenser mics?

like the samson C01U
I Like the Neumann D-01 as a USB mic...
'cleanest, best pleasure'

Post Reply