Sep 08, 2003 03:38 pm Wow... I don't really know what I'm talking about, but I think that I would go for the Carvin. It just looks sturdier and has a lot more channels, as you mentioned.
I am debating on a mixer for a pro recording studio...
Posted on Sep 08, 2003 03:04 pm
jason (@ work)
Member Since: Apr 14, 2003
I am thinking on two mixers for a studio that i would like to open in the near future. I am stuck on the mixer. I have to in mind that i would like to start with. They are the Mackie 32x8 mixer and the carvin S/L 56 mixer. The links are below:
Carvin: www.carvin.com/cgi-bin/Is...SL56&P1=MX3
Mackie: www.musiciansfriend.com/s...l/base_id/35479
Which on should i invest in? I like the carvin because of the price and the number of channels. I like the mackie because it has been used a lot in studios. Or should i get neither?
I will be using the MOTU HD192 and the expansion for 24 channels of ins and outs. I will be using a Mac G5 for recording.
Thanks
Jason
[ Back to Top ]
Sep 08, 2003 03:38 pm Wow... I don't really know what I'm talking about, but I think that I would go for the Carvin. It just looks sturdier and has a lot more channels, as you mentioned.
Sep 08, 2003 05:34 pm here is the set up that i will have when i get my gear to open:
The Carvin 56ch. Mixer
Mac G5 PC (1.8Ghz 512Mb Ram(PC3200) 160Gb HD, 160GB external HD, 17" LCD)
MOTU HD192 with expansion
Cubase SX 1.0
2-Track Master Recorder
Lots of Mic's
Various Effects and outboard gear
Carvin SRS Monitors
Lots of cables
I will post a complete list when i get it ready so you guys can see if i leave anything out.
Thanks
Sep 08, 2003 08:05 pm Hey Jase.
Nice setup my friend. Seems that things are definatly "exapanding" for you ;)
First off, Cubase SX1.0 is old news, please ensure you upgrade to SX1.6 ASAP, but you proably appreciate that already.
Sencondly, Cubase on a Mac? Are you sure? Logic would be my first choice on a G5 system seeing how Logic are now, in effect, apple.
As for Carvin vs Mackie. I would say Mackie, only beacuse I don't know about Carvin's product range and the quality :) I reccomend you read some more reviews or maybe post this on the prorec.com forums?
Regards
jues.
Sep 08, 2003 09:43 pm yeah, i hope to have a fully operational professional studio going in a couple of years. I haven't looked at software or anything yet, so thanks on the advice. I will look at Logic. I will have to get reviews on everything before i buy it.
Thanks a lot
Jason
Sep 08, 2003 09:48 pm Jase, are you sure you need such a big desk? Would a control surface + some really nice preamps not serve you better?
jues.
Sep 09, 2003 02:30 am if you've got the cash to spend on a large desk get a soundcraft ghost 32 those are sweet
Sep 09, 2003 02:34 am In a choice between the carvin and mackie... I'd go with the mackie every time. I just think the mackie pre-amps are better... the mackie eq is also better than the carvin.
The carvin boasts a Total Harmonic Distortion(THD) main mix buss... of 0.003% while mackie is at 0.0014% (both using a 1khz test tone)
Mackie wins
Channel crosstalk on the carvin is at -80 dBu...while mackie boasts -95 dBu with the same 1 khz test tone...
again Mackie wins.
Mackie also boasts significantly better shelving on the parametric eq... while the mackie eq is not totally the bomb... I doubt the Carvin eq would even be usable.
If you are serious and can at all swing the extra $$$ look into that Soundcraft Ghost console... This baby beats the Mackie....
The Carvin console come up way short of the Mackie.
Shred
Sep 09, 2003 09:51 am i need the channels because the MOTU HD192 will have 24 ins and 24 outs. The 24 outs will have to feed back into the mixer for monitoring, right? Then in this case i will need at least 48 channels to work with. Tell me if i am wrong.
I am also looking at the Behringer MX9000. It looks to be a good board for the price. It has the 24 ins for mics and 24 more on mix B for tape returns. Would this be the best route?
Thanks
Sep 09, 2003 10:20 am Yes, you are wrong :)
You can use the same channel for input and output at the same time mate. The channel can be used for tracking and then flipped for playback - that's the way I have always worked.
You're gonna need a desk with Direct Outs on every channel in order to make use of all 24 inptus on offer.
Also, I think that you should really consider looking into a digital desk and pc interface (A-Dat Lightpipe, etc). I went down the multiple analouge signal path (24 channels from 410's into a Behringer MX3282a) and the lack of digital autiomation / hiss and THD was VERY frustrating in the end.
jues.
Sep 09, 2003 01:02 pm jues is right!!!
If your gonna go digital (into) your computer... there is no real reason to come back out for mixing. This would just add another stage of D/A and A/D conversion to your mixing...
Your best bet is to get a slightly smaller console... 24 channels should be more than enough... that way you could track 24 inputs at the same time...(if you needed to).
With the extra cash you save...(on buying a slightly smaller console) get a really sweet controller for mixing on your puter... (ie Mackie control)
This would be a sweet pro setup!
ps: also remember that the consoles your lookin' at are set up for in line monitoring... so you could monitor from you puter if you wanted for tracking purposes!
Shred
Sep 09, 2003 01:08 pm I dunno if I agree with that, obviously, it's not the morn, but there havebeen time where I have run back out so I could use a particular outboard piece of gear (not that I have many of those anymore) or something unusual like that. Leaving the PC and routing back to the mixer, while not the usual process is not completely unheard of.
Sep 09, 2003 01:52 pm Yeah, but control surfaces (such as the Mackie Control) make the whole thing un-needed.
jues.
Sep 10, 2003 07:25 am ok, maybe i should approach this another way. maybe i should do this:
Get the Mackie d8b digital mixer, a stand-alone 24 track hard disk recorder, and a computer for mixdown. what do you guys think about this? i know that the d8b has some problems, but they shouldn't be that big of a deal.
What i need to know is which card i would need for this setup. i am clueless on this board and its cards.
Thanks
Sep 10, 2003 09:06 am naw, go with the MOTU. having your tracks on your PC will open up a zillion options for effects and fancy mixdowns. there's not much point in having a hard disk recorder AND a PC
but then, it sounds like you got $ to burn
Sep 10, 2003 09:27 am it's not that i have that much $ to burn, it's just that if i am going to do this as a living, i want to do it right the first time. doing it right the first time can save a lot of $ in the long run.
now, as i am building up gear for the future, i want to practice with my currenct setup. i have a behringer mx2442a, a couple outboard effects, and a delta 44. i want to expand to 8 channels by getting another delta 44, but that would take up 8 channels on my board, right? i would have to run all of the outs into 8 channels on my mixer. that cuts down on the number of mics i can use. is this the right way? its the only way i see it.
i would like to have 10 channels, but the delta 66 just adds 2 more on the card itself. i would want all 6 ins and outs on the breakout box. is there any way i can get 10 ins/outs to go with my 44?
i need to know how to run this setup so that i will not be taking up 8 channels on my board just for monitoring.
THanks
i will be recording 8 mics/tracks at a time. would i run everyhting out through 2 channels? if so, what would the other 6 be for?
Thanks
Sep 10, 2003 05:51 pm i still don't understand why you need to all those channels for monitoring. you really oughta concider mixing within the PC. i think one of us is confused.
maybe the Delta 1010 would be the cost effective way to go. 8 in 8 out plus digital. coupled with your Delta 44 you'd have 12 in 12 out. If you buy used ~$500 you could always sell it for the same price if you decide it's not what you want. And that's the beauty of buying used.
Sep 10, 2003 07:49 pm if i got the setup you described, i figured it out that i only need 2 outs to the mixer to monitor. what i dont understand what the other outs could be used for.
thanks
jason
Sep 10, 2003 08:56 pm You can bring the seperate signals out the pc and into the mixing desk. eg: take the kick out on 1, snare on 2, hats on 3, etc, etc.
That way you can mix on the analouge desk straight from your PC. That's how I used to work, it's ok, but I feel there are better ways of doing it (as I mentioed above)
jues.
Sep 10, 2003 09:43 pm i know that this is off topic, but i was messing around with my delta 44, and i noticed that when i am recording, the volume is loud through the monitors, but when i play back, its not as loud. i also noticed that palm mutes really stick out. do i need to compress it?
this is how i have everyhting ran:
guitar amp > sm57 mic > behringer ms2442a mixer > out to delta 44 > delta 1 and 2 outs back to mixer for monitoring.
Let me know how to set everything. i need to know if i go by the meter for recording, or go by the meter in cep. i set the pfl to around +4. Then i bring the fader up to around 0dB. Is this right, because when i play, the meter goes above +4 on the meter bridge, but the meter in cep doesnt go near 0dB. Let me know how to record in this setup.
Thanks
Jason
Sep 11, 2003 01:33 am Having a lot of channels is always a good thing... For a pro setup that you will be charging $$$ for, you should at least have a 24 channel console... I've recorded guitarists very picky about tone with 4 amps isolated before... kinda funny (stick one in the bathroom, closet, garage, etc...) They also wanted to track rhythm with the band... using a room mic in the garage and double micing at least one amp already takes up 6 channels for guitar (then, if you know the guy is really picky you also want a direct guitar feed for reamping) 7 total channels for guitar...
Now the drums! Fortunately, the drummer has a small kit... only 2 toms... but they want a in your face kick sound to you double mic that... and the top and bottom of the snare... overheads hi-hat and then toms.... there goes 9 more channels!
now for the bass guitar... The bass player loves his amp...so you mic that then run a direct feed in... 2 more channels needed...
Now the scratch vocal.... 1 more channel needed
So with this rhythm tracking session (which is modest with the smaller drum kit) you need at least 19 analog ins... 2 more channels to use are (eqable effects returns) for monitoring purposes...
total 21 channels
you can see where 24 channels is not just nice... but almost mandatory!
Now if your just recording yourself, and you mostly do overdubs... obviously 24 channels could be considered overkill!
Shred
Sep 11, 2003 11:36 am i still need to know the answers to my questions to the last post i put.
i appreciate all of the comments you guys are making.
thanks
Sep 11, 2003 04:02 pm Jason
i noticed you have the behringer mx2442a
for direct recording on all tracks, where do you take the direct "out" from?
thanks
jeff
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.