mixing with a 24 8 mackie analog mixer and pro tools

[lookingaft]

I really like working with a mixer rather then a mouse, but I find it to be more of a hassle then it is worth. Does anybody out there use an analog mixer for their final mix downs? If so what is a good set up to get protools and the mixer insync?

[LE692]

I don't think you'll have to worry about syncing a mackie mixer to protools.

[albee1952]

I would not use a mixer unless it was a seriously classy piece like a Trident or a Neve for the sound. It sounds better staying in the box as compared to running thru a cheap mixer like Mackie, Behringer or Soundcraft Spirit (just my opinion). It sounds like you really want a good control surface. A used Control24 might suit you well. Maybe just a Command8? I use the mixer version of the 003 but (as much as I love lots of knobs and faders) I find I just don't grab the faders that much. I generally rough in the mix and fine tune it by editing the automation with the mouse.

[sw rec]

My two cents worth...I use a Mackie 24-8 and 24-e for 48 inputs. Some plusses:
You never have to re-patch ANYTHING. And that's with LOTS of input sources.
You can set levels-eq etc. going INTO Pro Tools. Think of it as a big router.
While I never use on-board mic preamps, (I like my Joe Meek VC1Q, my TLA C-1, and my DBX 586), the Mackie console pre's probably sound better better than the Digi onboard pre's.
With the console, you get monitor control, talkback, headphone sends, etc.
And you can take three or four sources and do a submix on the front side if it's ever necessary.
BTW, LOTS of big-name bands have done their own albums thru Mackie mixers.
BUT, I do all my mixing INSIDE the box too.
I'm more into having stuff compliment other stuff than replacing it. Then again, I like stuff.
Maybe too much.
http://www.southwestrecording.com/xf...t/STUDIO-2.JPG

[dome80]

Hey i got a question if you don't mind helping me out on this. I just want to know how you set up protools with mackie 24 8,

Ok my main goal is to mix down into analog mixer so get the analog sound and apply some of my outboard gear.

Can you tell me if I have this right:

1. Run direct out from protools into the back insert board provided I have calibrated for head room on the board
2. After creating my mix on the board, sum them to my busses
3a. Direct my stereo output back into protools and record on a stereo channel (will this defeat the purpose of obtaining the analog sound?)
or
3b. Direct my stereo output to a CD recorder?

Any thoughts in this process?

If I were to have 30 tracks of output, can I run this out of dig 002 into the board?

[sw rec]

I still do all my mixing inside the box. I think it's just opening up a very difficult can of worms trying to split out all your channels and run faders when you can automate EVERYTHING in Pro Tools. Also, you have a MAXIMUM 16 outputs from your 002 and that's only if you have something to convert the lightpipe output to analog, otherwise you only have 8. And I can't recommend trying to bounce a final mix straight to a CD anyway, it's a good way to turn your blanks into coasters. If you really need to use some of your outboard gear, you can assign an output for a particular track and patch into your outboard gear, then record the affected signal. But, that being said, most of the current plugins are a much better alternative, unless you have some AMAZING outboard gear. I use a ton of outboard in my mic & instrument direct chain and try to get everything as close to how I want it to sound going IN
(that's why I use a console, among other things). Plus, if you;re loking for more of an "analog" sound, you'll affect your signal to some degree going thru the console on the way in.
Guys like Dave Pensado mix on consoles for all the big names, but they have HD rigs and 80- plus-input consoles to work with. For us mere mortals, I still maintain that we'll get better results mixing within Pro Tools. Drop me a direct e-mail at [email protected] if you want. I'll forward you my phone # and we can chat about it some more.