mixer confusion

[pk_hat]

Hello everyone,

I really want to buy a mixer, mostly to monitor the instruments before they enter Digi-land. Although some good mixer discussions were found in past posts, I can't figure out why I'm so confused about which one of these models will find a new home. So, I could use your help and experience (I never owned a mixer, I just plug into the Digi and monitor through the PC - which is now very annoying).

These next 2 mixers are quite different, but it's a question of what I need now, and what could be useful down the road. I can tell you right now that if I could afford it, I would get a Yamaha 01V, and figure it out on my own and not even post this message. But for now, it's between the analog Behringer MX2004, and the digital Roland VM-3100 PRO.

The appeal of the analog - Well, I plan on buying the WAVES plugins soon, and mixing within the computer without sending the tracks back to a mixer is non-cluttering and the quality is becoming increasingly stellar. I figure, route all the keyboards, bass and guitar & Pod into the desk and then send the signals to record into the Digi. I don't record full bands just yet, I just record 1, sometimes 2 instruments at a time. The Behringer has a 2+2 bus config.(?)
So, that's scenario 1.

Going digital with the Roland VM-3100PRO:
Let me clear this out first. The price on this kit is now an insane $550 at guitar center. It used to cost over $1000 a year ago. It has 12 inputs and an 8-bus config, awesome effects and optional ADAT card. SPDIF comes standard. Again, because of the $mall difference, I'm intrigued and wonder, is it worth it? I mean, perhaps going digital is the new way, and having 8 analog inputs freed up on the Digi can come in handy later on. Perhaps the effects on the Roland can be handy as it can free up a little CPU power. Also, 8 BUS! At 24-bit!!! Hmm...

Do you see what I mean? In the end, maybe it would be worth routing the tracks back into the mixer for further mixing? An option that seems appealing if going digital.

Anyways, if some of you could post your advice, especially some of your routing techniques, no matter what mixer you're using. Like, do you 'send' your keyboards and instruments through a Mackie into the Digi? Do you input in Digi directly and route the outs into a mixer afterwards? What about external effects, or pre-amps?

thanks so much everyone!

pk

[Rock_Artist]

Sorry I've No decision...
But few thoughts:
Berhinger:
The pre's consider not to be great on the mixers field.
Analog Electornics provide some "drops" of signal quality but with a new console those almost impossible to trace.

The model you've mentioned is the top of the line model.
DirectOuts gives you 8pres for the 001.
All channels got faders.

Roland:
I don't know anyone using it while the 01R is a standard at most posts I've been visiting.
Digital gives you midi based automation to PT.
Most channels. (8+2SPDi/F + 8optionals ADATs)

Those digital consols got fewer "multi-purpose" faders that going live makes a big difference.
Motorized faders and most of the digital consoles use chips to do most tasks.
Fixing an analog console v.s. digital is usually cheaper while digital should keep the quality with no loss at most times.

If you're using it for monitoring and getting more pre's inputs buy a less featured analog console from a good company as mackie. Or invest in 01R.
The Pre's are the important part of the console and not the roland or behringer as far as I know gives the best.

[stut5]

I use a tascam 2516 and route my keyboards in stereo to 4 inputs panned L & R on my mixer.Tape out of each line into the digi001. also send mics in say line 5 on the mixer and tape out to the digi001 in.My output from digi001 1 & 2 into my board say 15 & 16 panned left and right.If I were to get another board I would go digital.For me I don't even need a board because I'm only recording my own stuff.As far as routing back to your roland if thats what you get more options are always nice however I think digi is so awsome in it capabilities I would just keep it all in there and spend my money on a nice mic or keyboard or drum machine.Bottom line is finished product is a mixer going to make your end product much better compared to a new great mic or keyboard or something that adds to the sound.If your gonna be doing bands by all means a mixer will help otherwise you could definetly spend it somewhere else. there now that i have said all this your probably worse off sorry just my opinion.good luck Stu

[Jaleo]

My suggestion would be to consider investing in a device that would allow you to use the entire 18 inputs/outputs of the Digi001. You haven't mentioned how many synths, tone modules and mics etc. you currently have, but I will tell you that through personal experience, what ever you have now will multiply in the near future as you expand your studio/system. In my opinion the digital mixer will be your best option because it will give you at least 16, and if it also has S/PDIF I/O, 18 inputs and outputs to/from the Digi001. My Digi001 is rack mounted in a DAW desk, and I would hate to have to plug in cables every time I wanted to change a tone module. So I have the 6 inputs on the back of the Digi001 connected to the modules I always use, and the 2 on the front can be changed easily, along with the 8 on my digital mixer, that are connected via ADAT lightpipe. Plus, I think the signal is probably a lot cleaner from the Tascam digital mixer than from an inexpensive analog one.

[pk_hat]

Jaleo,
thanks for your reply (and everyone else, too). By the way, what kind of Tascam mixer do you use? Is it the TMD-1000 at $500? If so, I assume you you like it alright? I wonder how it compares to the Roland, as they're definetely in the same category, as far as size/features/price goes....

I have 2 syths (2 stereo inputs right there), an input for the POD which drives the guitars, and a bass. Reason will soon be added to the setup although the mixer won't matter that much for that.
There it is, like I mentionned, the initial idea of the mixer for me was just to 'monitor' without turning on the PC and ProTools each timme. Like the guy above, I highly enjoy the actual mixing within PT using plug-ins.
Just pressing the Monitor Mode button gets rather annoying as it only lets you hear inputs 3 and 4. Sometimes, you just want more, when friends are over and you just wanna jam with 2 or 3 instruments.
After all your replies, I'm definetely leaning on digital. Perhaps I'll take the plastic plunge and get an 01V...(yikes) [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

pk

[dsteele]

You wrote
>> monitor through the PC - which is now very >> annoying).

I just wonder what specifically you find
annoying? You can get rid of the latency
pretty much so I suspect it is not that.

Also if it is Mic-Pre's you are after, and
since you don't record too much at once, it
would be better to get 1 or 2 quality pre's rather then some more mixer type pre's.

Now I would love to have the power of a Procontrol 24 and use it for mixing too but
hey it is 10 times the price of the 001 ( and doesnt work with it anyway ) but with these
fairly simple mixers I am not sure what advantage there is.

Dave

[Morningstar]

Just a vote for analog. I'm using a Mackie 1642 VLZ pro, and an older 1202 VLZ. I carry the 1202 to my partners recording room, he uses a Behringer Eurodesk, because the pre's are better than the Behringer. Now, the Behringers are complete Mackie knock-offs (didn't they get sued for that?) but his desk is noisier. Maybe it's just his, or maybe its an older desk. IMHO, it's inferior.

I do not care for digital mixers. So, I should just shut up now. I shouldn't say anything about the tiny little windows. I should cease my complaints about more menus. I don't know jack about that Roland. Great company, probobly a great product,

with a tiny little window and lots of menus......

RM

[pk_hat]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dsteele:
[QB]You wrote
>> monitor through the PC - which is now very >> annoying).

I just wonder what specifically you find
annoying? You can get rid of the latency
pretty much so I suspect it is not that.


it's not a latency issue that annoys me. There are times when I just want to play, whether it's keyboards, guitars, bass, whatever, outside of the "recording environment", you know? Those times when you want to just practice, or go through the gazillion synth patches, or when the 2 neighbors come over and we want to do a little unplugged session (1 guy on guitar, 1 on kb, the other on another kb, etc..). That's when 'monitoring through the PC' becomes a pain. I don't want to have to turn the machine on, open ProTools assign an AUX track for each guy so we can hear him, just to play for the fun of playing.
Hence the mixer confusion...
For those times mentionned above, and for the recording aspect when it's time to actually record.

pk

[Haigbabe]

PPS With this/that setup, you can also monitor playback on the digi and jam along live while still plugged in but not have to arm tracks.

Cheers,

Haigbabe
PPPS Yes, I know about loop recording folks, similar function.

[pk_hat]

Haig,

thanks for the reply, it's the kind of answer I was looking for, especially when you mention the ins/outs of your mixer/Digi setup.
Is Behringer that bad? Some people think they're a wonder at those prices, at leat here in the US, while others look at Behringer as a company they love to hate.

Mackie 1402 VLZ - $550
Behringer MX2004 - $299

specs: pretty damn similar, perhaps more inputs on the Behringer.

fact: yes, B has ripped off Mackie in many engineering schemes and got sued. It hasen't affected my personal or musical life in any way yet.

the reality of getting a damn good analog mixer and save $249 when on a budget: Priceless.
[img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Ok, I know Mackies are great, I was just wondering if Behringer is to ever get credit for anything. I suppose you're not the guy to ask about their new 'truth' monitors [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]
(how funny that they look almost identical to... guess who? Yup, the Mackie HDR824's)

pk