Out of inputs!

[mike vee]

well, the only way to have more inputs is to add more inputs.

[BaconTastesGood]

Patch panel is a good start if you just want to patch less frequently used effects/instruments in and out, but failing that consider something like that the Tascam LM-8ST as a submixer for something like your Tempest and two mono synths.

[divemedia]

Originally Posted by mike vee

well, the only way to have more inputs is to add more inputs.

Yea, i got that part. Thanks. Now, what piece of eq would you consider that is somewhere between a $99 Eurorack and the Speck Xsum? Maybe an Ashley LX308B? Or Rane SM82? Should I instead consider just getting a better interface (Ensemble, MH 2882?) and then use my Onyx for extra inputs?

[Popbott]

A twelve channel mixer isn't going to cut it for all that gear anymore, obviously you need a mixer with more channels. Chaining mixer to mixer tends to cause a lot of noise on your main output, but it can be done. There are a lot of 16 channel mixers on eBay right now in the $300 range. I had a two mixer setup like that for years.

I once posted a pucture of all my gear here on GS. I had a 16 ch Mackie and a 16 ch Behringer at the time. Someone commented and asked why I was running multiple $2K synths though $300 mixers. I didn't know what I was missing until I upgraded, best decision I ever made. Whoever you were out there in GS land, thank you!

[divemedia]

What did you upgrade to?

[alex!]

are you thinking one of these scenarios?

instruments > mixer inputs > mixer channel direct outs (pre fade) > interface

or

instruments > mixer inputs > mixer bus direct outs (pre fade) > interface

PS. Mackie 8 bus mixers have post fade direct outs

[mike vee]

In my opinion a mixer outside the daw is counter productive, especially for inputs!!. summing is a different story....

a DAW IS a big digital mixer. So why not just get a new interface with a ton of inputs and use your DAW as the (fully recall-able) mixer?


MOTU 24I/O Core PCI-e System | Sweetwater.com


This would do the trick!! Plus it's PCIe so latency will be super low and you can run all at 88 or 96K for excellent sound:

[divemedia]

Originally Posted by mike vee

In my opinion a mixer outside the daw is counter productive, especially for inputs!!. summing is a different story....

a DAW IS a big digital mixer. So why not just get a new interface with a ton of inputs and use your DAW as the (fully recall-able) mixer?


MOTU 24I/O Core PCI-e System | Sweetwater.com


This would do the trick!! Plus it's PCIe so latency will be super low and you can run all at 88 or 96K for excellent sound:

Thanks for the input. No pun intended! I only have a macbook pro for recording so PCI is pretty much out. That's why I originally got the Onyx. It let me kill two birds with one stone- mixer and firewire interface. I guess the simple question here is, do I get a submixer to plug into the Onyx interface, or do I get a better interface and use the Onyx as a 12 channel mixer?

[tonepanic]

Originally Posted by divemedia

I guess the simple question here is, do I get a submixer to plug into the Onyx interface, or do I get a better interface and use the Onyx as a 12 channel mixer?

I highly recommend getting an interface with all the I/O you need, and possibly even with some way of expanding in the future (e.g. ADAT inputs). If you can swing it, it will cost you less in the long run, assuming there's some chance you may expand your setup. Unless you're extremely attached to tactile control of mixing (and there are obviously controller solutions for this, but that involves more money), there are some huge benefits to mixing in your DAW as well, like instant recall, automation, etc.

Oh, and this may be obvious, but if you're recording some of those synths in stereo, you may want to consider whether it's worth using the extra input. I switched my setup to record all of my synths in mono a few years back, even the ones with cool stereo features, and have never regretted it. There are plenty of ways to do cool stereo things in your DAW...

[fingerbib2000]

I got rid of my outboard mixer years ago, mixing in the DAW is so much more flexible from my point of view and I don't need room for a big old mixer!

How about this or an equivilent?

Focusrite Saffire Pro 40

and to that, add something like a Behringer ADA8000 for extra I/O that hooks into the saffire via ADAT

Behringer: ULTRAGAIN PRO-8 DIGITAL ADA8000

You get the general idea..I can't vouch for these products in question as I use Sonic-Core pulsar soundcard and an alesis Ai3 as my ADA into the ADAT of the soundcard...but the idea is the same.

and add a patchbay for ultimate flexibility!

[Demokid]

I use three 96-way bantam patchbays to my A&H WZ3 14/4/2+. I did have do some soldering but now it’s very easy to patch synths and effects whenever they are needed.

[divemedia]

Originally Posted by tonepanic

I switched my setup to record all of my synths in mono a few years back, even the ones with cool stereo features, and have never regretted it. There are plenty of ways to do cool stereo things in your DAW...

This is actually very helpful advice! Thanks. It crossed my mind before but I never really considered it. I'll give that a try in the very short term.

[tvsky]

[QUOTE=divemedia;8329784. The amount of equipment I have has grown to where I don't have enough inputs on the mixer to accommodate without constant unplugging/replugging. I'm sure this is a common problem that a lot of people run into. [/QUOTE]

well not everyone .....

time for a mixer upgrade!

[divemedia]

lol

[divemedia]

So basically you guys think I should sell my Onyx and pick up something like a fireface 800 or apogee ensemble and expand the number of inputs through adat to whatever i need? That would definitely be a MUCH more expensive route but would also give me better control in my daw. Generally, you all are opposed to using a decent rackmount submixer though because of signal path degradation and lack of control in the daw?

Obviously I'd love to have an apogee interface with a shitload of inputs all recording simultaneously but i don't know if i necessarily need to spend all this extra money to solve this problem.

[ilovesound]

I have a ton of synths etc ... I record in the synth line that I need and move on to the next synth if need be. Focus on the best quality signal going in to the computer you can afford. Running a ton of 'live' synths into a mixing board causes a lot of unwanted noise, unless you have hardware gates on each channel etc ...

If you need to have everything patched up, like others have mentioned, get a patchbay etc ...

I personally don't know a lot of producers that record numerous tracks in at the same time. Recording 2 tracks at a time seems to be the norm.

[Syn303]

Originally Posted by divemedia

So basically you guys think I should sell my Onyx and pick up something like a fireface 800 or apogee ensemble and expand the number of inputs through adat to whatever i need? That would definitely be a MUCH more expensive route but would also give me better control in my daw. Generally, you all are opposed to using a decent rackmount submixer though because of signal path degradation and lack of control in the daw?

Obviously I'd love to have an apogee interface with a shitload of inputs all recording simultaneously but i don't know if i necessarily need to spend all this extra money to solve this problem.

I wouldn't waste my money buying one of those overpriced expensive motu boxes. You can get a s/hand inline mixing desk for much less and still have money to buy extras or some more gear like fx etc.

Inline desks have line inputs and tape inputs, so a 16 channel inline desk would give you 16 line inputs and 16 tape inputs giving you a grand total of 32 inputs at mixdown, you mixer configuration would be 16-8-16-2 (16 line, 8 sub, 16 tape and 2 out), even 24 channel inline desks would give you 48 inputs (24-8-24-2 or 24-4-24-2).

Some decent and good inline desks - Soundcraft spirit studio 16 or 24 versions, A&H S2 or GS3 (both 16, can be expanded to 24), some of the earlier mackie desks are also inline desks.

[Morechips]

+1 to the above.

You can get a lot for your money these days with an old analogue console, should be a few kicking around DC!

Don't spend too much and make sure its a modular console, that way you can still be making music if a channel strip needs any work or modification.

[divemedia]

It's something to think about but i do want to be conscious of space. I'm not working with a ton at this point so a big analog console might not be ideal even though it would be 'ideal'. Maybe it's time I take some cues from Kramer and start thinking about LEVELS. Thanks all for the suggestions though. It has give me a lot to work with. Or at least, I know what direction i should be moving in.

[Barfunkel]

Originally Posted by ilovesound

I have a ton of synths etc ... I record in the synth line that I need and move on to the next synth if need be. Focus on the best quality signal going in to the computer you can afford. Running a ton of 'live' synths into a mixing board causes a lot of unwanted noise, unless you have hardware gates on each channel etc ...

If you need to have everything patched up, like others have mentioned, get a patchbay etc ...

I personally don't know a lot of producers that record numerous tracks in at the same time. Recording 2 tracks at a time seems to be the norm.

I've never had any problems with noise. Sure, I haven't used something like 64 channels at once, but with 16 or so channels the background hiss is very minimal and inaudible in a song context.

This is even more true if you get a modern mixer like an Allen & Heath Zed R16. It could even be TOO quiet, a bit of hiss here and there can actually enhance the music.

Also, I could never record just a stereo track at the time. I can't speak for anyone else, but at least my music is a complete live (well, live as in a techno live, ie. everything's presequenced and I'm turning the cutoff knobs and pressing/unpressing mute buttons and pretend to be a musician) take. Recording it a single instrument at a time would take ages and would very likely lose the vibe.

[divemedia]

Originally Posted by Barfunkel

I've never had any problems with noise. Sure, I haven't used something like 64 channels at once, but with 16 or so channels the background hiss is very minimal and inaudible in a song context.

This is even more true if you get a modern mixer like an Allen & Heath Zed R16. It could even be TOO quiet, a bit of hiss here and there can actually enhance the music.

Also, I could never record just a stereo track at the time. I can't speak for anyone else, but at least my music is a complete live (well, live as in a techno live, ie. everything's presequenced and I'm turning the cutoff knobs and pressing/unpressing mute buttons and pretend to be a musician) take. Recording it a single instrument at a time would take ages and would very likely lose the vibe.

So what is your recording setup like if you don't mind me asking?

[Barfunkel]

Originally Posted by divemedia

So what is your recording setup like if you don't mind me asking?

None at the moment, as I'm currently on a break from making music. However, I've had various setups over the years, recording drum machines and synths and FX boxes, through cheappo desks like Behringers and Mackies. Never had a problem with noise.

I don't use heavy compression on every channel though, that can increase the noise level considerably.

[iksrazal]

I ran into the same problem so I bought an Xtramix for its 76 inputs. An xsum has almost as many inputs but lacks the effects bus etc. For the moment I'm recording the 8 group outs into a Korg D888.

[AnalogGuy]

When I ran into this problem, I bought first Roland M240r rackmixer for 24 individual channels but the lack of internal EQ was too serious lack for my use (too expensive to get several EQ units), so I sold it and then bought Mackie LM-3204 and what a great mixer, 16 stereo channels! But they all are stereo, which means that if I am plugging only mono, it will pan the source for the center and the other channel can't be used for anything else, since the pan pot works only for both channels at the same time.

Then I finally bought Boss BX-16 (16-channels) for mono instruments.

[WDM]

I use Alesis Multimix 8 Line ($200) as my synth submixer. It has 8 stereo inputs, small footprint (1U), located close to keyboards and main out is connected to small powered monitors.

That’s my default configuration and I can play keyboards and synths without need to power up a computer/DAW.

There is a small trick tho. I have a patchbay connected between synths and mixer. So, it’s a matter of seconds to patch any synth directly to a preamp or audio interface for recording, eliminating submixer out of recording chain.

That works pretty good for me.

[getmethough]

I just got an audiofire 12 and it said in the manual that u can daisychain them so you could get two of them, takes up 2 rack spaces

[Reptil]

patchbay

+1 on the Xtramix - made for this purpose

[dubnspace]

Originally Posted by Reptil

patchbay

+1 on the Xtramix - made for this purpose

Just bought an Xtramix as well. Haven't got it all setup yet. Can you use the stereo inputs on the Xtramix as 2 mono inputs? I've read that you can but don't quite see it like that in the manual.

[Reptil]

there's two inputs on each of the input channels. you use the balance knob to blend/switch the two. they're not seperately available at the same time.