QUOTE=KEL;9744959]Both of those mixers are a decent entry level mixer capable of summing your roland sources out to a master recorder. Neither one can record to a USB stick. The Alesis it can send and receive usb multichannel, the Mackie only master 2-track mix. I don't see how either can really help you with usb there. They both are decently capable mixers. I'd much prefer an Allen Heath Zed like: ZED-16FX - Allen & Heath
along with the Zed mixer, perhaps one or two: FMR Audio - RNC
One of these in case you have to interface with somebody's live rig ART Pro Audio
and a couple of these in the length you need: MTFM-8
Do you not own a computer? If you do, you can get an SD card reader(or if you have a Mac, many come with it) and save to your external drive that way.
You could go this route: ICE-16 - Allen & Heath
With a slightly bigger mixer: ZED-22FX - Allen & Heath
that combo can record right to a USB drive or stick[/QUOTE]
Thank you for your interest & help. -I shall be pricing & researching these ALLEN & HEATH products, the ZED-16FX & ZED 22FX, mixer, etc. asp. This route may indeed be the optimum path for me.
But as I have been further researching the ROLAND R-88/FOSTEXD CXR-500 -with some sort of MIXER combo I have come up against some significant questions;
-Keep in mind that the RME UFX (that also does USB recording) had only 4 similtaneous trs. and was around the same price as the ROLAND R-88. AETA 4MINX and Sound Device664 & SD788T machines are way beyond my financial means at this time, -I shall investigate the Allen Heath ZED stuff, -but price is a factor.
-Back to the mixer question-
As one may expect, I have been told that the MACKIE PRO FX 8 and PRO FX 16 are much better machines than the ALESIS MULTIMIX 8 USB FX and 16 USB FX. -However I've learned that the MACKIE PRO FX machines are made for live performances rather than recording mixers. Apparently the ALESIS MULTIMIX USB FX machines can be used for both purposes, -but are not considered by many as good enough for really professional mixes.
*I'm reminded that I need to look at recording MIXERS with "INDEPENDANT CHANNELS" and "BALANCED DIRECT OUTPUTS". -Thus enters the relatively expensive consideration of the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I (-of which would require at least 8 expensive DB25 to maleXLR cables should I go with the ROLAND R-88 combo sceme). This is expensive but known as sturdy high quality gear, -an "ANALOGUE MIXER" supposedly with great ONYX pre-amps, -perhaps the compression & reverb/delay etc. are good enough with this mixer to do for the first while?
There's also something else to factor in with my general production apporoach.
*For various reasons I was planning to record directly into the ROLAND D-88's 8 similaneous trs. and THEN run said 8 trs through the mixer -mix-down into stereo -and into the FOSTEX CR-500 for mastering. (I could always send the FOSTEX CR-500 mastered files back to the ROLAND R-88 to be fed into a memory stick).
In this case should the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I make such better quality mix-downs than the MACKIE PRO FX 16 -or other cheaper mixers, (-and I feel that I need it so that I can make the pro-standard rec. art required) I would only need 2 to 4 DB25/maleXLR cables when I would use the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I for its ONYX pre-amps on microphoned trs., as apposed to the "into the mixer, -and then by the way of expensive DB25/maleXLR cables into the 8TR recorder, -running everything recorded on the ROLAND R-88 back through the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I -to be mixed into stereo onto the FOSTEX CR-500 approach".
( NOTE I was planning for a 16 channel mixer only because these ROLAND R-88s sync. & stack up -so that down the road when there may be more of a prod. need and available finances -I could get another ROLAND R-88 so as to work with 16 similtaneous trs.)
Should I persist with my intended "-first into the recorder & then later through the mixer to be mixed down to stereo onto the FOSTEX CR-500 to then be mastered method" I'm told that I could then get away with using a MACKIE PRO FX 16 type of mixer, as I'm only using it to mix everything down to stereo.
-The question is, although with my technique where I could use MACKIE PRO FX types of mixers -would I be able do get as good of a mix-down,(or good enough) sound-wise etc.? -How much difference would there be in my end recording as product? -say between using the MACKIE PRO FX 16 and the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I?
-Would the ONYX pre-amps save me some pense, and are the effects, especially reverb/delay & compression significantly better with the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I ?
In my quest for said "computer compatible/not computer reliant solutions" -there's obviously a financial aspect. -The original ROLAND R-88 recorder, MACKIE PRO FX 16 mixer, FOSTEX CR-500 mastering machine equation just about streched my cash limits beyond as it was. -Should the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I recording mixer be what's nessasary to make the quality of product that I need then I'll be effectivily over-extended -and for some good time there won't be money for pre-amps or racks etc. -That's why it's important for me to consider the merits of the MACKIE ONYX 1640-I 's pre-amp, compression, reverb, special effects, and other mixing advantages & features. -Will I be able to get along without any other pre-amps & racks etc. well enough in this case?
-I'm interested in direct memory stick & USB drive transfer because I can clearly see that the CD is on the way out, (and a good thing it is too).
-Again, -down the road, when prod. needs and the required finances come together and I do get into computers, -perhaps lets say with PRO-TOOLS -I'll then be able to use my ROLAND R-88 and 16 channel MIXER as AUDIO INTERFACES (should I at that time have a second ROLAND R-88 I would then have a full 32 AUDIO INTERFACE, 32 similtaneous recording trs into PRO-TOOLS. -Also the FOSTEX CR-500 is said to work esp. well with PRO-TOOLS. -So in theory even when I move up, -I'll still be able to use everthing as AUDIO INTERFACES, and as well serve as back-up systems should the computer fail on location, -even the mastering machine will still be relevent -with no learning curve.
(Hopefully then, I'll just need to move up to better studio mics & pre-amps & a few racks)
-DO you see any problems with me continuing on at that point -using my field recorders & mixer as AUDIO INTERFACES for PRO-TOOLS DAW type applications?
I assume that the ROLAND R-88 and any of these mixers should also be able to serve as AUDIO INTERFACES is that true?