Mackie 1640i vs Steinberg MR816X setup

[icemanaman]

Hi all!
I am currently in the prossess of building our new studio. So we need a new recording setup. I have thought of two different setups. I was hoping maybe you guys could make it easier to select one by telling me pros and cons of either

Now I know that the room and mics are more important than preamp quality in this pricerange. But if you could just ignore that fact for the purpouse of this question that would be great

Basic info:
I will be recording a full band on 16 different tracks. This is for making demos.

I would however eventually like to do really good recordings which can be used for an album.When I eventually do begin recording for real. I won't need more than 8 good preamps max (for drums..).

I already have a computer, studio mointors, cubase 6 and a M-audio ProjectMix that I can use.

The two setups:
1. Steinberg MR816X + M-Audio ProjectMix + Art Headamp6 + Cubase 6

In this setup I will be using MR816 as the interface. I have read on the forums here that the Pre's and ADC's are pretty good.
The ProjectMix will be connected to the MR816 through ADAT lightpipe (that makes a totalt of 16 preamps and input channels in cubase, right?).
The projectmix will also be connected to the computer through firewire via the MR816, so that I can use it as a control surface for Cubase.
The Headamp6's 6 inputs will be connected to the MR816's outputs so that I can have a seperate headphone mix for the whole band. The remaining two outputs will be connected to studio monitors.

2.Mackie 1640i + Art Headamp 6 + Cubase 6

In this setup the Mackie mixer already has 16 preamps, and it has the ADC and firewire interface. The Headamp6 will be connected to the Aux sends on the 1640i.

The good thing about this mixer is that it can be used live without problems. I'm not sure I would do that with MR816 setup. But the MR816 setup is better suited for doing recordings through F/W, right?


A couple of questions:
1. How do the preamps in both units compare against each other? Are either good enough to do professional recordings?
2. What are the ADC's like in both units?
3. If using the Mackie 1640i setup, will I be able to send the metronome from Cubase to the mixer and then out to the Aux sends (headphones)?
4. I have been reading about the low gain levels through fw on the 1640i. Has this REALLY been an issue for anyone?
5. If using the MR816, can I apply the DSP effects when monitoring through the outputs?
6. The 8 outputs on the MR816: Can the drive headphones alright, or do I need the Headamp?
7. Are these same outputs suited to drive regular floor monitors, if we want to reharse for a live gig?
8. For the MR816X+ProjectMix setup, how do I get 16 inputs in cubase? Where would i make the settings for this?
9. Any other pros / cons?
10. Any other options in this pricerange?


I could really use your guys' expertise on this one.
Thanks!

[ScumBum]

No question , get the Mackie Onyx 1640i , that thing is awesome ! Theres a thread on here somewhere and a guy posted songs recorded and mixed on it and it sounded really Pro , commercial . It will be way more simple and easy to work on then a DAW and the summing of the Mackie will sound better too . You'll get 16 pres , analog EQ , inserts for outboard gear you can patch in . It also works with Pro Tools , I think version 8 .

[ScumBum]

Heres that thread Pop Song Mixed on Mackie onyx 1640i PT9

[paul101]

I think you just going to end up with lots of biased opinions depending on what people own.

I own the Steinberg and its very good value for the money.

Is it better than the Mackie? I dont know, because Like most people who will give you opinions I haven't tried both.

The Pres and AD/DA are good. The Pres compare favourably to an Audient ASP008 that I also own and its also not too shabby on the DA front when compared directly with a Benchmark Dac 1.

[icemanaman]

Thank you for your answers

Maybe I should also mention that if and when we decide to do the professional recordings ourselves, we'll still send off the tracks to a professional studio for mixing and mastring. In other words, its the recording process thats most important for me

[icemanaman]

Anyone else? I could really use some help here!

[euphoria89]

Here's a post I made a few months ago:

Acoustic Guitar Sound - Thumbs up for MR816.

Here a example of a live recording with multiple 816's

Live record-ALL Steinberg MR816 pres/converters

And here is the YouTube page of my band, with about 6 live tracks. (watch in HD)

NorthernMonkeyMusic's Channel - YouTube

again all done with the MR816x pres and converter, apart from the live vocals (SM7B) which ran into the GAP Pre73.

Hope that gives you some idea. It really does sound great if you've got a few decent performers/instruments/songs/rooms and microphones. The rest is all handled by the MR816!

[Beyersound]

Used lots of Onyx pres over the years, used lots of Yamaha pres in their big (64ch plus) digital desks. I would easily take the Yamahas. The pres in the MR816 may be even a bit better than the big Yamahas, and reportedly they are same ones as the N12. The conversion in the MR816, is appreciably better than the Mackie. The integration of C6 with the MR816 is outstanding, that feature-set should not be underestimated.

[dxavier]

Originally Posted by Beyersound

Used lots of Onyx pres over the years, used lots of Yamaha pres in their big (64ch plus) digital desks. I would easily take the Yamahas. The pres in the MR816 may be even a bit better than the big Yamahas, and reportedly they are same ones as the N12. The conversion in the MR816, is appreciably better than the Mackie.

Agreed. I own a Mackie Onyx 1620i (which has the same pres as the Onyx 1640i and which I now use as a keyboard mixer) and a Yamaha n12 (which does have the same converters and pre amps as the MR816) and I can say without a shadow of a doubt, both the Pre Amps and Converters of the MR816 are superior everyday. The MR816 (although well respected here) is an underrated beast for the price and is better sounding than the RME FF800 IMHO. If you could hear both, I do not believe that you would consider this to be a difficult decision!!

[ScumBum]

Originally Posted by icemanaman

Thank you for your answers

Maybe I should also mention that if and when we decide to do the professional recordings ourselves, we'll still send off the tracks to a professional studio for mixing and mastring. In other words, its the recording process thats most important for me

Then the Mackie is a big hunk of wasted space and features your not gonna use . Get the Steinberg MR816X .