PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

I heard also that mixing with a hardware mixer is better for keeping synthesiser or drum machine or guitar (hardware stuff) dynamics (whatever), instead of going througt a sound card.

That certainly explains the price, and the use of them.

I think it's true. I practiced with a friend's studio.

I think that while all your other assertion are true, the one about dynamics isn't necesseraly. Well, that's if you're using a digital mixer.

I explain, the dynamics available depends greatly of the converter used to send audio to sfp and out.

The same apply to digital mixers. A good mixer with bad converters will sound flat with no dynamics.

This doesn't apply to analog mixer. But analog mixer have other problems, like noise (depends on quality of the mixer obviously), but sfp (or any other soundcard) doesn't add noise at all, granted they have a digital sound source.

For example, a pulsar card, using an A16U for converters,recording in 32bits to VDAT and mixed into STM1632 or STM2448 will have more dynamics than ANY hi-fi sound system can ever render correctly. You even risk damaging speakers.

A big part of mastering is reducing dynamics so that the song will play on a lower end system (understand home cinama sound system or hi-fi stuff) without removing the caracter of that said song.

That's one of the role of compressors.

So,if you buy a mixer with that particular goal in mind (having more dynamics), i think this is not necessarily the good approach.

I would ask myself why do i feel the need to more dynamics? Are my mixes flat?

Or, is it a 'hand-on' feeling i'm after? Does a good control surface would solve the problem?

Or is it an 'analog sound quest or holy-graal' thingy?


Anyway, this is my .02$

On 2003-11-07 05:10, Faybs wrote:
I think it's true. I practiced with a friend's studio.

SFP <b>IS</b> a hardware mixer without hardware faders and knobs!
It´s NOT a soundcard only!!

The most time, I´m working in cubase sx.
Setting up vol an pan for external synths is a VERY small jobstep only!
4 me, its not necessery to do this small job with hardware faders.

The main job is done in sx with the mouse by arranging komposing and mixing.

To change the focus from the monitor to the external hardware-mixer and back is not the best workflow.

And remeber:
Total Recall

I sold my mackie 8bus an now, i´m on sfp without ANY doubts .lol.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BlackSun on 2003-11-07 07:24 ]</font>

So you guys think that hardware mixer is not necessery due to the quality of creamware cards and mixing summation ?

So hardware mixer market will soon crash.

On 2003-11-12 02:32, Faybs wrote:
So you guys think that hardware mixer is not necessery due to the quality of creamware cards and mixing summation ?

Yes.

So hardware mixer market will soon crash.

Not very soon Not many people mixes live concerts using computer. And project studios often use mixers as preamps and/or ADs (in case of digi mixer).

[quote]
On 2003-11-12 02:32, Faybs wrote:
So you guys think that hardware mixer is not necessery due to the quality of creamware cards and mixing summation ?

Unless we talk about some high end Neve analog consoles, it's really not necessary. I'd prefer SFP mixer over any low cost analog or digital mixer. (Just give us that Mackie control support, knobs and faders feel better than mouse, single channel MIDI is not enough). Analog summing is said to sound better though. Has anyone here tried Dangerous 2-Bus or 2-Bus LT?

Well, the main reason I keep two nice mixers around (Allen & Heath MixWizard and Trident VFM) is that it's nice (even critical) to be able to choose from varying types of mic pres and eqs going from source through SFP to disk. You just can't replicate these factors 100% in software. Whether that is of importance to you should probably be the determining factor.

..no but you can replace it with a channel-strip!

<img width="350" height="189" src="http://www.spl-usa.com/media/Geraete/Channel_One.jpg">

<a href="http://www.spl-usa.com/Channel_One/in_short.html"><b>
Channel One </b></a>

Try to top this sound with an affordable mixer...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BlackSun on 2003-11-13 06:33 ]</font>

Good points all. Marcus, thanks for pointing out that Tascam FW device. I had been looking for both an 8-channel MIC mixer and a control surface, so that seems like a neat little synergy. I like the looks of the MOTU 828mkII as well, but that would be if you were looking for balanced/unbalanced, and didn't care about twirly little knobs.

My pulsar II is a "classic", i.e. one set of most inputs you would want. But from a connection standpoint, it is "dangly". I tend to like the breakout box approach, but I'm not complaining. So... if you did want the abilities people are talking about, then things like this are worth looking at:

1) phantom power, mic pre's
2) balanced connections
3) connecting multiple devices at once
4) ergonomic control surfaces

You have a bunch of Mic's a bunch of external synths, some balanced outboard gear... You get the idea...that kind of stuff makes these kinds of mixers nice things to have...

Well, I'm using 2 pulsar II cards, an A16 Ultra and an 02R for my outboard gear. 2 x adat cards in the back of my 02R routed to one of my pulsar cards. (which i thought was cool and looked great) Then i realised i was using my 02R as a very expensive AD converter and that a second A16 would do the same using my STM24/48. for a small example......


Recording outboard synths, effects and wordclock could go through an A16 into SFP the same as an 02R. Actually the A16 is better, (via adat only) the A16 obviously has 16 ins and 16 outs whereas the 02R has 16 ins and 8 outs (8bus).


Recording vocals or instrument. I use TL Audio's 5051 valve processor. And just like the synths instead of using the 8bus on the 02R, via the A16, you can either use the 8bus on the STM 24/48 to the Asio2 dest.


Hardware effects. via the A16, (and as said before) You can use the Hardware I/O Adat source and dest or use external effects under effects.


What about Headphones? Well other than the quote i saw earlier where the headphones are on board the channel strip, I use the half rack size Samson C-que 8 headphone amp. Again instead of using the 02R, via the A16, select Destination S under Tools, insert adat channels and connect to either StdL/R or CtrL/R.


After making this comparison no matter how much i am a fan of my hardware equipment, I have to realise the power of SFP. I've now sold my 02R and will get a second A16 Ultra.

As for a controller, the FW 1884 seems to be an interesting replacement. We'll wait and see.........

Hi,

I'm not gonna say something like "you MUST do this, or DON'T do that" Some prefer digital, others analogue, no discussion.

It's more about people sharing their experiences, well here's mine.

I used to use my synths + CW cards through an Behringer MX2442 (bad choice from the beginning), then to my powered monitors.

I wasn't quite happy about the Behringer, so I got myself LogicControl and I dumped the analogue desk, this is the best thing I ever did.

Now, my synths run through 2 Luna Breakout boxes and show up twice in Logic. First as a Midi track and second as an Aux channel. This way I can do my Midi trick AND make full use of the Logic FX. All Logic outputs go to the SFP2448 mixer, from where I route all channels to the analogue stereo outputs of my Pulsar to feed the active monitors.

I don't do too much mic or guitar recodings, but I there's a need, I will get me decent channel strip.

Bottom line for me was:
This way I don't need any external mixer, this leaves out AD/DA conversion.
I still have physical faders
And above all, full automatisation !
Hope this helps.

Regards
Ronald