Analogue Mixing Desks?

Many here use them? I think they are awesome, but some people say unless you spend megabucks on a really high end one they are not worth it.

I know Ant uses a Mackie (8Bus I think?) which is a little pricey for me and I'm sure in Dave The drummers studio pics I see a big arse analogue desk.

I was looking at the Alesis Studio-32 which isa 16 Channel with direct outs on each channel for easy multitracking into a DAW, I can pick one up locally for pretty cheap. I know Alesis make great studio monitors, anyone ever used one of these mixers?

Should I go for this, or pick up Cubase SX3 for almost exactly the same price... I'm leaning towards the mixer myself...

Any other good ones? Good points/Bad points about using analogue desks?

mackie have just relaesed an analogue desk with a firewire interface if your recording stuff down to a computer this might be good ,think that the
firewire is an added extra ie: more money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FILTERZ

mackie have just relaesed an analogue desk with a firewire interface if your recording stuff down to a computer this might be good ,think that the
firewire is an added extra ie: more money.

---

Yes those Mackie desks with Fireware are absolutely sex-tacular!! :)

But WAY out of my price range :(

Would a decent quality analogue desk give better results than the mixer in Cubase, or any other digital sequencer? I've heard a number of people claim a good analog desk just sounds 'better' than software, but I'm not entirely convinced the improvement would be noticable enough to warrant spending that much cash...
If the difference is noticeable, in what way is it superior? More definition/separation between tracks, more headroom? Or is it just the added 'warmth' you get with analog gear?

Well for one thing its very easy to grab knobs change levels and tweak things around , much better than a mouse or a hardware controller,
One knob one function.
To my ears my mackie sounds better than the mixer in sx , but then i would say that wouldnt i, my mate has just sold his however and he swears by the sound of his new digital o1x thing.

it sounds quite nice when driven hard and gives nice distortion if you overload the channels, cant really do that with digital stuff ;)

try getting a second hand mackie 1604

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dan the acid man

try getting a second hand mackie 1604

---

My mate will sell you one if you are intertested ;)

PM me if you are ;)

i use a mackie 1604 vlz pro an its perfect for making techno, good eq's an built like a brick. I got mine 2nd hand for 400, but u can get em new for bout £800-900.

Have a look on ebay, also the new mackie onyx desks are really good an i think there a bit cheaper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_s

Would a decent quality analogue desk give better results than the mixer in Cubase, or any other digital sequencer? I've heard a number of people claim a good analog desk just sounds 'better' than software, but I'm not entirely convinced the improvement would be noticable enough to warrant spending that much cash...
If the difference is noticeable, in what way is it superior? More definition/separation between tracks, more headroom? Or is it just the added 'warmth' you get with analog gear?

---

any desk really will make your sound results much better than the cubase mixer...seperation is the key to getting a good clean sound.

Thanks for the responses guys. I'll say no the you're mate's Mackie FILTERZ as I'm in Australia and the shipping would likely kill me ;) Plus I can get a good price on a mixer here.

Anyone know anything specifically about Alesis mixers? Are they good or crap? I know they make kick arse montitors, and are famous for their FX units, so I'm guessing they would be good sound quality..

The thing that really interests me about this mixer is it has direct outs on each channel which which will make it really good for multitracking and doing hybrid analogue/digital audio stuff. IE, doing stutter edits and other funky shit by bouncing tracks to audio in logic, chopping it up/morphing/generally wrecktifying the audio, and then routing it back out through the mixer, etc...

If you're going to get an analog mixer don't get an Alesis... definetly get a Mackie or better.
I have both a 1402 and a 16ch 8Bus and love em.

:)

There's a comparison of analogue vs digital on one of the pro audio sites, something like proaudiorec.com i think, someone did a mix of a band (not techno unfortunately) on both an SSL desk and on Protools and I'll be damned if I could tell which was which, I mean I got it arse about tit, they did the mixes, posted them up and let people guess which one was done on the computer.

Trouble was one had a slightly nicer eq'd bottom end which i think was down to the taste of the person doing the mix. But that aside I couldn't say which was better (the band weren't that great though I can tell you that).

Anyway, that aside, having a decent analogue desk lets you be freer in your mind when you're mixing (if you follow) but the convienence for us of being able to have like 8 projects on the go at once and practically instant recall of everythiing (except the reverb which is all outboard) just blows the entire analogue mixing idea out the water.

Also the EQ on cheap desks sounds cheap so you'll end up usingthe computer EQ for a lot of stuff anyway ... but it starts to get interesting when you talk about the Mackie 8 bus / Soundcraft Ghost / Allen and Heath stuff where the EQ is probably a bit nicer than the computer.

on the other hand I just remember a lot of hiss and hum came into the equationwhen there was that much analogue kit around and having to be well careful about that kind of thing.

Might be somethign to be said for buying a posh analogue EQ one day and carrying on mixing in the computer.

There's been a whole lot of noise made about whether digital summing and that kind of thing actually makings some computer software flawed when it comes to mixing. But it's not something I've managed to train my ears to hear at all ...

so my vote, mix it in the computer and buy ssome (very) tasty outboard to help you along. cheap outboard and analogue pretty isnt' worth the money to me, even if it takes all year to save up for the stuff (I really want a culture vulture next I think).

Quote:

---

More definition/separation between tracks, more headroom? Or is it just the added 'warmth' you get with analog gear?

---

Definately all of the above plus hands on control. But Its not something your average person will pick up on, or even care really. But if you are a real nut, you will know the difference, you will FEEL it in your soul and you will get more pleasure out of writing music. I reckon that its easier on the ears too.

But if you don't have the budget, you can do without it.

( feel it in your soul? I talk some real shit sometimes ;) )

I have to say i like mixing with analogue - apart from the obvious recall issues.. But i just wouldnt bother with any of these alesis behinger or soundcraft things - the built in cubase mixer is as good if not better in my opinion.
basically you just want somthing with good headroom (cubase has that) good eqs (cubase kind of has that with plugins - but a very different sound) & if your doing techno nice warm gains helps too (but cubase cannot do that)..

Now with a cheapo desk (behinger, soundcraft, alesis, tapco blah blah) you will get none of the above so you are better off using cubase.. so unless you only need to use the mixer as a glorified patchbay for your outboard gear and dont mix on it there isnt much point imo.

A better quality desk can give you good mix headroom, good musical eq and warm gains and therefore give you a musical advantage over mixing within cubase.

The mackie 8bus is the obvious choice with deep warm gains, heaps of headroom and eqs that sculpt tones you will instantly recognise being a techno fan :)

At the moment im using a Soundtracs topaz 24 which is like a mackie 8 bus clone which i got for £450 second hand and i really rate it, these things are a bargain. The mid eq isnt half what the mackie is but i actually think its slightly crisper on the top end and warmer on the bass. The gain warmth leaves a little to be desired next to the mackie but for £450 you cant knock it.

The other choice in this class is the Tascam m-2600 mk2 , another 8bus mixer pretty much identical to the mackie.. ive never used it myself but some of the old pros on the sound on sound forum actually think its better than the mackie! Its about 400-500 i think..

Basically these 2 are quality mixers that got overshadowed by being released just after the mackie and so never really took off. consequently they are ****in bargains as they remain relatively unknown :)

The Mackie's EQ is pretty rubbish for recording bands and conventional studio stuff - People complain that it sounds harsh and unmusical compaired to the likes of the Allen & Heath GS3000...

(The Strokes first album was mixed on a Mackie 8-buss)

But... The harsh EQ suddenly becomes "modern" sounding when you're trying to EQ a breakbeat or a drum machine... So it's really the industry standard dance/electronic music desk for that reason.

The 8-busses are quite prone to breaking down though... I've had mine 5 years and I've got a few channels out now - Mainly thanks to Logic crashing and frying all the outputs.

If it needed replacing I'd consider an Allen & Heath very seriously... R&S Records used to use an A&H at their studio in Belgium... You can tell a lot of their recordings had a much warmer, softer sound than you'd get off a Mackie.


It'd be very hard to compair a software mix to a desk mix fairly... With software you can't really drive the pre-amps, and the EQ works very differently...

I'd say, if I did a very average mix in software and then tried to replicate it on the Mackie (not using any desk EQ of course) it'd sound very similar after being recorded back down to digital and dithered, etc... Although some people notice the track separation and added depth a lot more than others...

But, an analog desk does allow you to go nuts a bit - The reverbs mix in MUCH better too... Feels like you've got an extra-dimension of control on an analog desk - You can have the levels high and get a really full sounding mix, or you can leave them low and get something really subdued sounding... There's softclipping and all sorts going on inside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J Swift

The Mackie's EQ is pretty rubbish for recording bands and conventional studio stuff - People complain that it sounds harsh and unmusical compaired to the likes of the Allen & Heath GS3000...

(The Strokes first album was mixed on a Mackie 8-buss)

But... The harsh EQ suddenly becomes "modern" sounding when you're trying to EQ a breakbeat or a drum machine... So it's really the industry standard dance/electronic music desk for that reason.

---

Yeah, you turn that HF gain knob on a mackie and you know about it for sure, crispy, the Ghost was much more mellow too.

have to agree the build quality could be better , i have channels out and a ****ed buss , its only three years old ;)

cmon mackie sort it out