Turtlerock Forum

Hi All,

I am looking for advice on a small format mixer that is easy to move around for on site recording.

I am looking for some thing I can use for doing the odd corporate live recordings (when I have to) as well as some remote band pre-production/demo stuff (working with emerging artist in remote locations), and then put to work in my studio afterwards as a day to day workhorse.

I already have a Yamaha 01v96 and a old A&H in my studio space but both are either to big or to integrated (01v96 is a controller and line mixer mainly) to move around.

I think I would need 8 mono/mic channels, a simple yet effective EQ, insert points and a stereo mix bus. A couple of Auxiliaries wouldn’t go astray either for a back up send.

I have used A&H mix wiz, Mackie Onyx, be!@#$%^& rubbish, Soundcraft sprits, Yamaha MG series, as well as a few others over the years for live stuff mainly and although some seem fine for that (and a lot of them aren’t), I don’t know if I would want to record with any of them.

I have recently been using a Midas Venice that seem like it might be Ok,I haven't had a chance yet to plug a recorder in and see how it come outs, however mixing live on it feels/sounds like it could work. The Midas is more money than the other stuff I have mentioned, but I am of the mind set these days that I would rather get some thing good that I can use regularly and be happy with it rather than something cheap (and nasty)that I cringe everything I have to turn to it.

So my question is what is out there that people are using or have had experience with that I should be looking at?

Thanks
Tony

Tony

Depends a bit on how you work. To what will you actually record? DAW? TAPE? Hard Drive?

When I do location stuff like you mention, its a case where tracking is different from mixing. I focus on just tracking, not EQ / inserts etc etc or trying to get anything like a decent mix. So I don't use a mixer at all on location when recording - I track straight to DAW and use a raw (untreated) blend of the tracked audio for monitoring as required.

This has two advantages - the talent gets to hear exactly what they are sounding like (the good the bad and the downright unspeakable), and it manages expectations about what the final mix will sound like. People are more impressed with a shiny mix if the heard the raw starting point.

Hi Chris,

That’s how I would usually work, tracking clean to a DAW or to my Nagra VI, then doing everything in the mix. However recent changes are making me a adjust my work flow for some of these gigs so this desk will be for a few things:

1. Mixing down live to stereo for corporate clients who want to walk away at the end of a gig with a file they can give to there IT guy to web stream, etc.
2. Mix groups that are more than six channels (the limit on my Nagra) for example: I will be tracking some pre production work out west with a young band before they waste there time(and money) coming to a 'real' studio. So the desk would be a Drum mix with Gates and Compressors inserted with the other channels going straight to the Nagra,. The thing would then be mixed and dissected back at my space so they had some refence stuff to work with.
3. Fill in some gaps at my studio for the front end, for tracking mainly on direct outs, as I mix ITB.

That’s where I am at this point; I guess I need to adapt to stay on top of thing, if I can get some piece off gear that I enjoy using out of it that is a bonus. If you can think of a better option, it would be great to know, I think it’s easy to get stuck in a single mind set of how to work if that’s what you’re used to, and I am always keen to try new things if I think it can make my work faster or better.

Tony

Have you thought about one of those all in one multitrack jobbies... Boss, Korg, Fostex etc all do them. Sounds like that sort of thing would be ideal, as long as you can find one you like with an appropriate feature set.

Kurt

I had a look into those sorts of gadgets a while ago when I was looking for a portable recorder, I ended up going with the Nagra as it seemed to be the best sounding, battery powered device (for recording sound scape in romote areas) I could aford at the time. So if I can avoid it I would rather not go down the 'digital toys' route that I have been on for quite a while now.

Some may look down on them, but I flew all over the country for months recording live stuff with a Mackie 1604 and it was excellent. Got so much red sand in it in the deserts of SA, but it took a lickin and kept on tickin.

The mackie 1604 looks like a fairly robust little desk. How do the pre's and the eq standup?

If you want to go for something special you could look for a Studer 169, but they aren't cheap (or light). No direct outs but you can make up cables to use the inserts as direct outs. In that format they are hard to beat, I think it would do a Nagra justice. I've only used a Mackie 1202 & the preamps are ok, wouldn't bother with the eq.

I googled the 169 and it looks like an interesting desk, it seemed to get pretty good reviews from people online for what thats worth. A few question about them
Are they very heavy/hi maintainance like most quality older gear?
Any idea how they would they hold up to being dragged around the country side?
Do they turn up for sale very oftern?

As for the Mackie I stopped off today at a store and had a quick play with one and was less than impressed. I know show rooms are not a good test enviroment but after 10 minutes with the desk I had no impusle to take it out out of the store.

I find going mobile that if the older gear lacks eq options then a neutral sounding mixer like the A&H mixwiz can be more handy.
It's nothing special but is clean & transparent sounding. If i'm recording a band while mixing FOH i usualy get good enough results if i know the FOH speakers are eq'ed correctly so i don't have to over eq the desk, but the two sweepable mids come in real handy. Then it's really a no brainier to record from the direct outs. There is a jumper inside on the PCB's that makes the direct outs pre fader but still post eq as they come default post fader. The mix wiz is also one of the toughest out on the road with individual PCB's and the thick steel top. As a reference, have a listen to the Chris Wilson recording on myspace as it was done live from the direct outs of my mix wiz while i was mixing FOH at the Conti in Sorrento. For how a Midas Verona sounds, listen to King Armadillo Live at the Evlyn a few tracks down. I don't think the Midas Venice would be as tough as the A&H on the road though.

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the info and for pointing me to those tracks, both rock but with a different vibe, nice work.
I would totally agree with what you said about the A&H, I have seen them kicked between venues, used as door stops etc and still keep on keeping on. I've never seen that happen with the a midas. There seems to be a slightly differnet treatment of consoles in the venues that have them, or maybe guys just grab the A&H's for more 'quick I need a desk' gigs.

Just a quick question on your tracks. It sounded to me like the Chris Wilson track seemed a bit brighter and more present where as the King Armadillo track seemed a bit darker but more 'glued together' do you think this had much to do with the desks or was it all the differnt band, style, venue and million other things that would have been different about them?

Most probably the million other things. The Chris Wilson track was mixed through a Harrison MR3 console with an Avalon 747 on master buss comp duties. The King Armadillo track was ITB mixed with The Avalon again on master buss comp. There were quite a few more mics open on stage with King Armadillo, where as With Chris Wilson the mic count was much lower, being 4 on the kit, which was a Brady and sounded superb, and one mic for each instrument of a 3 piece band, with vox and harmonica amp. This would definitely be one of the factors.Each member in that band gets a great sound with their rig. I re-amped , ( with my Byer 77 into a 10 inch alnico Rola), Shannon Bourn's guitar for one side of the stereo with the original on the other. One thing i remember re the FOH desks was I had to be careful with the eq on the Midas as it was so much more powerful than the A & H so while a great tool to have it could also cause some problems if overdone. Hope this all helps as the decision making process can be a real pain.

Thought that might be the case, so many thing s define a sound before a desk comes into it.

Interesting comment about the EQ on the midas, it made me really think hard about the gigs I have done with the two differnet consoles and think I would agree that the midas eq seem to be more 'responseive' having said that have always had a graphic over the main mix with these desk and they were oftern small band s so a lot of the surgical stuff got done on it.

It reinforces that I need to make a list and give them a try paying more attention to the desk rather than the live sound.
So far Midas venice 160, A&Hmix wiz, and a Studer 169 if I can find one.

What else do people think is worth haveing a look/listern to?

Well the Mackie Onyx1640i is worth consideration as the pre amps are more than acceptable, much better than the earlier 1202VLZ, and you get the firewire into your laptop or whatever and the eq is 4 way. For ease of setup its hard to beat, and the sound is comparable to the other options. I have done a few assisting jobs where the band has one they use for their recordings and the results seem fine but i haven't listened that critically. Don't really know how robust it is on the road but they claim it up to it. If you already have your A to D covered then probably no great advantage over the other options. Others with more experience with the Onyx should have more to say.
Another mixer that would be great to get your hands on is the Amek BC2 or BC3 for the more "professional cred" type mixer options.

tony wrote:I googled the 169 and it looks like an interesting desk, it seemed to get pretty good reviews from people online for what thats worth. A few question about them
Are they very heavy/hi maintainance like most quality older gear?
Any idea how they would they hold up to being dragged around the country side?
Do they turn up for sale very oftern?

As for the Mackie I stopped off today at a store and had a quick play with one and was less than impressed. I know show rooms are not a good test enviroment but after 10 minutes with the desk I had no impusle to take it out out of the store.

Hi Tony,

Is most quality older gear high maintenance? I have some that is & some that seems to require very little maintenance. I think it depends on the condition of the particular piece, but the Studer is very well built, durable & modular if maintenance is required. It is designed to be dragged around the countryside & if you drop it it will damage the ground. Yes, it's heavy. I don't know how easy they are to come by. If you find one in good condition and are happy with the price it will be the sonic jump you're after for recording. I'm sure there are other options, I just mentioned the best one I knew.

Cheers,
Glenn

Tony;
There's also the A&H ZED R16: very good pre's and EQ, and multi-channel recording via FW. ADAT I/O as well

How about a Sound Devices 788 with CL-9?

http://www.sounddevices.com/download/ph ... 1800px.jpg

If I needed to mix and record 8 tracks plus stereo master, I'd be seriously considering this combo. Much better idea than lugging around my Studer 169! The preamps probably don't sound as full as the Nagra's, but this is a combo built for travel.

When I bought, the nagra i did a trial between it and the 788.
I really wanted to like 788, it was smaller with a higher track count and more features. however when i put the 2 side by side the nagra just won out in ease of use and sound quality. I didn't have the faders for the 788.

After having the nagra for over a year now, i don't regret the buy one bit. If I needed to buy the device again I wouldn't think twice about it.

Now i just need s desk in front of it.

Just out of interest has anyonne use the little TLAudio desks?

There are also a bunch of small format mixers out there that are normally used by production sound mixers in film/TV Episodics. Check out:

Sonasax - http://www.sonosax.ch/mixers/sxst/sxst_index.html
PSC Solice - http://www.professionalsound.com/specs/solice.htm

Or you could find a used Cooper 208. All of these are supposed to be great sounding (never personally heard them), highly portable mixers.

Alot of the film guys also use 01V's and a few use modified Mackie 1642's

It seems to me that a Sadie LRX2 might give you what you want. If you set it up with mic/line IO slots, you could record, mix and do the live sound from within the "box". Small and portable and very high end.
http://www.sadie.com/products/lrx2/main.php
Al

I'd say yes to a Cooper Sound mixer as well if you can find one. I repaired a CS-106 some years ago (It had been dropped a long way, not a failure of the electronics) They are very well built, hi end components, not consumer grade and nost importantly sound good. The one I worked on was owned by a location sound guy who worked on feature films and docos and was fanatical about clean sound. Any Cooper would be a worthy addition to the Nagra, as would the Studer. The Coopers are very portable and not as heavy as the Studers. They are mainly designed for location sound recording. Another in the European camp to look for is Eela from Holland. I have an Eela S-50, only 4 Channels and no EQ, but clean and "bullet proof" reliability and an Eela S-191(S-100 series) 6 Channel with EQ and limiting. P+G faders, transformer i/p, 19" rack format, They come up occasionally and they're a nice little mixer

we have a midas venice and i love it for live recordings.... the new venice's look really good.

we have a bunch of other pres in the studio, but i we have a live recording i wont hesitate in using the venice.
(i wont use our allen & heath consoles at all for this purpose...and we have sold all out mackie mixers)...