PDA

View Full Version : What sound mixer?



mobi
Jun-29-2016, 8:18am
I am looking for a good (but inexpensive) sound mixer to record my mandolin playing and my wife singing.

A friend has following.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Alto-ZMX122FX-Professional-8-Channel-Compact/dp/B004TM31FG

But this can't record directly as a computer file.

Any recommendation with USB output feature?

Never used sound mixers before :confused: Don't understand why they come with so many buttons!

Also, what microphone I need to use with it?

If 2 persons are recording (e.g. 1 vocal + 1 instrument) do I need 2 microphones?

Br1ck
Jun-29-2016, 2:12pm
You may be able to get by with a USB interface with four or more channels if you don't want effects, EQ, multiple sends, etc. Good and inexpensive are rarely found in the same product and I'm not familiar with all the cheaper digital products out there. Don't get more inputs than you will need.

As for mics, you can use one if you want to. I have a Rode NT 2 that has switchable pickup patterns, and have used it in figure 8 pattern, with the mic in between.

You could get a Tascam or a Zoom portable recorder too. I'm into a certain level of gear, so somewhat jaded. I've heard the good stuff, and like everything else, it costs. I use a MOTU Track 16 digital mixer in my home studio that I've been very happy with and is bundled with decent Mac recording software, but is probably more than you want to spend.

Basic advise is don't buy the cheapest gear out there. Better you get two channels with good AD/DA converters than a 16 channel mixer with all the bells and whistles, IMHO.

If you want separate mics, you can't go wrong with Shure SM 58 and 57s.

avaldes
Jun-29-2016, 4:22pm
You can get by with a USB recording interface with more than one input to record both mandolin and voice simultaneously. I have the Scarlett 2i2 and use it with Garageband (it comes with a free version of Ableton that I have not mastered). You would each have a mic, and set levels to get the balance you want through the monitors (I monitor through headphones). If you record simultaneously, you will get some mando in the vocal mic and voice in the instrument mic unless you work with sound baffles and complicated setups. On the other hand, picking up some of the other source in each channel may be more honest.
With all software I am aware of, you do not have to record simultaneously, but can, for example, lay down a really clean instrument track and then she can sing over that. And then you can add guitar, or she can harmonize over her main vocal, and so on, limited by imagination only. Lining up tracks usually involves the digital metronome that your software optionally clicks out, or I prefer to just count in verbally and then edit that out at the end.
Scarlet 2i2 is about $150US

almeriastrings
Jun-30-2016, 12:31pm
Yes - as above. If this is for recording (not for live use, e.g., mixing for a PA system) a basic USB interface is much more suited to your needs. You absolutely do not need a mixer for basic recording tasks, or indeed, even many advanced recording tasks these days. I would not recommend an SM57 or SM58 as ideal for recording purposes, by the way. There are many better options out there for this job. This is a very good deal. (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Focusrite-Scarlett-Studio-Headphones-Leads/dp/B00AW91CPG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1467307765&sr=8-1&keywords=focusrite+scarlett+studio)You can add a second mic as required or pair of mics... very good 'beginner' setup. Quality is really good.

Br1ck
Jun-30-2016, 8:14pm
While the Shure 57 and 58 are not the greatest recording mics on the planet, I'd take them over many of the cheap condensers out there. A Rode NT1 is decent, the NT 2 better. A USB interface needs a pre gain stage IMHO, and before you know it, you might just want a couple more channels.

Recording kind of snowballs. The ability to use my Track 16's internal effects while singing, but sending a dry signal to the software is a VERY nice feature most mixers can do nowadays.

I make do with three mics in my studio now, a Rode NT2 and two Shure SM 81 small diaphragm condensers. Glad I bought the second SM 81.

Also IMHO, the simpler the recording, the more important good gear is. But I will grant you, cheaper gear has never been better.

almeriastrings
Jul-01-2016, 12:18am
One reason why I would not recommend SM57's and SM58's as first and only microphones for home recording is that their sensitivity is very low - (1.6mV/Pa for the SM57). This in turn requires substantial amounts of clean gain on the input (at least +50dB and preferably +55dB) and this is beyond the capability of the preamps in lower cost interfaces. If you start with higher output microphones in the first place, this issue does not arise, You can certainly use low output microphones successfully (I use ribbons fairly often) but you do need very good quality, very high preamps if "hiss" is to be avoided. The design criteria for most lower cost interfaces assumes the use of microphones with outputs in the 4.0mV/Pa and above range. A Rode NT2a outputs 16.0mV/Pa and he SM81's are 5.6mV/Pa so with these you can run your preamps at quite low levels of gain and are not at risk of maxing them out.

mandroid
Jul-02-2016, 10:04am
FWIW, Shure has an adaptor the interface has a phantom power switch,
so can even be used with condenser mic's,

so your mic (regular XLR output) can, also, be used Live.


http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/shure-x2u-xlr-to-usb-microphone-adapter?rNtt=Shure%20X2U&index=1