Currently, in my home studio, my main board is a Ramsa WR8118. It has
served me well for an older board and I'm very comfortable using it as
a front end for my Cubase SX system.

I rely on the Ramsa WR8118 for mic pre, EQ and inserts. I rely on my
patchbays for most routing to outboard gear and monitoring. The rest of
my processing and mixing usually takes place in Cubase SX once I get
the signal "to tape". I'm using two of the M-Audio Delta 1010s for PC
interface, by the way.

I've been wondering if I would be gaining any fidelity by moving from
the Ramsa WR8118 to an Allen & Heath Mix Wizard DX 16:2 or similar
mixer (the discontinuted Spirit Studio comes to mind)? I know I'd be
saving some space on my desktop (always a good thing). But would I be
gaining a significant amount of quality in the signal I'm getting into
my system?

Any input is welcome.

Thanks,

Rick

In article .com writes:

I've been wondering if I would be gaining any fidelity by moving from
the Ramsa WR8118 to an Allen & Heath Mix Wizard DX 16:2 or similar
mixer (the discontinuted Spirit Studio comes to mind)?

I've never compared them side by side, but I don't think the
difference if any would be dramatic. Since you're mainly using the
mixer as a front end for mics, you might want to look into a couple of
channels of modern preamp or channel strip. Depending on how many
channels you need simultaneously, you might be able to eliminate the
mixer and save some space. But you'll probably end up spending more
money than what a used 16x2 Allen & Heath will cost. But you can do it
incrementally, and eventually retire the Ramsa mixer.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

I really do need a lot of channels for real time situations. I record
and mix entire drum kits along with other rhythm section instruments.
Channels strips would get too expensive and unwieldy pretty quickly. I
do have 2 Studio Projects VTB1 preamps that I do use for recording
vocals, but I can't see having 16 of those.

As long as I'm going to stick with the mixer paradigm, I was wondering
if I could get significantly better results with a new mixer under
$1000.

Thanks for the suggestion though.

-Rick

In article .com writes:

As long as I'm going to stick with the mixer paradigm, I was wondering
if I could get significantly better results with a new mixer under
$1000.

I doubt it. Perhaps there would be some things that would be better,
but maybe they would matter, and maybe not. What are you lacking now?
Do the preamps have enough gain for everything you record (for drums
and percussion, they should)? Is the EQ usable? (this is a big thing -
a lot of sub-$1K mixers have EQ that's dramatic but gets tiresome in
practice) Do you have enough channels and outputs?

In other words, what would YOU like to get out of a new mixer?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

wrote:
I really do need a lot of channels for real time situations. I record
and mix entire drum kits along with other rhythm section instruments.
Channels strips would get too expensive and unwieldy pretty quickly. I
do have 2 Studio Projects VTB1 preamps that I do use for recording
vocals, but I can't see having 16 of those.

Why not? I have thirty-two channels of individual preamp racked up in a
shipping box for concert recordings.

As long as I'm going to stick with the mixer paradigm, I was wondering
if I could get significantly better results with a new mixer under
$1000.

Probably not better quality per channel, but you'd get more channels.
Which is probably important in your case.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Currently, I'm limited in space in my control room. Definitely not
enough room for a rack full or preamps right now. Maybe in 2 years when
I'm ready to build a stand-alone room, I can do something like that.

The Ramsa has 18 channels of line/mic input, EQ, Inserts and Direct
Outs and I have 2 more outboard preamps. So, I already have more output
capabilites than I have PC inputs (2 Delta 1010s = 16 ananlog in/out).
Not that I would be opposed to chaining up another Delta 1010 for 24
analong in/out. But even with my current setup, that's 20 inputs and
preamps for routing the PC or wherever else.

I guess what I'm realy asking is this: Would the mic preamps and EQ on
a more modern board (Mix Wizard/Sprirt Studio) give me better mic
preamps, a cleaner signal and better EQ than I currently get from my
Ramsa?

In practice while multi-tracking, the Ramsa has enough gain for
tracking the rhythm section. The switchable high and low shelving EQ
combined with the sweepable mid EQ makes for a very useable EQ section.
When I need a more sensitive approach than the Ramsa can accomplish, I
rely on the outboard pre's. Maybe I am using the right board for me and
don't need to look at an upgrade until I'm ready to really take the
plunge into the $5000 - $6000 range where the difference in quality
will be truly noticeable.

Thanks for the input so far.

-Rick

In article . com writes:

I guess what I'm realy asking is this: Would the mic preamps and EQ on
a more modern board (Mix Wizard/Sprirt Studio) give me better mic
preamps, a cleaner signal and better EQ than I currently get from my
Ramsa?

And I think I answered (and will again): Not spectacular. I wouldn't
bother making that switch myself unless your Ramsa console is just
worn out.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo