Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
I've been checking out Mixers. There seem to be a couple good ones for
$2000 or less. I've been reading that the Mackie Onyx 1640i was marketed as a live mixer that works well as a recording mixer.. while the Allan and Heath ZED R16 is the opposite; made as a recording mixer that works well as a live one. Anyways, I've read that while the 1640i has a better routing section and outputs for every channel, while the ZED has better preamps, and also MIDI capability, although I don't use MIDI, I might in the future. The MIDI doesn't matter to me. Also, it doesn't matter that the 1640i is PT M-Powered compatible, while the ZED isn't. I can always record into Reaper and then transfer the files into Pro Tools (without a loss in sound quality) for editing/mixing. Anyone have ant experience w/ either unit? Suggestions? Also, if I overlooked any other mixers in this price range, please tel. I'm planning on using this mixer for my studio centerpiece. Thanks, -Adam |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
adam79 wrote:
I've been checking out Mixers. There seem to be a couple good ones for $2000 or less. I've been reading that the Mackie Onyx 1640i was marketed as a live mixer that works well as a recording mixer.. while the Allan and Heath ZED R16 is the opposite; made as a recording mixer that works well as a live one. Anyways, I've read that while the 1640i has a better routing section and outputs for every channel, while the ZED has better preamps, and also MIDI capability, although I don't use MIDI, I might in the future. The MIDI doesn't matter to me. Also, it doesn't matter that the 1640i is PT M-Powered compatible, while the ZED isn't. I can always record into Reaper and then transfer the files into Pro Tools (without a loss in sound quality) for editing/mixing. Anyone have ant experience w/ either unit? Suggestions? Also, if I overlooked any other mixers in this price range, please tel. I'm planning on using this mixer for my studio centerpiece. Thanks, -Adam Are you planning to use the mixer for live sound as well as for recording? (The Mackie Onyx 1640i is not marketed as a live sound mixer. That would be the Onyx 24-4.) If this if for recording first and live sound second I suggest you look closely at the Mackie Onyx 1620i and 1640i, depending on how many simultaneous mic inputs you need. The 1620 has 8 and the 1640 has 16. That talk about the preamps is Internut bull****. I like A&H gear a lot. It's very good stuff for the money. But those pres are not better than those in the Onyx, and the Onyx line has excellent EQ - EQ of sufficient qualtiy that I was surprised. An Onyx whatever-"i" with the optional Firewire card is a fine rig, allowing you to track right into the DAW of our choice. It works nicely, based on my brief trial with an earlier version of the 1620 that I tried, thanks to Kurt Albershardt for the mixer and Mike Rivers for the Firewire card. If you're going into a DAW anyway the Onyx feeds digital audio into your computer, rendering the part about "individual outputs" irrelevant. I have an A&H GL2200-24 that I use for SR work. It's a nice little board. If I were looking for an "affordable" to cover both small=scale live sound reinforcement and digital recording I would buy one of the Mackies. -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShai...withDougHarman |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
adam79 wrote:
I've been checking out Mixers. There seem to be a couple good ones for $2000 or less. I've been reading that the Mackie Onyx 1640i was marketed as a live mixer that works well as a recording mixer.. while the Allan and Heath ZED R16 is the opposite; made as a recording mixer that works well as a live one. I'd say that was a nearly fair assessment. I'd say that the ZED-R16 is a better studio mixer than the 1640i because it offers more inputs and outputs than the 1640i (if you can use them) and while it doesn't have motorized faders, it can serve as a control surface for a DAW program. Anyone have ant experience w/ either unit? Suggestions? I reviewed the ZED-R16 in Pro Audio Review and I liked it a whole lot. If it had 24 channels rather than 16 and a real meter bridge, I wouldn't have wanted to send it back. I have a Mackie 1640 with the optional Firewire card and I've used that as a live mixer while recording the inputs to a computer and it worked fine for that. The 1640i does that and (like the ZED-R16) also can play all 16 Firewire channels back into the mixer for real analog hands-on mixing. I like the idea of working that way - use the computer as a recorder, an editor, and exotic signal processor (with plug-ins) but do the main mixing and EQ on the analog console. It sounds better than mixing entirely on the computer, but I think that's probably because I'm just more comfortable working that way and I can do a better job of mixing. Your experience may differ. -- "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
On 9/10/10 10:05 PM, hank alrich wrote:
Are you planning to use the mixer for live sound as well as for recording? This will be the main part of the home studio I'm starting. I like how the Mackie has an output for every input just incase I have a client that wants to record reel to reel. I'd be able to rent a reel to reel and use it with the Mackie, the A&H wouldn't let me do that. This is a far out scenario, but the option is nice. As far as the mic-pres go, mostly every person who has tried both agrees that if you know what you're doing, the difference in mic-pre quality really doesn't justify it being a deal breaker. -Adam |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
adam79 wrote:
On 9/10/10 10:05 PM, hank alrich wrote: Are you planning to use the mixer for live sound as well as for recording? This will be the main part of the home studio I'm starting. I like how the Mackie has an output for every input just incase I have a client that wants to record reel to reel. I'd be able to rent a reel to reel and use it with the Mackie, the A&H wouldn't let me do that. This is a far out scenario, but the option is nice. Have you ever alinged and calibrated an analog deck? As far as the mic-pres go, mostly every person who has tried both agrees that if you know what you're doing, the difference in mic-pre quality really doesn't justify it being a deal breaker. Frankly, my own opinion is that the Mackie pres, once you get to the Onyx line, are better. -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShai...withDougHarman |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
adam79 wrote:
This will be the main part of the home studio I'm starting. I like how the Mackie has an output for every input just incase I have a client that wants to record reel to reel. I'd be able to rent a reel to reel and use it with the Mackie, the A&H wouldn't let me do that. This is a far out scenario, but the option is nice. If that's going to be a sometimes thing, you could use the inserts on the A&H to go to and from the tape deck and it will operate like an in-line console. Sure, they're unbalanced, but unless you're using very long cables or working in a high-EMI environment, that shouldn't be a concern. It's too bad they didn't put direct analog outputs on it, but you can't have everything unless you design it yourself (or pay for more than you need). -- "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
... adam79 wrote: This will be the main part of the home studio I'm starting. I like how the Mackie has an output for every input just incase I have a client that wants to record reel to reel. I'd be able to rent a reel to reel and use it with the Mackie, the A&H wouldn't let me do that. This is a far out scenario, but the option is nice. If that's going to be a sometimes thing, you could use the inserts on the A&H to go to and from the tape deck and it will operate like an in-line console. Sure, they're unbalanced, but unless you're using very long cables or working in a high-EMI environment, that shouldn't be a concern. It's too bad they didn't put direct analog outputs on it, but you can't have everything unless you design it yourself (or pay for more than you need). People seem to forget that back in the day unbalnced was the norm for interconnects. Even microphones were unbalanced. There's a whole body of great recordings that were done under these conditions. Sean |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Mackie Onyx 1640i, Allan and Heath ZED R16 (and other $2000 mixers)
"adam79" wrote in message
net... I've been checking out Mixers. There seem to be a couple good ones for $2000 or less. I've been reading that the Mackie Onyx 1640i was marketed as a live mixer that works well as a recording mixer.. while the Allan and Heath ZED R16 is the opposite; made as a recording mixer that works well as a live one. Don't put a lot into how things are marketed. It's called 'marketing' because they're trying to improve sales. It' about influencing the perception of the potential buyers, which may or may not be truthful. I know that I wouldn't reject either board for either role. Anyone have ant experience w/ either unit? Suggestions? Also, if I overlooked any other mixers in this price range, please tel. I'm planning on using this mixer for my studio centerpiece. I would seriously look at the Presonus StudioLive 16.4.2, which is a digital board. You can buy them new at that price all day long, they have class-A preamps with direct outs that sound great for recording, and they have a lot of nice stuff built in like four band EQ (all four sweepable), comps and gates. You can record and playback all channels over the fireware interface, and you can even do things like patch effects from your DAW as a channel insert on the board. If you're not starting out with a lot of kit, I would definately add it to your list of boards to consider. You can do a lot in your DAW, but sometimes it's nice to not have to do *everything* in the DAW. One important note for all of these firewire boads - pay close attention to any notes about compatible chipsets. The Presonus manual lists specific chipsets that are known to work and ones that are known to cause problems. Sean |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
onyx mixers vs. interfaces | Pro Audio | |||
FS:Mackie 1220 Onyx Mixers | Pro Audio | |||
Mackie Onyx 800R VS Onyx 1640 w/FW card | Pro Audio | |||
Onyx Mixers | Pro Audio | |||
Onyx Mixers | Pro Audio |