[[email protected]]

I tried out an M-Audio Profire 2626 interface. Got one off
of eBay for song. I just want to gripe about one aspect of
it that I think almost cripples the device - the software
mixer. The unit has plenty of gozintas and gozoutas. The
preamps sound pretty good to me. The firewire seems pretty
solid - I am buffering at 64 samples.

So this doesn't seem to be too much to ask these days. But
there is something as important as the hardware - the
software mixer. I actually picked this unit up after
reading about its DSP mixer. I liked the flexible routing
and the assignable master volume knob. A great step in the
right direction. Here's my complaint: Aside from the
master mix, the only other way to create a mix for output
is by using the Aux sends. The trouble is that these lack
mute and solo buttons, and the pan is slaved to the master,
plus there is no master volume for each AUX. My first task
was to set up outs 1/2 and 3/4 as separate headphone mixes
(not configurable) and then 5/6 as a monitor mix (so cool
that I can assign the master out knob as I wish). So I
went to do some recording. Immediately I notice that the
array of circular knobs is way more confusing to look at
then the bank of linear faders that the master mix is
blessed with. But that's ok, I'll get used to it. I
brought in a pre from my old interface via S/PDIF so I
could compare the two units. I record something while
hardware monitoring the two preamps. Then I go to listen
to the recording, but I have to mute input monitoring of
the two preamps. Nope. I have to turn down the levels on
those inputs to listen to the software returns, and hope
they get back to the same place when I record again.

I compare this to my old unit. The mixer has tabs at the
top, one for each hardware output. Now, you can't see
everything at once, which may be why the 2626 went the
route they did, but when I want to mess with my headphone
mix, I click that tab, and I can see everything in faders
with mute, solo and pan dedicated to each source. Plus I
get master out meters to tell me how hot my signal is at
the output, along with a master level to control the final
level at that output. How can you live without that? If
the level is not right, I have to mess with all of that
AUX's knobs to change the total output. Lame. Ok I know
I have a headphone knob on the unit but I still want to
adjust the digital level properly, and this doesn't help
me if I'm sending to an outboard unit or something from one
of the other outputs. The only place an AUX mix can go is
to a hardware output - so to leave of a master level and
meter is difficult to understand.

I just think that the software was designed by someone who
had never used the unit in a working environment. It's all
about the software these days. You get the signal into the
computer as soon as possible - from preamp to converter and
in - then the world is your oyster if the software is
designed correctly. I just don't see the proper level of
attention to detail being brought in here.

Now at ~3ms latency, I can probably solve all of this
by bypassing the DSP mixer altogether (one can), and doing
all of the mixing from my DAW software. No problem making
a proper headphone mix that way. Still, it irks me and
I wanted to complain.

Here are some shots of what the 2626 looks like along with
my other interface's:

http://imgur.com/a/d4ooG

This is what I'd see if I wanted to
adjust my headphone mix. A row of lonely AUX knobs on the
one, and a fully visible and featured mixer on the other with
dedicated pan, mute and solo buttons with a master out meter
and fader. Far superior.

I know this unit is old. Maybe things have gotten better out
there by now. I normally buy used gear cuz money.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/23/2016 12:31 PM, wrote:
I tried out an M-Audio Profire 2626 interface. Got one off
of eBay for song. I just want to gripe about one aspect of
it that I think almost cripples the device - the software
mixer.

I just think that the software was designed by someone who
had never used the unit in a working environment.

I know this unit is old. Maybe things have gotten better out
there by now. I normally buy used gear cuz money.

It's not that old. I downloaded the manual to see if perhaps you missed
something, and that's dated 2010. But sometimes the reason why you can
get something for a song on eBay is that there's something about it that
nobody likes.

I know what you expected. My Mackie 1200F and the Focusrite interfaces
that I've had in for review have a "tabbed mixer" layout, where each mix
has all the controls and the only difference between one and another is
where the output goes - some have fixed assignments, others can be
assigned where you want them, like your M-Audio does.

Actually, what you have is about what you'd have with a hardware
(analog) mixer. Unless it's a specialty mixer designed for monitors
(there are such), you usually don't find solo or mute switches on the
auxiliary mixes. But is it really a problem to set up headphone mixes
without solos and mutes? The only time I use solos is when I'm looking
for a problem with an input source, and the only time I use mutes is
when I want to turn something off. Neither of those should be of much
concern when it comes to headphone mixes.

If you really don't like working with it, well, there's always eBay.



--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[geoff]

On 24/11/2016 6:31 a.m., wrote:

I know this unit is old. Maybe things have gotten better out
there by now. I normally buy used gear cuz money.


Is it possible to configure ASIO4ALL to do what you want ?

geoff

[[email protected]]

I know what you expected. My Mackie 1200F and the Focusrite interfaces
that I've had in for review have a "tabbed mixer" layout, where each mix
has all the controls and the only difference between one and another is
where the output goes

Yeah, that just works out better.

Actually, what you have is about what you'd have with a hardware
(analog) mixer. Unless it's a specialty mixer designed for monitors
(there are such), you usually don't find solo or mute switches on the
auxiliary mixes. But is it really a problem to set up headphone mixes
without solos and mutes?

The case for mutes came about today when I was recording. I wanted to
hardware monitor, then quickly shut the monitor off to listen to the result
without hearing the mics.

The real problem is the lack of master fader/meters for each output.
Today I was getting distortion from somewhere, and I checked my DAW, and all
the levels one by one. The problem was that I had multiple sources going
to an AUX mix, that were all below 0db, but summed together, went over.
The only way to find that out is to listen, and *individually* lower all
of the source levels trying to maintain the same mix until feeling that the
level was right with no visual guidance. It's lame. When recording with
phones, I end up turning down the monitor to record, then back up to audition.

The way I think I'll use this is
to just connect the monitor amp to 1/2 which is the same as the first phones
jack. I lose a little flexibility but not bad. If I have another musician
over, then I'll have to fuddle with the AUX mix to get them a phones mix.

The rub is that I've been testing the preamps all morning and they sound
more natural and a little less noisy than the ones in my other interface
that has the better mixing software. Sound is king, so the 2626 stays for
now.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/23/2016 3:55 PM, geoff wrote:
Is it possible to configure ASIO4ALL to do what you want ?

Probably, but that has nothing to do with T's problem. The software
application for the built-in DSP mixer gets installed concurrently with
the ASIO driver, but the two pieces of software work on two independent
parts of the interface.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[[email protected]]

Is it possible to configure ASIO4ALL to do what you want ?


I've never used it, but what I'm talking about is internal
hardware routing inside the unit. I don't think the audio
driver could help with that. I could definitely go to my
DAW for a headphone mix sent to a different software return.
There is the latency to think about but Reaper is reporting
3ms at a 64 sample buffer which sounds pretty tight.

[geoff]

On 24/11/2016 6:31 a.m., wrote:
I tried out an M-Audio Profire 2626 interface. Got one off
of eBay for song. I just want to gripe about one aspect of
it that I think almost cripples the device - the software
mixer. The unit has plenty of gozintas and gozoutas. The
preamps sound pretty good to me. The firewire seems pretty
solid - I am buffering at 64 samples.

Guess it's many years too late for, rather than a complaint, a Product
Suggestion. But maybe worth a try....

geoff

[JackA]

On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:31:10 PM UTC-5, wrote:
I tried out an M-Audio Profire 2626 interface. Got one off
of eBay for song. I just want to gripe about one aspect of
it that I think almost cripples the device - the software
mixer. The unit has plenty of gozintas and gozoutas. The
preamps sound pretty good to me. The firewire seems pretty
solid - I am buffering at 64 samples.

So this doesn't seem to be too much to ask these days. But
there is something as important as the hardware - the
software mixer. I actually picked this unit up after
reading about its DSP mixer. I liked the flexible routing
and the assignable master volume knob. A great step in the
right direction. Here's my complaint: Aside from the
master mix, the only other way to create a mix for output
is by using the Aux sends. The trouble is that these lack
mute and solo buttons, and the pan is slaved to the master,
plus there is no master volume for each AUX. My first task
was to set up outs 1/2 and 3/4 as separate headphone mixes
(not configurable) and then 5/6 as a monitor mix (so cool
that I can assign the master out knob as I wish). So I
went to do some recording. Immediately I notice that the
array of circular knobs is way more confusing to look at
then the bank of linear faders that the master mix is
blessed with. But that's ok, I'll get used to it. I
brought in a pre from my old interface via S/PDIF so I
could compare the two units. I record something while
hardware monitoring the two preamps. Then I go to listen
to the recording, but I have to mute input monitoring of
the two preamps. Nope. I have to turn down the levels on
those inputs to listen to the software returns, and hope
they get back to the same place when I record again.

I compare this to my old unit. The mixer has tabs at the
top, one for each hardware output. Now, you can't see
everything at once, which may be why the 2626 went the
route they did, but when I want to mess with my headphone
mix, I click that tab, and I can see everything in faders
with mute, solo and pan dedicated to each source. Plus I
get master out meters to tell me how hot my signal is at
the output, along with a master level to control the final
level at that output. How can you live without that? If
the level is not right, I have to mess with all of that
AUX's knobs to change the total output. Lame. Ok I know
I have a headphone knob on the unit but I still want to
adjust the digital level properly, and this doesn't help
me if I'm sending to an outboard unit or something from one
of the other outputs. The only place an AUX mix can go is
to a hardware output - so to leave of a master level and
meter is difficult to understand.

I just think that the software was designed by someone who
had never used the unit in a working environment. It's all
about the software these days. You get the signal into the
computer as soon as possible - from preamp to converter and
in - then the world is your oyster if the software is
designed correctly. I just don't see the proper level of
attention to detail being brought in here.

Now at ~3ms latency, I can probably solve all of this
by bypassing the DSP mixer altogether (one can), and doing
all of the mixing from my DAW software. No problem making
a proper headphone mix that way. Still, it irks me and
I wanted to complain.

Here are some shots of what the 2626 looks like along with
my other interface's:

http://imgur.com/a/d4ooG

This is what I'd see if I wanted to
adjust my headphone mix. A row of lonely AUX knobs on the
one, and a fully visible and featured mixer on the other with
dedicated pan, mute and solo buttons with a master out meter
and fader. Far superior.


Thought M & S were Mono & Stereo!
Now, how many "mixers" have a Master gain control? For example, I can mix multiple tracks in Audacity, but if I find the VU meter being pegged, I either have to decrease amplitude of each track, manually or automatically, but both are either tedious or time consuming. I asked the Audacity development crew to simplify, they suggested adding Master Gain Control.

Jack

I know this unit is old. Maybe things have gotten better out
there by now. I normally buy used gear cuz money.

[Nate Najar]

I had the profire 2626 before I got my prism Orpheus. I thought the monitor mixer on the 2626 worked really well- it works like a regular desktop mixer. The mixer on the Orpheus works the way you described you want it to work, and I'm happy with that too, but what's funny is that if you look at online comments, most peop,e complain that they cannot figure out how to use the tabbed output individual mixers. So there you go. You can't please everyone.

I was really impressed with how low you could get the latency on the 2626, you can probably just monitor through your Daw and still be comfortable. I can't do that with the prism, it has fairly high latency and so you have to use the foldback mixer. But the conversion is stunning. And it's an 8 year old unit. S T U N N I N G.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 24-11-2016 18:19, JackA wrote:

Now, how many "mixers" have a Master gain control? For example, I can mix multiple tracks in Audacity, but if I find the VU meter being pegged, I either have to decrease amplitude of each track, manually or automatically, but both are either tedious or time consuming. I asked the Audacity development crew to simplify, they suggested adding Master Gain Control.

No mixer I know of - my view of the world may be incomplete - have that,
if you overload the summing, then you're done, just don't.

Jack

- Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

JackA wrote: -show quoted text -
"Thought M & S were Mono & Stereo! "

That's Mid-Side Stereo! ave Maria....

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

wrote:
I tried out an M-Audio Profire 2626 interface. Got one off
of eBay for song. I just want to gripe about one aspect of
it that I think almost cripples the device - the software
mixer. The unit has plenty of gozintas and gozoutas. The
preamps sound pretty good to me. The firewire seems pretty
solid - I am buffering at 64 samples.

So this doesn't seem to be too much to ask these days. But
there is something as important as the hardware - the
software mixer.


What I use for a software mixer is REAPER. Sure, there's
10msec latency ( REAPER self-reports 4.9 to 6.9 msec )

If I wanted to use the software mixer[1], I could use an S/PDIF
F/X unit for reverb and have no dynamics or EQ F/X, and
presumably zero latency.

But for my purposes, REAPER is fine. It saves me the footprint
of an analog mixer and any analog F/X units needed.

[1] Scarlett Mix Control.

snip

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

wrote:

Is it possible to configure ASIO4ALL to do what you want ?


I've never used it, but what I'm talking about is internal
hardware routing inside the unit. I don't think the audio
driver could help with that. I could definitely go to my
DAW for a headphone mix sent to a different software return.
There is the latency to think about but Reaper is reporting
3ms at a 64 sample buffer which sounds pretty tight.




This is exactly what I use. I generally set the interface latency to 2
or 1 msec[1], which gives REAPER self-reported 4.9 to 6.9 msec latency.

@ 44.1kHz SR - so 44 to 88 samples.

I'd always use 1 msec, but this machine sometimes wants 2.

--
Les Cargill

[JackA]

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 7:42:20 AM UTC-5, wrote:
JackA wrote: -show quoted text -
"Thought M & S were Mono & Stereo! "

That's Mid-Side Stereo! ave Maria....

Thanks, Peter!

And, you, why is it when the create CDs from past material, and just do a transfer, it's (SPARS) ADD, but when mixing is involved, it's AAD! So much for "ReMastering"! Creating a new Master!

Jack

[Tobiah]

On 11/26/2016 03:53 AM, Peter Larsen wrote:
On 24-11-2016 18:19, JackA wrote:

Now, how many "mixers" have a Master gain control? For example, I can mix
multiple tracks in Audacity, but if I find the VU meter being pegged, I either
have to decrease amplitude of each track, manually or automatically, but both
are either tedious or time consuming. I asked the Audacity development crew to
simplify, they suggested adding Master Gain Control.

No mixer I know of - my view of the world may be incomplete - have that, if you
overload the summing, then you're done, just don't.


Out of 26 hardware outputs, only 2 have a meter and fader to gauge the output
level. My other interfaces get it right at the cost of the copy and paste of
some computer code.

[JackA]

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 at 10:22:41 AM UTC-5, Tobiah wrote:
On 11/26/2016 03:53 AM, Peter Larsen wrote:
On 24-11-2016 18:19, JackA wrote:

Now, how many "mixers" have a Master gain control? For example, I can mix
multiple tracks in Audacity, but if I find the VU meter being pegged, I either
have to decrease amplitude of each track, manually or automatically, but both
are either tedious or time consuming. I asked the Audacity development crew to
simplify, they suggested adding Master Gain Control.

No mixer I know of - my view of the world may be incomplete - have that, if you
overload the summing, then you're done, just don't.


Out of 26 hardware outputs, only 2 have a meter and fader to gauge the output
level. My other interfaces get it right at the cost of the copy and paste of
some computer code.

In my opinion, back in the analogue (analog) tape recording days, I feel it was best to put as much signal on the recording tape as possible, maximize signal to noise ratio!!

Some did, but used thin, less expensive tape, and over the years, you could hear (layer to layer) bleed-through!

Jack