Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft MTK
Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft MTK
Hey guys,
So I'm planning (long term) a mixed hardware/software studio. My thought was to get a Soundcraft Signature 12 MTK, as it has an interface built in and you can route individual channels to/from your DAW. That way I could mix my hardware synths on a tactile surface with on-board effects alongside my soft synths. then I'd get a separate MIDI box.
But now I'm wondering if that's the right way to go. Would it be better to just get a good, fast interface with MIDI, and some kind of controller for the mixer in my DAW? I'm using touchOSC right now and it's fine, and I've got the old Akai APK at home (though I don't really use live anymore).
What are your thoughts on mixer w. interface + dedicated MIDI box vs. dedicated interface with MIDI + control surface?
(I'm also looking for as low latency as I can get on a budget.)
So I'm planning (long term) a mixed hardware/software studio. My thought was to get a Soundcraft Signature 12 MTK, as it has an interface built in and you can route individual channels to/from your DAW. That way I could mix my hardware synths on a tactile surface with on-board effects alongside my soft synths. then I'd get a separate MIDI box.
But now I'm wondering if that's the right way to go. Would it be better to just get a good, fast interface with MIDI, and some kind of controller for the mixer in my DAW? I'm using touchOSC right now and it's fine, and I've got the old Akai APK at home (though I don't really use live anymore).
What are your thoughts on mixer w. interface + dedicated MIDI box vs. dedicated interface with MIDI + control surface?
(I'm also looking for as low latency as I can get on a budget.)
- Lost to the Void
- subsekt
- Posts: 13518
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:31 pm
Re: Mixers with interface vs. interface and controller
I can't really comment on what to choose be sure I use my stuff inseparation, but I have the MTK 12 and it is great, but I just use it to record my hardware.
Re: Mixers with interface vs. interface and controller
have you considered a digital mixer like the https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/X18
you trade physical faders for touch screen but gain a ton of dsp on each channel (gate comp eq rta) and bus efx and dsp , heaps of flexible routing (6 aux) , 18x18 interface and full recall and automation. you can also connect physical knobs and faders to it
you trade physical faders for touch screen but gain a ton of dsp on each channel (gate comp eq rta) and bus efx and dsp , heaps of flexible routing (6 aux) , 18x18 interface and full recall and automation. you can also connect physical knobs and faders to it
Re: Mixers with interface vs. interface and controller
You use it with a hardware sequencer instead of your DAW?Lost to the Void wrote:I can't really comment on what to choose be sure I use my stuff inseparation, but I have the MTK 12 and it is great, but I just use it to record my hardware.
I'm curious how good the audio interface is. If it was low latency and high quality, that might just do it for me. Seems like an (almost) all in one solution.
- Lost to the Void
- subsekt
- Posts: 13518
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:31 pm
Re: Mixers with interface vs. interface and controller
I drive all my hardware from an MPC live and record through the MTK in to the computer.
I haven't run it with software to see what sync latency is like with vst or anything.
I either work ITB or OTB but never mix them.
Quality is great though and the EQs are nice.
I haven't run it with software to see what sync latency is like with vst or anything.
I either work ITB or OTB but never mix them.
Quality is great though and the EQs are nice.
Re: Mixers with interface vs. interface and controller
Makes sense.
Unfortunately, I'm not finding reliable info on its latency online. Some sources say it's bad, others say it's good.
Unfortunately, I'm not finding reliable info on its latency online. Some sources say it's bad, others say it's good.
Re: Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft
Q: Recording stuff over USB. Can you record 12 channels with live, random fader adjustments & eq into Ableton?
Read that the 12 usb option only records the 'raw' channel input & that you have to use subgroups to record down to stereo.
Can this be true?
Read that the 12 usb option only records the 'raw' channel input & that you have to use subgroups to record down to stereo.
Can this be true?
>> Click here for NEW POSTS on subsekt <<KennethExack wrote:My kids and I are completely shocked by the specialized secrets that everyone has on this forum
Dialog I The Hole I subsekt Blog I The Bench I IG I SC I Mixes I FB
- Lost to the Void
- subsekt
- Posts: 13518
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:31 pm
Re: Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft
You can record 12 channels, as you would when recording to multitrack tape for example.
Each channel is post gain section (so gains and the hipass are recorded) but pre EQ.
Once recorded you can then mix through it, by routing each channel in your daw back through the MTK, and using the usb return button, per channel, this will then record and "print the EQ".
So think of the recording and mixing as separate stages (as you would traditionally).
You don't need subgroups to record stereo you just select the dual channels (11 +12 for example) within the DAW.
I've had no issues with latency doing a print record via the usb return.
Each channel is post gain section (so gains and the hipass are recorded) but pre EQ.
Once recorded you can then mix through it, by routing each channel in your daw back through the MTK, and using the usb return button, per channel, this will then record and "print the EQ".
So think of the recording and mixing as separate stages (as you would traditionally).
You don't need subgroups to record stereo you just select the dual channels (11 +12 for example) within the DAW.
I've had no issues with latency doing a print record via the usb return.
Re: Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft
Aaah Ok.. I possibly totally understand that now. Thanks for that Steve.
I seen those features & read some comments.. but didn't make the connection.
Excellent idea because the raw audio gets recorded / stored in DAW & you can go back & forth doing different mixes. Non destructive basically.
Have I the right end of the stick there?
I seen those features & read some comments.. but didn't make the connection.
Excellent idea because the raw audio gets recorded / stored in DAW & you can go back & forth doing different mixes. Non destructive basically.
Have I the right end of the stick there?
>> Click here for NEW POSTS on subsekt <<KennethExack wrote:My kids and I are completely shocked by the specialized secrets that everyone has on this forum
Dialog I The Hole I subsekt Blog I The Bench I IG I SC I Mixes I FB
- Lost to the Void
- subsekt
- Posts: 13518
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:31 pm
Re: Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft
Críoch wrote:Aaah Ok.. I possibly totally understand that now. Thanks for that Steve.
I seen those features & read some comments.. but didn't make the connection.
Excellent idea because the raw audio gets recorded / stored in DAW & you can go back & forth doing different mixes. Non destructive basically.
Have I the right end of the stick there?
Yeah, exactly.
I think it would be nice to be able to switch the EQ in and out when tracking in, but I get why they did it this way.
Essentially the mixer becomes a plugout processing and routing device once you have recorded through it.
- nomadjames
- mummy!!
- Posts: 611
- Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 8:30 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh
- Contact:
Re: Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft
If it helps you in any way, I have a Mackie 16.8.2 mixer which has 16 tape reteurns. I just grabbed a Behringer ADA8200 preamp to connect to my Focusrite Saffire Pro 40. So I have 16 in and 16 out, and my mixer has 16 tape send and 16 tape returns, AFAIK.
All of that shit was cheap for what it does. Takes up a tone of space though. Currently don’t have room for the mixer, and it’s killing me.
Mixer is my favorite instrument.
All of that shit was cheap for what it does. Takes up a tone of space though. Currently don’t have room for the mixer, and it’s killing me.
Mixer is my favorite instrument.
www.soundcloud.com/nomadjames
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." - Hunter S. Thompson
www.nomadjames.com
Pittsburgh Ableton
www.facebook.com/groups/558333351022659
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." - Hunter S. Thompson
www.nomadjames.com
Pittsburgh Ableton
www.facebook.com/groups/558333351022659
Re: Mixers with interface vs. i/face & controller Soundcraft
Cheers Men. Thanks for the clarity.
I'm toying around with the idea of getting a new mixer. I've spent the last few months restoring an old synth & I honestly don't feel like spending the time cleaning out the gunk from my old mixer. Just wanna nake music. There are a couple of scratchy channels.. no biggie, but pissses me off a bit. Even though I've no computer atm.. I like the idea of USB. Might be good to take a clean leap forward.
I'm toying around with the idea of getting a new mixer. I've spent the last few months restoring an old synth & I honestly don't feel like spending the time cleaning out the gunk from my old mixer. Just wanna nake music. There are a couple of scratchy channels.. no biggie, but pissses me off a bit. Even though I've no computer atm.. I like the idea of USB. Might be good to take a clean leap forward.
>> Click here for NEW POSTS on subsekt <<KennethExack wrote:My kids and I are completely shocked by the specialized secrets that everyone has on this forum
Dialog I The Hole I subsekt Blog I The Bench I IG I SC I Mixes I FB