Studio setup - few questions

[aediorum]

Hello all!

Now, I'm in the midst of planning and setting up my home studio. I have most of the kit already, and the plan is there. I know what I want to be able to but am somewhat struggling with making sure it all works together. For clarity, I am confident in my ITB set-up, that doesn't really need your attention, it is the stuff that's OoTB which I'm having trouble with: so, I am entirely open to suggestions, tips or even a complete overhaul of my plan! I'll start with giving you my current plan: -

PLAN
1) All audio to ‘finish’ in Renoise
2) Essential: record each channel from mixer separately, concurrently (i.e. can record live jams, then mix down afterwards)
3) Essential: can use both external and internal FX on internal sounds
4) Essential: can use both external and internal FX on external sounds (synths, drum machines, etc.)
5) Ideally: have each drum voice controllable by a separate channel on the mixer such that can easily fade in / out, pan, EQ, etc..
6) All tracks from mixer will have own track in Renoise. So, keep external sounds controlled by physical mixer, and internal sounds by NanoKontrol? Or, have all controlled within Renoise by NanoKontrol?

(Levels, pan + AUX sends ITB) Renoise control by Launchpad (clip selector) / Oxygen (keys) / Kontrol2 (‘virtual’ mixer)
(Levels, pan + AUX sends OoTB) Synths / drum machines control by physical mixer

Renoise → → → → (?LINE / USB?) → → → → → → ¦ mixer ¦ → Renoise
Synths → → ¦mixer¦ (aux sends) → → [EXT. FX] → ¦ mixer ¦ → Renoise

Within Renoise, have sends with pre-programmed doofers for ‘static’ FX; parameters don’t need to be touched much, if at all.
AUX sends on mixer for external FX; how to route internal sounds to external FX and how to control amount?

From mixer, have aux sends for FX: i.e. -
Send 1: parallel compression / distortion, fuzz, etc.
Send 2: distortion channel
Send 3: modulation / delay
Send 4: reverb

SUB 1 and 2 ...possible recording channel:
Source signal → guitar / bass amps → SPLIT→ 1) mic → mixer
__________________________________________2) DI → mixer

MIDI
Novation LaunchPad Mini }→ DUPLEX
Korg nanoKONTROL2 - 8 faders, 8 knobs, 3 buttons per channel }→ DUPLEX
M-Audio Oxygen }→ composition, not live; playing hard synths

Renoise controlling clock → Monomachine ¦→ DRUM MACHINE(S)
______________________________________¦→ SYNTHS / MODULAR

LIVE
Control patterns with Lauflicht (step sequencer) / LiveDive (Ableton style clips), triggering pre-made atmos, pads, etc..
Have some drum loops pre-recorded (live MIDI → drum synth?), but also ability to program drum patterns live (LiveDive)

Should probably mention that my mixer is a Behringer 2442FX, here's a picture of the top and rear

QUESTIONS
8 (4x4 stereo?) subgroup outputs total. Use as extra AUX sends??? Use separate channels on mixer for each drum voice (from drum machine); use to group drum voices to send to Renoise???
How to integrate pedal FX with set-up??? For space saving (mostly) and easy access, pedals on shelves in rack???
How to make sure I can record each mixer channel on separate channels ITB, at the same time (i.e. for recording live jams; for later editing, mixing down, etc.)???
How to best connect guitar / bass amps such that they can be used with both internal and external sounds (DI and mic!) ???
How to best send sounds ITB to external FX and equipment??? (advice on audio interface)
Stereo rack compressor for main insert serial compression???
Do I need a patchbay???

As you can probably tell, I'm quite new to this 'studio' stuff, though certainly not new to production and the gear world, as such. Any and all suggestions / pointers are welcome. Thank you for taking the time to help me out!

[aediorum]

Let me know if the plan doesn't make any sense to you, I've spent quite a lot of time staring at it, editing it, so if it makes no sense to anyone else that would be entirely understandable!

[BDeep]

Hmmm, interesting. The way I see it, you want the mixer to be sort of your central hub from where you can bring everything together, add fx and route back to your PC.
I'm not entirely sure how many external inputs/instruments you need. Can you elaborate a bit on that? I see guitar, bass, drummachine, monomachine... So 14 (mono) at minimum I guess?
Then you want Renoise channels to be able to use external FX, in this scenario it would probably be best to use your mixer's Aux routing for that. For that, you'll need to insert the outputs from your pc into a proper mixer-input. Let's say that's 8 (4 stereo) channels coming out of Renoise.
So we're now at 22 for inputs. (note, I -think- with what you have in mind, your mixer might be to small).
Now for the interesting bit. How to get all of that back into Renoise. Since you want most of it separately, those first 14 inputs will have to come out of the mixer. It depends a bit on whether you can live with the "clean" input on the mixer, or you want each channel with added FX. In the first case, you can abuse the inserts on your mixer to tap a line out to your PC, after the gain stage.
But, you'll also have the FX you added to your Renoise parts. Do you want to be able to record those in your pc, as separate channels?

You know, looking at it, I think you want too much out of it. It's supposed to do live, recording and adding outboard fx to renoise. You might want to re-wire the whole thing for live performances (without dedicated channels for drums for instance).

Can I suggest you start making a drawing for yourself? I'm sure it will be a lot clearer to you if you visualise what you're trying to accomplish and how that impacts the scaling of your setup.
It's not that hard, all external instruments need a channel on the mixer, and if you want to add ext. fx to Renoise, those channels will need a channelinput as well.
External fx are routed via Aux send and come back via the returns. Note that any dynamics processing (distortion, compression) are usually done via inserts.

For pedals - I'd just insert them between the instruments and the mixer.
Guitar/bass - I'd recommend DI for recording a live performance and Mic for studio recording
For recording each channel (as per your question) - like I said, if you want to record it as performed (with FX) I'm afraid you're out of luck as you lack the proper outputs. You can abuse the inserts if you want to record the clean feeds.
Audio interface - I'd work the rest out first, so you can say something useful on the needed channels

Hope this helps - a bit...

[aediorum]

I think you're right in saying that I want it to do much with it, so let's focus on the studio / production set-up for now and ignore the live set-up. That can come (much) later!

Guitar / bass I don't use that often for producing, so we can exclude those. Have other means of recording those than through the mixer!

Monomachine, can't decide whether or not to make use of all 3 stereo outs or just stick to 1. That's what I've been using so far, the single stereo out. Let's stick with that for now. So, 1 stereo input.

Drum machine, when I eventually pull my finger out and decide on what to get, it'll be 6 mono inputs.

Let's leave another 1 stereo inputs available for another synth. That leaves me with 2 mono inputs and 2 stereo input.

4 stereo channels is probably about right for channels coming out of Renoise, but can live with 2 for now. That leaves 2 mono inputs

Now that I think about it, internal FX for Renoise parts is probably perfectly fine for my workflow, but having the ability to route (for example) a sine wave from Renoise through my bass amp, either MIC or DI back to mixer / soundcard, then record back in to Renoise would be ideal. I wouldn't need to do this during jams, that would be during mix downs, etc.. So could potentially unplug something to do that. Does that help things at all?

I have actually made a lot of drawings, but because I am not familiar with routing things through a mixer, I'm not always 100% sure on my insert channels and that, whether or not they're wet or dry, that sort of thing.

Which outputs would I need in order to record each channel separately with FX?

Really appreciate your help, hope I've shed some light on the missing information!

[yan6]

I use a similar setup. The key to it all for me was a multichannel audio interface and a patchbay. The patchbay makes it easy to swap things around and route them differently. I dont use much outboard effects, but do send audio back into my eurorack for processing.

[OHADOHAD]

That's my setup.. It might help you.. it might not..
But that's the hybrid way that works for me now.
I can jam, record every channel separately, eq/compress/fx whatever.. some hardware fx routed thru the mixer..
Anyway, if you have questions feel free to ask

[aediorum]

Thanks for your responses guys! Could you both go in to a little more detail? Like I said above, I'm not married to my set-up plan, so am entirely open to other ideas. Who knows, I might end up doing a hybrid of my own idea, and yous two's set-ups.

[aediorum]

As an aside, what are your thoughts on using a Mackie Onyx 1620i, for example, such that each of my channels and AUX sends can be routed to the computer and recorded separately, whilst also being able to send two channel from my DAW to the mixer. I assume that would solve most of my problems right?

Since by using a firewire mixer I wouldn't have to get a massive, expensive soundcard. I would also be able to use my external FX on the internal sounds, and internal FX on both internal and external sounds. I could then also use my controllers to control ITB FX on both internal and external sounds, and switch between the source I want to send to the mixer on channel 15/16.

Realistically, I think I would use the DAW for long samples, which I would have already processed and pre-prepared, so would only be adjusting volume, EQ and some extra FX if playing live.

This seems to solve a lot of my problems, without having to do lots of complicated routing! Could also be used in a live context I reckon. What you you guys think?

[Wiu]

As an aside, what are your thoughts on using a Mackie Onyx 1620i, for example, such that each of my channels and AUX sends can be routed to the computer and recorded separately, whilst also being able to send two channel from my DAW to the mixer. I assume that would solve most of my problems right?

Since by using a firewire mixer I wouldn't have to get a massive, expensive soundcard. I would also be able to use my external FX on the internal sounds, and internal FX on both internal and external sounds. I could then also use my controllers to control ITB FX on both internal and external sounds, and switch between the source I want to send to the mixer on channel 15/16.

Realistically, I think I would use the DAW for long samples, which I would have already processed and pre-prepared, so would only be adjusting volume, EQ and some extra FX if playing live.

This seems to solve a lot of my problems, without having to do lots of complicated routing! Could also be used in a live context I reckon. What you you guys think?

I personally wouldn't be buying a Firewire product new now. I thought it was kind of a dying out a as Thunderbolt and USB3 seem to be the new kings. I may well be wrong though. If you're really after multi track recording via a mixer, then check out the new Soundcraft Signature MTK range of mixers. The 22 channel one is like 22in/22out. There was a thread in 'The Hole' where I mentioned them recently.

[Wiu]

Ahhhhhhhhh, there it is.....

http://www.subsekt.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6110

[Mattias]

Off-topic but;
You have far too many nice pieces of gear to let the audio of it be contaminated through a Behringer console

And yea, do buy new Firewire stuff in this day and age.

[aediorum]

The Behringer doesn't sound too bad, I've tried far, far worse mixers! That's not to say it's good, but it does the trick for now.

Regarding the Soundcraft MTK, looks great! Only thing I don't get is that it's USB 2.0, so if the MTK is £600 and the Mackie Onyx 1620i is ~£450, surely I'd be better off with a firewire mixer, since they're ever so slightly faster?

It's quite funny, just had a look at the SOS video for the Soundcraft mixers, and I know the guy doing the sales pitch. Have already asked him to hook me up, might be able to get me a staff discount or something. Had no idea he worked for Harmon/Soundcraft!

[b0n0b0]

One thing I don't get, with all these mixers that do multi track recording they all seem to record pre-EQ/compressor/fader.

Surely it'd make more sense to record the tracks into a DAW after the EQ/comp/fader, if I'm jamming away a track using hardware and recording in separate tracks to edit later, I'm using the faders, mutes, eqs and probably some compression as part of the 'performance' to build the track. All that is lost or impossible to use with the Soundcraft mixers when recording live multitrack since the record tap is before all those things.

I don't see how thats better than using a mixer with 2 outputs and recording a single stereo output.

I want a mixer that lets me tap outputs from my modular and jam away, using mutes, faders, EQ that are high quality hardware, and record those tracks in WITH those fader, EQ and mutes, so I can then break the tracks up into loops and edit the arrangement/structure and refine it later.

It seems the only way to do that is to use a multi-IO audio interface and then use a midi controller to do all the 'mixing' which is far less immediate, less satisfying and means I'd always have to have the computer on to jam away even when I don't want to record it.

[A.M.Smith]

fwiw I have skipped the mixer entirely in favor of a patch bay and multitracking directly to my DAW...I do my EQ work there after I record my jams and edit the audio down

the nice thing about this method is it makes me very conscious of how the sounds fit together in a mix before I touch and EQ...I usually end up EQing by arrangement and find that I most just end up using a low end shelf on most things to clean up the bottom end

the only thing I am missing are aux sends...but I've managed to mostly choose FX with wet/dry knobs so it's worked out

also all this signal going in and out of Reason you want to do would have me concerned about latency...if Reason has decent FX I don't see the benefit of taking a sound out of the box and back in

[Wiu]

One thing I don't get, with all these mixers that do multi track recording they all seem to record pre-EQ/compressor/fader.

Surely it'd make more sense to record the tracks into a DAW after the EQ/comp/fader, if I'm jamming away a track using hardware and recording in separate tracks to edit later, I'm using the faders, mutes, eqs and probably some compression as part of the 'performance' to build the track. All that is lost or impossible to use with the Soundcraft mixers when recording live multitrack since the record tap is before all those things.

I don't see how thats better than using a mixer with 2 outputs and recording a single stereo output.

I want a mixer that lets me tap outputs from my modular and jam away, using mutes, faders, EQ that are high quality hardware, and record those tracks in WITH those fader, EQ and mutes, so I can then break the tracks up into loops and edit the arrangement/structure and refine it later.

It seems the only way to do that is to use a multi-IO audio interface and then use a midi controller to do all the 'mixing' which is far less immediate, less satisfying and means I'd always have to have the computer on to jam away even when I don't want to record it.

Ohh, where does it say it records pre eq/fader? Not seeing that written anywhere. Or is it staring me in the face and I'm just to oblivious to it in my excitement

[b0n0b0]

I'm going on this:

"-All the inputs ALWAYS send down the USB channel of the same number, i.e. Channel 1 on the console -> USB 1, Channel 2 -> USB2, and so on... The USB send point is post-gain and pre-limiter/HPF/EQ. Another send point would add considerable cost and would not jive with the goal we had with the Signature MTKs: to make it very affordable. On the 12MTK, USB 13/14 is the master bus pre-fader. And on the Signature 22MTK, USB 23/24 is the master bus pre-fader. This allows you to get analogue summing back in your DAW. You have +22dB of headroom on the Signature (hit that master bus HARD, it sounds great!) and the 0dbFS point for the USB send on the master bus is maximised to take advantage of this... analogue clipping = GOOD. digital clipping = BAD."


From the guy who did the promo videos from soundcraft in this thread:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much ... ers-9.html



It really sucks, since it really limits the usefulness in how I would use it since it means the goody features I'd want to play with are all applied after the record output I'd want to use.

I can kinda see why, your supposed to use it to combine audio tracks in analogue rather than as a set of channel strips.

I'm thinking of building my own setup using software to do a 2 band EQ, compressor, two send tracks and pan on each track and then setup a midi controller that will record all the automation I do when I'm jamming and a get a multi-in audio interface to record the audio into separate tracks. That way I can edit the midi data and the audio when I'm working it into a track. Not as neat or cool, but it does allow for more editing after (which may be a bad thing!) and is probably about the same price.

[Wiu]

I'm going on this:

"-All the inputs ALWAYS send down the USB channel of the same number, i.e. Channel 1 on the console -> USB 1, Channel 2 -> USB2, and so on... The USB send point is post-gain and pre-limiter/HPF/EQ. Another send point would add considerable cost and would not jive with the goal we had with the Signature MTKs: to make it very affordable. On the 12MTK, USB 13/14 is the master bus pre-fader. And on the Signature 22MTK, USB 23/24 is the master bus pre-fader. This allows you to get analogue summing back in your DAW. You have +22dB of headroom on the Signature (hit that master bus HARD, it sounds great!) and the 0dbFS point for the USB send on the master bus is maximised to take advantage of this... analogue clipping = GOOD. digital clipping = BAD."


From the guy who did the promo videos from soundcraft in this thread:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much ... ers-9.html



It really sucks, since it really limits the usefulness in how I would use it since it means the goody features I'd want to play with are all applied after the record output I'd want to use.

I can kinda see why, your supposed to use it to combine audio tracks in analogue rather than as a set of channel strips.

I'm thinking of building my own setup using software to do a 2 band EQ, compressor, two send tracks and pan on each track and then setup a midi controller that will record all the automation I do when I'm jamming and a get a multi-in audio interface to record the audio into separate tracks. That way I can edit the midi data and the audio when I'm working it into a track. Not as neat or cool, but it does allow for more editing after (which may be a bad thing!) and is probably about the same price.

That seems like a weird decision. Why make such a song and dance about how great the EQ is etc, when you can't even record any tweaks made! I'm going to send Soundcraft a message to find out what's what. If this is correct then it's defo not on the top of my 'To Buy' list anymore. In fact, an old Soundcraft M12 mixer would probably be better. At least that has individual outs so I could multitrack record if I had an interface with enough inputs.

Which leads me into another thing that always pisses me off. Why is it most audio interface manufacturers seem happy to release these products with a high count of ins/outs, when most are fucking digital and no real use if you just want to record a load of shitty old drum machines and a couple of synths!?!

[aediorum]

I'm starting to doubt the usefulness of these USB / Firewire mixers, they all seem to have made compromises on functionality in order to either make it cheaper to produce or as a result of poor design; either way they seem quite limited. Alas, I have found another solution...

So, I've realised that I could use the 8 direct outs on my 2442FX, and the last 4 stereo channels can be routed to individual SUB outs - that gives me enough channels for both a live and studio setup. They are all post-EQ, fader, etc., so that works perfectly!

However!, I've only managed to find two audio interfaces with enough I/O for my needs - I've worked out I need 16 ins and 6 outs, so my mixer is *just* big enough, for both live and studio - the Tascam US-16x08 and the MOTU 16A. Only issue now, is the soundcard. Anyone have experience with a Tascam US-16x08?

[b0n0b0]

I actually quite like the idea of getting one of those mixers with direct outs and an audio interface with lots of ins, seems like it'd fit my workflow far better. Its just finding enough inputs.. that Tascam US-16x08 looks like it only has the 3 pin guitar style inputs, can you connect standard jacks with a converter cable easily enough? The MOTU16A is far to expensive for me!

[Lost to the Void]

Tascam US-16x08 looks like it only has the 3 pin guitar style inputs, can you connect standard jacks with a converter cable easily enough? !

Those 3 pin sockets are XLR, generally for microphones, they probably run through onboard preamps (probably also with 48v ghost power option)
You also have 2 instrument/line (1/4 inch jack) on the front, and then 6 of Instrument/line inputs (1/4 jack) on the back.
So I wouldn`t suggest trying to convert your jacks to XLR