Do i really need a mixer?

[Andelusion]

Hey all, i've been using the line out of my rack for recording for some time now although of course it never sounds great..

I'm hoping to get a microphone setup for christmas so i can mic up my Marshall for some hopefully decent quality recordings.

I'm looking at buying a Shure SM57 mix, a Mackie 1202 mixer and an M-Audio Delta 66 soundcard with breakout box.

The thing is, do i really need the mixer? I will only be micing up one instrument at a time (my guitar) since i'm not recording in a band situation. I'm looking for good quality recordings of one single instrument at a time. If i didn't have to shell out for the Mackie mixer then this would obviously save me some money.

So could i just use the Shure SM57 straight into the Breakout box of the Delta66 and then EQ in Cubase SX (if this is actually possible although is EQ overly important?) Or would the mixer really make a difference?

Thanks all

[Two hands31]

I've got a Tascam US-122 that I run mics straight into. No mixer involved. When I record in the studio, running through the console, all I ever touch is the level settings. I never use EQ while recording. Ever. EQ is for the mixing process. If it doesn't sound right during the recording stage, fix it at the source (guitar, amp, effects, cab, microphone, mic placement, etc.)

[Soup Kitchen Studios]

Your soundcard needs to have a mic preamp if you are going to plug a microphone into it. Check with the manufacturer.

p.s. there are millions of reasons to use an EQ when tracking.

[Andelusion]

Well, i'm not hoping to make brilliant quality recordings, just something that'll capture the sound of my marshall as apposed to the dry somewhat lifeless signal that my rack puts out

I'll be buying an M-Audio Delta 66 soundcard (that includes 4 1/4"ins and 4 1/4" outs) so i'm guessing i'll be able to run the mic into that then that is connected to the soundcard > straight into the computer.

I think i'll look at the 'audio buddy' thing by M-audio to i'll be able to control levels aswell.

Thanks all!

[Rotti]

Definately go for a mic preamp instead of the mixer. It will let you conect your guitar mic etc, and will have better sound quality than the mixer. Do a search on ebay for preamp in the pro audio section. There are some sweet ones out there. Also if you are going with a preamp like the audio buddy, or similar you might be able to do without the delta 66's breakout box. The preamp will basicly become your breakout box. Then you could purchase a cheaper M-audio like the audiophile 24/96 and save a couple of bucks there too.

[BeastofLove]

Originally Posted by Rotti

Definately go for a mic preamp instead of the mixer. It will let you conect your guitar mic etc, and will have better sound quality than the mixer.

Not necessarilly- the mic preamps in my Mackie 1202-VLZ sound better than my ART V3 mic pre, and the mixer (used and plentiful) was cheaper than the ART mic pre. Actually, the pres in there sound better than the JoeMeek VC3Q pre I had as well, and the JoeMeek stuff ain't cheap. Oddly enough, the inexpensive Studio Projects VTB-1 sounds great and sounds better than the Mackie pres.

Plus, with the mixer you get the option of 2-mic (or more) amp recording, and the ability to use multiple mics for any jam-sessions when folks come by. Sure you still have to mix it all to stereo, but it's a bit more flexible than a single input pre.

-Ben

[Andelusion]

Originally Posted by Rotti

Definately go for a mic preamp instead of the mixer. It will let you conect your guitar mic etc, and will have better sound quality than the mixer. Do a search on ebay for preamp in the pro audio section. There are some sweet ones out there. Also if you are going with a preamp like the audio buddy, or similar you might be able to do without the delta 66's breakout box. The preamp will basicly become your breakout box. Then you could purchase a cheaper M-audio like the audiophile 24/96 and save a couple of bucks there too.

Yeah :P I realised eventually that if i just got something like an Audio Buddy then that'd do me fine for Mic inputs, i wouldn't really need the breakoutbox with the audio 66 since i'm only ever going to be using one input at a time, as far as i can see anyway, i'm not going to be recording more than one instrumental simultaneously.

I've decided i'm going to get an M-audio audio buddy, an Audiophile 2496 card and the shure sm57 I hope it all sounds decent once set up

Cheers for all the help guys

[Rotti]

Most of the preamps I'm looking at have at least two inputs. (I'm shopping for one now) and I just asumed that the preamp quality would be better in a dedicated preamp than a mixer. Since you paying for just pre-amp. Maybe you just really like the sound of your mackie? and some people would prefer the Joe Meek? Sound quality is like that. We all hear things differently.

[Rotti]

Cool, I'm sure it will sound great.

[Soup Kitchen Studios]

Originally Posted by Andelusion

I'll be buying an M-Audio Delta 66 soundcard (that includes 4 1/4"ins and 4 1/4" outs) so i'm guessing i'll be able to run the mic into that then that is connected to the soundcard > straight into the computer.

I think i'll look at the 'audio buddy' thing by M-audio to i'll be able to control levels aswell.

Thanks all!

The Delta 66 has 4 line-level inputs. You cannot plug microphones into these inputs. Well, not sucessfully anyway. You need a microphone pre-amp before the Delta 66.

The "audio buddy" thing is a microphone pre-amp. You would need two of them to record four microphones into your delta 66.

You see, a mixer is a series of "channel strips". Each channel strip generally has a Mic Pre-amp, EQ, and on nicer boards you'll get some control over dynamics (i.e. compression). By buying a microphone preamp, you are streamlining your purchase for only your actual intended use. You don't need 12 channels of mic pre and eq, so you just buy the single mic pre.

It's like difference between buying a combo amp or a triaxis/2:90/4X12. You need to have all the components either way, or it won't sound very good.

SKS

[Soup Kitchen Studios]

Originally Posted by Rotti

I just asumed that the preamp quality would be better in a dedicated preamp than a mixer. Since you paying for just pre-amp. Maybe you just really like the sound of your mackie?

That's a big assumption. Some of the best pres in the world are on mixers.

If you want a great pre at an affordable price, go to mercenary.com and buy the FMR RNP 2 channel preamp. Pick up a FMR RNC while you're at it, you'll be glad you did.

[Two hands31]

Originally Posted by Soup Kitchen Studios

p.s. there are millions of reasons to use an EQ when tracking.

And yet Jack Richardson has rarely found one, and recommends you don't use EQ when tracking, but instead fix it at the source.

[Soup Kitchen Studios]

Fantastic for Jack. If everyone followed the same rules, everyone's record would sound the same.

[Two hands31]

Originally Posted by Soup Kitchen Studios

Fantastic for Jack. If everyone followed the same rules, everyone's record would sound the same.

My point is, EQ is overused. I'll bet 95% of all engineers out there never use EQ when tracking, unless it's for a dramatic effect (and even then, it's usually not printed to tape/disk).

[Soup Kitchen Studios]

This isn't the point of the thread... but your statement is just a random guess at a percentage. I know your teachers may have taught you this and that are rules, but there really aren't any rules. You don't get a peice of paper one day and then you are officially an engineer and you obey the rules of engineering.

Some engineers do things one way and some do them another, but using eq during tracking certainly isn't illeagl or "wrong" and it can very often improve the sound. Being unconventional is how many interesting sounds are achieved ...do you think trent reznor records everything flat?

Have you tried slapping an api 550b on a kick when you're tracking? It really isn't that horrible of a thing