Best 24 channel mixer with touch sensitive faders and audio interface

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Spencerleehorton

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2012
Messages
4,035
Location
Felixstowe, Suffolk, UK
Hi All,

Thinking about selling my Allen & Heath GS3000 32 channel mixer, digidesign command 8, digidesign 96 I/o interface and HD core card into protools, running OSX 10.10 Yosemite.

I want to upgrade to high Sierra with Protools 11/12 and a digital mixer/interface. Minimum of at least 16 individual inputs and 4 separate outputs, Ideally 24 input channels.

I’m looking at the Allen & Heath QU-24 and presonus studio live 24.
I wondered what other options people could suggest as I think both of these mixers don’t offer touch sensitive faders.

Presonus studiolive has touch sensitive faders
 
I don't even own a mixer but that sounds like a fancy feature for what would essentially be a "live mixer" (or something with integrated converters). IMO I don't think converters integrated into the mixer would be as good as a quality computer audio interface. I have a fetish about measuring the noise of things (making recordings with a test tone on one channel to establish level and 50 ohm term on another channel and then making hi-res spectra with software) and the results showed that my separate USB audio interface is much better. I'm talking about a difference of 10dB at low frequencies.

Meaning if you're recording, it's going to be very difficult to beat a separate proper converter / computer audio interface that can do high level analog I/O. IMO, the ideal recording setup is, vaguely speaking, a proper converter / computer audio interface connected with balanced DB25 snakes to  a proper "recording console" and by "proper" I mean they can do +20dBu IO so that noise performance of the analog side is good.

If you're doing live mixing then I suppose it doesn't matter. And I'm sure you could make a nice studio recording with a live mixer w/ integrated ADC/DAC. But if you want the best possible noise performance (for studio recording), I would be weary of an integrated all-in-one solution.
 
I would be weary of an integrated all-in-one solution.
.

The affordable all in one mixers suffer from switch glitch,  non fuctional motorized faders.  Defective LCD,s and such.    They also are difficult to get apart and to repair.  I view them as a short term product that is to be trashed after 5 years of use.  Kind of like a Mackie analog  8 bus.  Difficult to get apart and frustrating when switches have had there 5000 pushes.
 
+1 on good I/O  and then add a daw-integrated mixing interface. 

I went through a similar gear cycle back in the Yamaha O1v / Tascam DM days, and found those mixers to be great for live and for using like an instrument for DJ type sessions, but studio mixes on it were lackluster.
 
I wasn’t expecting that everyone is against these products tbh!!
Maybe my setup isn’t so bad after all, could you guys suggest a good upgrade to 96i/o interface and command 8 and GS3000?
 
Lynx Aurora integrate well with Pro Tools,  the 1st version is cheap these days.  I use those with Avid Artist Mix units on Pro Tools 12 with HD native card. . And then analog outboard for tracking and mixing.

Have heard good things about the new Avid HD converters too.
 
Lynx Aurora integrate well with Pro Tools,  the 1st version is cheap these days.  I use those with Avid Artist Mix units on Pro Tools 12 with HD native card. . And then analog outboard for tracking and mixing

I wish I had heard the above advice before giving into the urge to spend money on a new digital/hybrid mixer.
Analog pre's and summing around quality, dedicated A/D D/A is the way to go--  any control surface will do as long is it fits with your workflow.
I also second the suggestion on  used AES16e's and Auroras.  To make noticeable improvements over 1st gen aurora's require a serious chunk of change.
 
Ok I will investigate the lynx option, this is one of my many other thoughts.

(I have 16 mic preamps 8 x Neve and 8 x API312) Mic pre’s in patch bay patched into tascam us 16x08 interface, also patched in patch bay connected USB to computer.
Monitors connected to command 8 midi controller to control DAW.

My only concerns are monitoring before and whilst recording as regards latency.

This option would only cost me £260
So I would only need to sell mixer or 96i/o interface and core card, ideally I would rather try this before i sell anything to make sure it does everything I want.
 
Regarding latency an analog mixer is the way to go imo.  But it doesn't need to be fancy.  I use outboard mic pres and mult the outputs,  one straight to DAW,  the other to a rack line mixer that does the cue mix.

Since the mixer path is only for monitoring,  it doesn't affect the quality of the recorded signal.  The only effect is loading due to the mult,  which is usually negligible.
 
Splitting with patchbay is easiest.

Why not just keep the GS3000? You have great pres with the Neve and API,  use them for mics  and the Heath for everything else.
 
The main reason for getting rid of the gs3000 is that it takes up so much space and the 96i/o and he core card are pretty ancient now!!
Would getting a modern interface have better converters?
I mainly record at 24bit 48khz and have no real desire to record any higher due to no real evidence that it will improve the 44.1khz 16bit eventual output? Open to a debate here!

I would like to build a more aesthetically appealing mixing room which fits my needs a bit more and sound quality is improved.
 
very interested in more details of how it improved the audio? could you describe it a bit more please MountCyanide?

Ive seen a few going for about £1200 with d-sub leads etc, i would like to know how there is so much difference in quality between all these digital interfaces? seems weird? im sure it all an be explained.

A while ago i was interested in the SSL madixtreme interface as a friend had changed over to it and said pretty much the same thing, that the overall sound quality was much improved on every level, i suppose i need to hear it to believe it!!!!!
 
When I would track with the 96io I was let down by what was recorded as opposed to monitored by my console while tracking (Yamaha PM-2000). I remember likening it to the sound of the E-MU SP-12 Drum Machine - a bit of an exaggeration but that's how I felt! So I'd stick a plugin on it and move on. I also preferred the old Apogee AD8000 to the Digi but that wasn't a faithful repro but rather a sweet one.
When I finally got the Aurora, I'd track and it was the same as what I monitored. And less reliance on plugins.
 
I have to say, now i've checked out a few videos on the Lynx Aurora the sound quality is very nice and i think i'm sold on this!!!
There are no videos for the Tascam US 16x08 which have impressed me yet.
The routing capabilities of the lynx are amazing!!
 
There's also the PreSonus Quantum 4848 which is DB25 18dBu. And the Tascam ML-32D which is DB25 24dBu. The only concern would be that the digital outs are not modular like the Lynx. The Quantum is thunderbolt and ADAT optical (which is arguably a good compromise) whereas the ML-32D is Dante only. The Lynx Aurora is DB25 20dBu and supports multiple modular digital I/O options.

But these are all DB25 so you can make new snake cables (or just buy them in many cases) as your rig evolves and they're high level I/O which is necessary if you don't want to basically waste the dynamic range of your analog stuff. What's the point of your fancy Neve clone putting out 26dBu if you can't actually use it?
 
very interested in more details of how it improved the audio? could you describe it a bit more please MountCyanide?
Glad you've been persuaded to try it out.  As for my switch, it was a move away from toslinked gear (we're going pretty far back now!) and it had a large impact on my confidence with clients- perhaps even bigger than the first time I heard a 312 on a snare.  :)

fwiw, I added a Big Ben to the rig a little later, but it's doubtful I could consistently pick between external or internal clock while blindfolded.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top