My Mackie 1640 (original) died yesterd. : I need to replace it, opinions wanted.

[xiwiwix1]

I've narrowed it down to 4 options:

 

Steinberg MR816 CSX

Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56

Mackie 1640i

Allen Heath ZED-R16

 

I need 16 channels so I'm going to get either two of the Steinberg, two Focustire or one and one.

 

These are the pros and cons as I see them:

 

 

Steinberg MR816 CSX

Pros: Cubase integrated

Cons: No Protools, no midi

 

 

Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56

Pros: Pro tools, midi

Cons: Don't know yet.

 

 

Mackie 1640i

Pros: Sounds great!!!

Cons: massive in size

 

 

Allen Heath ZED-R16

Pros: Don't konw yet

Cons: Don't know yet

 

 

 

As you can see I'm stuck. Yes I like the idea of being able to switch over to Protools but I don't mind staying with Cubase either. Midi, well I can always grab some add on later so it's not really a big plus.

 

Do I go with the Mackie that I love, and upgrade to protools later.

 

Possiblly the Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56, with it's midi and pro tools compatibility. I wonder how it sounds compared to the others being the newest of the bunch.

 

Or do I just stick with Cubase and grab the Steinberg MR816 CSX which I've heard so much about it's integrated benefits.

 

 

 

Does anyone out there have any experience with all/any four? I really want the best sound quality pres above all. Please help. I'm really at a dead zone between all three. Please give me your opinions/experiences on these units.

[MikeRivers]

 

I've narrowed it down to 4 options: Steinberg MR816 CSX Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56 Mackie 1640i Allen Heath ZED-R16

 

 

I've reviewed all of those except the Steinberg. You can read what I had to say about them on my web site (see below).

 

I had an Onyx 1640 which didn't die, it just developed an odd problem. When anything was connected to the Recording outputs or with the Firewire option card installed, channels would oscillate at about 200 kHz. They weren't all at the same frequency so they'd beat and you'd hear a faint whistle in the mix output.

 

It's been replaced by a 1640i which sounds and works just fine, but I don't use it a lot since it isn't a regular part of my normal recording setup, hence it's stored on a shelf and I have to haul it out when I need it. It's what I take out when I'm doing live sound at a folk festival and I'm afraid of the junker mixer they're going to supply - those things are often as not done by volunteers, which includes the gear. Anyway, there's nothing at all wrong with the 1640i as a general interface, mixer, and a bunch of good sounding preamps.

 

I would liked to have kept the ZED-R16. I really liked it a lot but it just couldn't fully replace my regular console, a Soundcraft 600. I really want its big brother, the GS-R24, but I do so little paid work in the studio any more I can't really justify the $8,000 or so.

 

The Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56 is a very good and very flexible unit too, but it's not a real console. However it has gobs of outputs and up to 16 mono mixes (or 8 stereo, or some number in between if you need some of each). They're usually fine for headphones and monitor while tracking, but you can't really mix a project on the software mixer since it doesn't have any EQ, just levels and pans. I really like mixing on real faders.

 

It's impossible to say which one sounds best. They're all in the "no reason you can't do excellent work with it" class. You should worry more about how you're going to work with it than how it sounds.

 

 

I need 16 channels so I'm going to get either two of the Steinberg, two Focustire or one and one.

 

 

You have to be careful about that. Not all Firewire devices allow you to put more than one on a bus, and ASIO (at least for Windows) allows you to have only one device. Those that let you hang another (usually the same model) interface on the Firewire bus have a driver that makes them look like a single device.

 

I seem to recall that you can't link two Liquid 56s because that many channels would exceed the bandwidth of the Firewire chip that they use. But you probably don't have to. In addition to the 8 mic/line inputs, it has two ADAT optical ports. If you get a mic preamp with ADAT output, you can easily add 8 more inputs. And do it twice, for 24 inputs, plus two through the S/PDIF port and send them all to your computer for recording. You're not locked into Focusrite preamps so you can get another model for a slightly different color. The two Liquid channels aren't really dramatic but they'll give you a little variety.

 

 

As you can see I'm stuck. Yes I like the idea of being able to switch over to Protools but I don't mind staying with Cubase either. Midi, well I can always grab some add on later so it's not really a big plus.

 

 

Pro Tools 9 will work with any of those interfaces, or any interface for which there's an ASIO driver, so don't let that distract you. The A&H has MIDI output on the faders so you can use it as a control surface for the Pro Tools mixer, or do some mixing digitally (in the box) and mix other channels through the analog path in the mixer. It's the best of both worlds. The only inconvenience is that while Pro Tools will follow your fader moves, the faders aren't motorized, so while the channel gain will follow an automated mix that you recorded in Pro Tools, the fader knobs don't move.

 

 

Do I go with the Mackie that I love, and upgrade to protools later.

 

 

Upgrade to Pro Tools whenever you can afford it, whenever you're ready for it.

 

 

Does anyone out there have any experience with all/any four?

 

 

Lee Flier has a ZED-R16 and loves it. She has an appreciation for an analog signal path and prefers hands-on-faders mixing instead of adjusting levels with a mouse, so it suits her working style well. And she knows what good sound is. I think she mostly works with Reaper, probably has no compelling need to move to Pro Tools.

 

 

I really want the best sound quality pres above all.

 

 

I can assure you that nobody is going to send your CD back for a refund, accusing you of not using $1,000/channel mic preamps. In the price range of these products, there are barely discernible differences in how they sound, but they all sound just fine and won't in any way keep you from doing a great job.

[UstadKhanAli]

If we're just talking about the sound, I'd go with Allen and Heath.

[BushmasterM4]

I started with the 1640 and upgraded to the 1640i this year. You know how good it sounds because you own the 1640. To me its a no brainer. Your use to the set up and now with the 1640i you can use the Perkins Eq and send all 16 channels back through the mixer during mix-down if you want. Plus many other added options. Its a nice board.

[Mats Nermark]

Hi,

 

I'm in a similar position as the OP so I will follow this thread with interest. Thanks!

 

/Mats N

[philbo]

Ever consider finding a tech and getting it fixed? I hate to see something else on its way to the landfill...

Maybe, at least, there's an electronic technician college in your area who can use it a a troubleshooting project?

[MikeRivers]

 

Ever consider finding a tech and getting it fixed? I hate to see something else on its way to the landfill... Maybe, at least, there's an electronic technician college in your area who can use it a a troubleshooting project?

 

 

It's a bugger to work on, but maybe it's something simple and easy to get at. We'll probably never know.

[BushmasterM4]

Maybe a loose connection. Try re-seating all ribbon connections. Wouldnt hurt to try.

[techristian]

These newer electronic devices have many surface mount parts which aren't easy to solder. Some of these devices can be fixed if you take the modular approach. (unless they stuck everything on a single circuit board)

 

If it is in the power supply, many things can discovered just by LOOKING. Blown caps are easy to see. (for an example)

 

Dan

[scud133]

if i was gonna buy a new mixer today it would be one of those Presonus digital ones. those are outrageously cool

[MikeRivers]

 

if i was gonna buy a new mixer today it would be one of those Presonus digital ones. those are outrageously cool

 

 

Agreed. if being cool is important to you. I choose mixers based on what I expect to do with it most of the time, and that's decidedly not messing with a computer. There are indeed a lot of good features in the PreSonus StudioLive, but I had one around for a while (review on my web site) and it really isn't my cup of tea no matter how cool it is.

[Philter]

My buddy with a live sound company uses two different Allen & Heath mixers, one 16 channel and the other 24. He swears by them, and from the time I've spent playing on them and listening, they sound great and feel really solid. I know that's basically their reputation in general. This is for live use. My 2cents.

[Lee Flier]

Mike is correct that I have the A&H and I love it. It truly does sound way better than it has a right to at that price.

 

And apart from the fact that you can use it as an analog mixer, you can also use its faders as MIDI faders to mix in the box. Keep in mind that with the Mackie 1640i, for instance, you can't do either of the above. You can record using its analog channels, of course, and you can route effects and such out of your DAW via an aux send. And you can route the master mix out of your DAW back into the Mackie... but you can't send the multitrack signals back out of the DAW into individual mixer channels, and you can't use the faders as MIDI controllers for your DAW mix. With the A&H, you can do either one, or any combination of both. Personally, I found it pretty astonishing the difference between summing inside the computer and sending the individual tracks out to the board and doing an analog mix.

 

You can also use the board as a live mixer, and record either the post-fader stereo mix and/or pre-fader multitracks to a DAW. So it really is an amazingly versatile beast, and have I mentioned that it sounds awesome?

[MikeRivers]

Keep in mind that with the Mackie 1640i, for instance, you can't do either of the above. You can record using its analog channels, of course, and you can route effects and such out of your DAW via an aux send. And you can route the master mix out of your DAW back into the Mackie... but you can't send the multitrack signals back out of the DAW into individual mixer channels, and you can't use the faders as MIDI controllers for your DAW mix.

 

A correction here: The Mackie 1640i can stream 16 channels from the DAW back into the mixer. While the faders are strictly analog and can't be used to control the DAW, you can mix 16 tracks from the computer through the 1640i. It doesn't have the flexibility that the ZED-R16 offers in selecting where the analog return from the computer comes into the channel strip, but if you want to mix 16 channels analog, you can do that with the 1640i.

 

There was a time when, at least in the US, the ZED-R16 was cheaper than it is today and 1640i was more expensive. At one point the two sold for the same price. As of today, Sweetwater's prices are $1500 for the Mackie and $2500 for the A&H, and that's a pretty big difference for someone for whom money IS an object.

 

I don't think there's an argument worth having over which one has the best preamps or whether the "Perkins EQ" or "traditional British EQ" is better. Both sound fine and don't have any sonic problems that would get in the way of doing good work. While I never had the feeling that the A&H was in any way fragile, my sense is that the Mackie is really built like a tank (at least on the outside). If the mixer was going to be tossed in the back of the car a couple of times a week to do live shows, the Mackie would probably be the better choice. If it was going to mostly iive in the studio, I'd take the A&H for its flexibility.

 

I have a 1640i. I don't have a ZED-R16. The reason is simple - Mackie gave me one of their mixers and A&H didn't. But if I had to buy one and these were my two choices, or even throwing a PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2 into the pot, I'd take the A&H because that most closely suits the way I work and the direction I figure I'll go if I start moving toward more DAW use.

[BushmasterM4]

Ditto Mike. I also looked at the ZED-R16 before upgrading my 1640 to the 1640i and the cost kept me from buying it. Plus my Sweetwater rep sold me the 1640i cheaper than the todays $1500 going price. Huge price difference and no concernable differences IMO.

[Lee Flier]

A correction here: The Mackie 1640i can stream 16 channels from the DAW back into the mixer. While the faders are strictly analog and can't be used to control the DAW, you can mix 16 tracks from the computer through the 1640i. It doesn't have the flexibility that the ZED-R16 offers in selecting where the analog return from the computer comes into the channel strip, but if you want to mix 16 channels analog, you can do that with the 1640i.

 

Hmm... really? That was one thing that kept me from buying it a couple of years ago - is this a relatively new addition?

 

There was a time when, at least in the US, the ZED-R16 was cheaper than it is today and 1640i was more expensive. At one point the two sold for the same price. As of today, Sweetwater's prices are $1500 for the Mackie and $2500 for the A&H, and that's a pretty big difference for someone for whom money IS an object.

 

Yeah, that is a bit odd that A&H raised the price. I paid $1799 for a B-stock R16. One could probably still find a good deal on B-stock, though it's true that it won't be as cheap as the Mackie. If you really can do analog mixes out of your DAW on the Mackie now, that makes them a lot more comparable in features at a pretty big price difference.

 

The only other caveat about the Mackie is their famed lack of driver support. Has that gotten any better?

 

I don't think there's an argument worth having over which one has the best preamps or whether the "Perkins EQ" or "traditional British EQ" is better. Both sound fine and don't have any sonic problems that would get in the way of doing good work.

 

Yeah, agreed. I'm pretty impressed with the Onyx pres and EQ. I like the A&H just a bit more, but that's very subjective.

 

While I never had the feeling that the A&H was in any way fragile, my sense is that the Mackie is really built like a tank (at least on the outside). If the mixer was going to be tossed in the back of the car a couple of times a week to do live shows, the Mackie would probably be the better choice. If it was going to mostly iive in the studio, I'd take the A&H for its flexibility. I have a 1640i. I don't have a ZED-R16. The reason is simple - Mackie gave me one of their mixers and A&H didn't. But if I had to buy one and these were my two choices, or even throwing a PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2 into the pot, I'd take the A&H because that most closely suits the way I work and the direction I figure I'll go if I start moving toward more DAW use.

 

Good points.

[Lee Knight]

I do love my little Mackie ONYX 820i I use for telephony audio for my day gig. It really sounds great. The only issue is the pres have less gain than the earlier Mackie models. Fine for most things, but can be an issue for VO with a dynamic.

 

But I gotta say, that A&H Lee's got makes me want one for the home studio.

[MikeRivers]

 

A correction here: The Mackie 1640i can stream 16 channels from the DAW back into the mixer. Hmm... really? That was one thing that kept me from buying it a couple of years ago - is this a relatively new addition?

 

 

The 1640i has always had 16 Firewire streams going back to the mixer from the computer as well as 16 going out to the computer. And only 16 - you can't record 16 inputs plus the stereo mix. If you want to record the stereo mix, you have to press a button that routes the stereo bus to the channel 15-16 A/D converters. Your ZED-R16 has the same arrangement only A&H put another A/D converter on the main stereo bus so you can record a live mix as well as all the inputs on separate tracks.

 

All the other Mackie i series have all the input channels going out to the computer, but only two coming back. The original 1640 (not i) with the Firewire option card was 18 out and 2 back. You might remember one of those.

 

 

If you really can do analog mixes out of your DAW on the Mackie now, that makes them a lot more comparable in features at a pretty big price difference.

 

 

What's missing is the MIDI controller stuff. Today I don't need that since if I have to mix tracks from the computer, I send them out analog to the console. I can still use plug-ins on the tracks, but I don't need to use a mouse for mixing. The ZED-R16 has a little more thought put into how the Firewire streams come back in - before or after the EQ, or with the channels at fixed gain so you can mix in the computer (controlling the mix with the MIDI out of the faders) and still sum the channels on the analog bus. Some people say the difference is like night and day. I say "goodnight."

 

 

The only other caveat about the Mackie is their famed lack of driver support. Has that gotten any better?

 

 

Not that I've been able to tell. It took them a long time to get a Win7 driver out and it appears to work. I'm still running WinXP and the original driver they released when they introduced the console works fine for me. The new "universal" driver works too, no better nor worse. But yeah, they're really slow about updating drivers and there are a lot of people on their forum complaining about having bought expensive doorstops.

 

But you know computers enough to know that there are two kinds of people in the world, those who have no problems and those whose problems never go away.

 

Or maybe there are two kinds of computers. the ones that run anything you throw at them and the ones that balk. I have the Focusrite Scarlett USB2 interfaces here for review now and they work fine on all my computers except the one I had hoped they'd work with, my Toshiba netbook that I travel with now. I was dreaming of a small box that would let me record four tracks, a pair for a live mix coming off the console and another pair for a stereo mic. It records, but crackles. And when playing back even a single stereo track in Reaper, the interface hangs and Reaper crashes, or maybe vice versa, and Reaper is a pretty light duty program. Even on that micro Atom powered computer, Reaper's resuorce mmonitor shows practically no load. DPC Latency Checker shows a big honkin' spike about ever 30 seconds and others not quite so high but less periodic and I can't find anything to make them go away. But then it's a Toshiba, and they have a bad rep for working with audio hardware. I didn't buy that computer to do audio on so it's no big deal, I'm just disappointed that I can't seem to make it work.

[Lee Knight]

No issues with the XP Mackie driver.

[xiwiwix1]

Amazing! Thank you guys for all the input!

 

I run small studio and record anything and everything rock. From Indie to Death Metal. I've never mixed "out of the box;" that's how I learned and what I'm used to. Though, the thought of being able to mix on a mixer sounds like something I would like to do but isn't important.

 

My question about mixing on a analog mixer:

 

Does it affect the sound, or is it just feel?

 

When I first got the mixer I had a lot of drivers issues, but once they got sorted out it ran great! Then Win7 came out and the best quality I could record at was 48000khz, and anything higher bogs my system down. Regardless, the pres sound amazing. I had the unit since 05, or 07... I really don't remember.

 

No I haven't opened the unit up. I saw the magic come of the unit, and then the smell of fried electrical parts hit my nose. lol I'm guessing the units done. Besides I wouldn't want to record on a unit that I didn't feel was at 100% if I'm charging some one. Though at a later point I'm going to send it to a Mackie repair center and have them go thru it, fix it and then I'll put it up on eBay as a repaired unit.

 

I've been giving it some thought and I want to move on to Pro Tools.

 

 

A few questions about the ZED R16:

 

Isn't this a new unit? Didn't it come out after the 1640i? Or is this the same unit I was looking at when I bought my 1640 (original)? I remember looking at an A&H when I bought it, but I just don't remember the model number. Was the unit available at that time?

 

If so I remember people saying it was no contest between the Mackie and the A&H but at the same time they were in different price. The ZEDR16 was only $1000 new, while the Mackie was closer to $2000 (including the price of the firewire adaptor). SO why would a unit almost triple in price if it's the same unit? Could it really be as good as the Mackie if it was once at a lower price range? I'm asking because I'm starting to lean towards the A&H.

 

 

Some people are saying I can't go wrong with any of the units, well I don't have money to throw away and I want to make sure I make the right decision based on facts and opinions (people who own the unit). It took me a few weeks to pick the 1640, because I wanted to make sure I was making the right choice.

 

 

Anyone on the Focusrite want to chime in?

[xiwiwix1]

Mike, can you please post some links to your reviews?

 

If anyone knows of any reviews on these units, can you please post some links here.

[MikeRivers]

My question about mixing on a analog mixer: Does it affect the sound, or is it just feel?

 

Now you've done it - started another analog vs. digital debate.

 

I think it affects sound because it affects feel - your feel, when you're mixing. It's just so much easier to react to the music and make adjustments to the mix when you're not staring at a computer screen. When I work on a computer, I get distracted by the computer and sometimes I don't even hear the music. But this may not apply to the kind of music you record, so you'll have to feel yourself out.

 

I can tell you that the guy who was project manager of these things when the 1640i came out, who's a decent musician and engineer himself, started working "hybrid" - using the computer as a recorder, editor, and occasional signal processor, and actually mixing the a 1640i, told me that he was finishing projects a lot quicker and they were sounding better. I think that one reason was that he was simplifying his work flow and concentrating more on the music than the process. But he liked the sound of the mixer, too.

 

No I haven't opened the unit up. I saw the magic come of the unit, and then the smell of fried electrical parts hit my nose. lol I'm guessing the units done.

 

Could be a power supply. Getting it repaired will cost a lot less than buying a new mixer, but maybe you're just tired of it.

 

A few questions about the ZED R16: Isn't this a new unit? Didn't it come out after the 1640i? Or is this the same unit I was looking at when I bought my 1640 (original)?

 

I don't remember when the 1640i came out, but I had the ZED-R16 in here in November 2008 and it was fairly new at the time, so, maybe 3 years ago. This was their first recording mixer in many years. They had, and still have a strong line of live sound mixers, but they dropped out of the recording field for quite some time before bringing out the ZED-R16.

 

If so I remember people saying it was no contest between the Mackie and the A&H but at the same time they were in different price. The ZEDR16 was only $1000 new, while the Mackie was closer to $2000 (including the price of the firewire adaptor).

 

What does "no contest" mean? Who was the winner? You must have been looking at two different mixers, neither a 1640i or ZED-R16. The Mackie with the Firewire option card was the 1640, the predecessor to the 1640i. The ZED-R16 was, I think, $3,000 list when it first came out.

 

My reviews and articles are on the web page at the bottom of this message.

[xiwiwix1]

Now you've done it - started another analog vs. digital debate.

 

I lol'd Then it sounds like there is no real difference in sound, other than what people think they hear.

 

Could be a power supply. Getting it repaired will cost a lot less than buying a new mixer, but maybe you're just tired of it.

 

Not tired of it, which is why I wouldn't mind getting the 1640i. I just don't want anymore problems with it. I've never had a good expirece with electronics coming back working as before. When I power up the unit, then turn on the monitors (speakers) I hear a hum and no sound from my system. It's the same thru the headphone jack on the board.

 

 

What does "no contest" mean? Who was the winner? You must have been looking at two different mixers, neither a 1640i or ZED-R16. The Mackie with the Firewire option card was the 1640, the predecessor to the 1640i. The ZED-R16 was, I think, $3,000 list when it first came out.

 

I was paraphrasing what I remember some people talking (reviews/forum posts) about; nothing more. I was looking at some A&H, not to sure which one. Yes, I am aware that the 1640i is the updated version of my mixer. If it waslisted at $3k, then I don't think it was the one I was looking at. Maybe it was another brand/model. It's been a while.

 

Thanks for all the help Mike.

[Lee Flier]

I lol'd Then it sounds like there is no real difference in sound, other than what people think they hear.

 

This is definitely not true. There's a big difference in sound, even with just a simple "faders up" comparison where you leave the DAW faders at 0 and get your balance on the analog board vs. in the computer. Yes, "feel" helps in terms of doing a good mix, but by no means is that all there is to it! I was pretty astonished at the difference, frankly. I knew there was a big difference on higher end consoles because I've heard that many times, but I didn't expect it to be the case with an inexpensive console like the R16. Another friend of mine has a Toft console and had the same experience.

[Mats Nermark]

Hi,

 

This is a very interesting and educational thread. Thanks to all involved!

 

Cheers,

 

Mats N