Help me expand recordability, please

[Toast]

Let me try to keep the long story as short as possible.

 

Up until recently, I haven't needed to record more than one instrument at a time, so I have a little interface with two inputs. Basically, one input is an out from my mixing board, and the other is a mic I set up in the room, and I blend the two accordingly.

 

Now, however, I want to record up to 8 tracks simultaneously but independently. I haven't acquired a bigger interface for that (yet), but my mixing board can definitely handle it.

 

I have a Mackie 1604 VLZ Pro. So I thought the obvious answer would be to simply plug each instrument/mic into its own channel input, then use the 8 direct outs (on tracks 1-8) to connect directly into an 8-track digital audio interface.

 

But then I checked out the owner's manual, and it's suggesting that I put the digital 8-track between channel inputs 9-16 and send to direct outs 5-8, and also sub outs 1-4.

 

And THEN I read a review where someone suggested that instead I should run the eight sub outs to an analog/digital converter (like a Behringer ADA8000) to convert them to ADAT light pipe, then use four assignable subs and four aux sends to basically create 16 inputs ... but I don't quite understand what's going on there.

 

So ... why shouldn't I just use the 8 direct outs on tracks 1-8 and plug them directly into an 8-track audio interface? Is it not that simple?

 

Thanks.

[Phil O'Keefe]

There's no reason why you can't do exactly what you suggest and connect the eight direct outputs to the line inputs on an eight channel audio interface. The other options will let you do a few other things, such as combining multiple inputs and submixing them (via the four groups) before sending them to an audio interface, but if you don't think you're going to need to do any submixing and the recording tasks you envision require eight independent sources / mic preamps and sending each to its own track, using the direct outs should work just fine.

[Toast]

Thanks as always for the response.

 

From a recording standpoint, what's the purpose of grouping with the subs? Is it for adding rack effects?

 

I've really only used this board for live performance before, so I don't really know all the ins and outs just yet. And really all I've ever done with the subs before is things like put my acoustic in one group because my direct in is noisy; if mic'd up, put the cymbals in one group so I could EQ the highs down ... that kinda stuff. I don't really have any rack effects other than a comp/eq but I only use that to EQ the room, not to EQ any specific tracks.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Assume you had four backing vocalists, using four vocal microphones, but you wanted to submix them down to a single mono track or stereo pair. Or maybe you have a drum kit with four toms, and you want to track them to just a stereo pair of submixed toms instead of four individual tom tracks. Subs would allow you to mix them together and route them to one or two tracks instead of four individual ones. Of course, you can also do it in your DAW too, after you record the individual tracks... which may be the more flexible approach.