MACKIE ONYX 400F (audio interface)

[Anderton]

I believe Cubase has a latency correction adjustment when going out to external gear and back in again. Sounds like it might need to be reset for the 400F.

[nigelgeden]

Hi

Thanks for the response,I've asked around and found no such function within Cubase myself.

Also ,the only external gear is the 400f itself,the yamaha and terratec are removed from the system altogether when testing the mackie,even if I record directly(keys etc.) into the 400f the,track still plays back out of time compared to what was monitored.

The other way of getting a "direct input" is to play a file from DAW,take output 1 from 400f patch it back to input 1 of same,switch off dsp mixer to stop feedback loop,record the mirrored signal to a track in the DAW and play back the results,which should play the two files back at the same starting point,it doesnt.

In a nutshell ,no external gear,recording directly from 400f input,down firewire to cubase,results in tracks not playing back at the same time they were recorded.

BTW
The higher the latency set,the worse the timing issues are .
Surely this should only be the case for monitoring,not actual recorded result?

Cheers

Nigel

[JAL]

I don't know about Cubase SL, but in SX, if you look under device setup, then VST audiobay, where you select the Onyx F driver, there's an "expert" button. Press that, and you can set the "record placement offset". I have to set mine at 2550.

I believe this offset has to be set because the 400f is not reporting the correct latency. Maybe this won't be necessary if that new driver ever gets released.

[nigelgeden]

Hi JAL

I checked the expert button,but sl does not have a record placement offset feature only a "preload amount" 2-6 seconds
and audio priority "low 2 very high"settings.

No matter how I set these doesnt help,setting the latency(buffers) in the 400f mixer directly affects how far off the playback tracks are,the audio should start where it was recorded not later.

If as you say the 400f is "not reporting the correct latency" the only way to solve my issue is to spend money on an sx upgrade to access the record placement feature,or return the 400f ,get a refund and buy a product that DOES report the correct latency.

If the 400f is not reporting the correct latency,this is clearly a fault with mackie and the 400f and needs to be resolved by them,
quickly!

A last thought,my firewire card is a pinnacle dv/av card with video ins and outs plus firewire 6 pin.
Someone suggested that the card is not "seen as top priority firewire by the pc and a stand-alone firewire card would help.

I cant see how this would make a difference to cubase' track placement in the software.

Any thoughts?

Nigel

[Music Calgary]

It is true that the 400F does not report the correct latency, that was noted and confirmed by another user some time ago. My memory isn't 100% on the source but I believe it was in the KVR forum.

The amount of offset required seems to vary slightly from DAW to DAW. Once you get it set though, you should be able to record in time.

[Anderton]

Reporting correct latency is, unfortunately, a common problem. Check out this page from Sonoma Wireworks, where they tested out a bunch of interfaces. The Mackie interfaces aren't on there, but it gets the point across.

[Music Calgary]

Thanks for the link. Kudos to the crew at Sonoma.

[Anderton]

Based on Sonar 6, Cakewalk just gave up -- they let you compensate for interface latency manually because what's reported may or may not be right.

The Sonoma Wire Works people are pretty hip, their Riffworks software is really something different. That was a fun Pro Review to do.

[Music Calgary]

Excellent podcast Craig!

So any reply yet rcassent?

[Music Calgary]

This is how Mackie treats their loyal customers...
http://forums.mackie.com/scripts/forum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=27;t=001077

[Music Calgary]

Almost 2007. Another year gone and still no driver from Mackie. Astounding.

[kuharido22]

Hey Guys I'm really confused. I'm building a small project studio, and after exhaustive research I narrowed my option down to the Mackie Onyx 400 and the Echo Audiofire8 . The Mackie seems to have superior preamps, but frankly I'm terrified after what I've read in his post. And once I buy the system it's next to impossible for me to return it (international shipping). What's the deal here ? Is it really that bad of a unit ?

To make things worse, the fact that you can only have one audio application at a time is ridiculous ! Cheaop buil-in soundcards are better at that ... maybe I understood the complaint wrong, I sure hope so, if anyone would like to clear up please. In addition, mackie only mentions support for ASIO and GSIF among others ... what about ASIO2 and GSIF 2.0 ?

I will be using a PC with more or less the following specs :

Core 2 Duo 6600
Asus P5B MOBO
3 ~ 4 GB RAM

It's a small studio, I record mostly on my own. My music is primarily (electic guitars through POD XT, acoustic guitar sometimes mic'ed sometimes direct, vocals, keyboard, and MIDI to use samples like quantum leap orchestra) .

By all means, if you have other audio interfaces to suggest please do.

I really appreciate the help ! And I need it bad ! I'm new to this! Plleeease =)

[kang]

It is kind of driving me crazy that Mackie hasn't even hinted at any progress on new non-beta multi-client drivers. You'd think getting this done before Christmas would help sales a bit.

[Music Calgary]

The 400F just isn't worth the hassle IMO. Yes the preamps do sound good, but the way the unit integrates into real world studio workflow is nothing but grief. Do yourself a favor and look for something with better driver support because Mackie's is simply the worst in the business, bar none.

The product support at Mackie is as bad as I've ever seen from any company in any sector. It's non existent. If you want to test that out, go join their forum and then make a post saying that you have just bought a 400F and are having problems with the driver. Ask them politely when the new (not the antique beta) driver will be released. You'll see, they'll completely ignore you. They have shown nothing but contempt for their loyal users as you can see in their forum and here.

Either way, best of luck finding a great sounding card and happy music making. FWIW for close to the same price a DAV BG-1 into an Emu 1212m sounds better than a 400F and then you have 2 channels of turly world class preamps in your studio, i.e. the preamps in the DAV BG-1 are amazing whereas the preamps in the 400F are just good. If I had this to do over again I would avoid the 400F completely and get the DAV BG-1 then buy an EMU1212m and use that until I could save up for a Lavry or Apogee converter, then sell the EMU1212m.

This year I spent thousands of dollars in Mackie gear. But never again. As long as I live I will never buy another product from Mackie or Loud.

[Badside]

It is in fact frightening to see so many people with problems with their 400F, but also hard to understand, as I've had nothing but good luck with this unit.
I bought it maybe 7-8 months ago mostly based on this review and used it to record all the demos for my band's album.
Now we are recording the actual album with it and so far so good (very good even).
The drummer overdubbed his tracks over the existing guitar/bass/vocals tracks. We used all 8 inputs, with the built-in preamps handling kick, snare and OHs (only had access to a lower quality Mackie board for the other inputs, but the tom tracks actually turned very good).
So I was recording 8 tracks over 5-6 tracks playing back (with some compression and EQing running) and I only got one single drop-out in the entire 2 weeks session, and it was my fault: I was loop-recording a tricky section and I had like 10-12 takes piled on top of each other (that 80-96 tracks by the way) which, even though they were muted, were still being read by Sonar (in case I unmute them while playing...). After that I made sure to archive my takes (move them to a archived tracks) after every 2-3 takes.
The sound turned out very good, I'm really surprised! I sometimes cannot believe I recorded this myself! The only problems are caused by an "okay" sounding room. For example, the imaging of the hi-hat is really bad, but it was really close to a wall so the reflections are all over the place. In comparison, the ride and crash on the other side of the kit can be pinpointed to an exact position.
The kick is really meaty and the snare really pops. I had the 400F phantom power the OH and snare mics.
I did the bass tracks direct (using the 400F's DI inputs) and they mesh so well with the drum. The bass is really fat and complements the kick nicely. I do intend on re-amping them but I'm not even sure it's necessary. Bass is a Musicman Stingray 5.

One thing that did disappoint me is the headphone amp. It's good for listening to rough mixes at night or tracking vocals, but it ain't cutting it for drums. To hear the click clearly, even with Vic Firth isolation headphones, the drummer still had to wear earplugs and crank the headphones. I had a cheap Samson headphones amp (4 channels) and with the volume on 5, it was already louder than the Mackie, yet it kept going louder and louder above that. I'm actually surprised that my headphones survived the volume that he was putting through them.
Of course, the Samson is a dedicated headphone amp, while the Mackie is an audio interface first, then an headphone amp. Still, it's a freaking Samson...

Anyway, rock solid. No latency or timing problems at all with Sonar 4.

[kang]

Mines working well too, I just want to be able to use another one.

[Music Calgary]

Fact is that your 400F does have problems, you just haven't discovered them yet. For example, here's one way in which your unit doesn't function as intended.

Your 400F came bundled with Tracktion. Tracktion has a feature to edit audio using an external editor. But the 400F can't do that due to a flaw in the driver, so your hardware doesn't function as intended and that prevents your software from functioning. That's just one of many irrefutable bugs already admitted by Mackie which affect all 400F users, including yourself.

FWIW Tracktion works fine with any budget soundcard from any competitive company.

Anyhow I realize not everyone edits audio when they record, nor does everyone use Tracktion (so this might not affect you) - but that isn't the point. When Volvo sells you a car with a broken heater you don't just go, "Oh well, it's warm out." you request a repair. And if they don't provide one, you stop buying Volvos. It's important to stand up for what's right, now more than ever IMO.

[Badside]

Originally posted by Music Calgary Fact is that your 400F does have problems, you just haven't discovered them yet. For example, here's one way in which your unit doesn't function as intended.

 

 

You're right, I don't use Trackion. I tried it but hated it (feels like running a Flash application off a website).

I do all my editing within the same application (Sonar).

 

I know what you're talking about, but it has never been a problem to me in 8 months. I guess we have different needs and ways of working and I'm hoping your issue will be resolved.

 

I do know however that you've been mentionning this since the beginning. I know I was able to return mine when I bought it initially (then changed my mind and bought it back).

[Music Calgary]

You're right, I don't use Trackion. I tried it but hated it (feels like running a Flash application off a website).

From Photoshop to Windows, all software feels weird at first. The example is tertiary, the key fact to grab here is that your 400F indeed does not operate as designed.

I do all my editing within the same application (Sonar).

Interesting. In all my years of studio and music experience I've never met anyone who uses Sonar exclusively for all their audio needs. Doesn't sound conducive to quality work, but as long as you're happy. Anyhow this is why you haven't come up against some of the limits of your 400F, your workflow is extraordinarily simplified.

I know what you're talking about, but it has never been a problem to me in 8 months. I guess we have different needs and ways of working and I'm hoping your issue will be resolved. I do know however that you've been mentionning this since the beginning. I know I was able to return mine when I bought it initially (then changed my mind and bought it back).

How is "returning your unit" equal to "never been a problem". You are contradicting yourself. Anyhow I respectfully disagree with you, i.e. if you actually returned your unit them I'm not inclined to extend the "never a problem" designation...

Regardless the key point here is that the 400F you have today does have problems, you just haven't discovered them. Yet. It's important to recognize the vast difference between that and "not having problems".

[Badside]

Originally posted by Music Calgary From Photoshop to Windows, all software feels weird at first. The example is tertiary, the key fact to grab here is that your 400F indeed does not operate as designed. Interesting. In all my years of studio and music experience I've never met anyone who uses Sonar exclusively for all their audio needs. Doesn't sound conducive to quality work, but as long as you're happy. Anyhow this is why you haven't come up against some of the limits of your 400F, your workflow is extraordinarily simplified. How is "returning your unit" equal to "never been a problem". You are contradicting yourself. Anyhow I respectfully disagree with you, i.e. if you actually returned your unit them I'm not inclined to extend the "never a problem" designation... Regardless the key point here is that the 400F you have today does have problems, you just haven't discovered them. Yet. It's important to recognize the vast difference between that and "not having problems".

Thank you for teaching me that I do not know what I'm doing

It's ok that you are not satisfied with your unit, but you don't need to make those who are feel stupid.

What you are implying is that Sonar 4 is an amateur software yet Tracktion is pro-level. And the fact that with Sonar I do not need to use external software with it seem like a bad thing...

Whatever

I'm sorry I offended you by posting a positive comment about the 400F. I have an album to record, continue the whining as you may, you've officially been ignored.

[Music Calgary]

Thank you for teaching me that I do not know what I'm doing

I never said that.

It's ok that you are not satisfied with your unit, but you don't need to make those who are feel stupid.

If you "feel stupid" that has nothing to do with me. I certainly never said any such thing nor do I feel responsible for the way you feel. Sorry.

What you are implying is that Sonar 4 is an amateur software yet Tracktion is pro-level.

Nope. Not at all. Full stop.

However I do believe that anyone who uses Sonar exclusively for all their audio needs is operating within a very limited sphere.

And the fact that wth Sonar I do not need to use external software with it seem like a bad thing...

I've never heard an impressive recording which was tracked, mixed, and mastered in Sonar. Sorry. Please prove me wrong by posting an impressive recording you mastered in Sonar. Otherwise...

I'm sorry I offended you by posting a positive comment about the 400F.

I'm not offended. Positive comments from people who have barely used the unit are what they are. No biggie for sure. Cheers.

I am amused however that you feel you are providing valuable info on the 400F given your lack of interest in exploring how the unit operates. All the positive comments on the 400F seem to have come from people who haven't put the unit through its paces, or in some cases, don't even own one... I'm not sure how much value readers place in those comments. Personally I place no value in that sort of internet filler, it's just verbal sawdust.

I have an album to record, continue the whining as you may, you've officially been ignored.

Happy music making. I'll try to carry on without you.

[Music Calgary]

Some reports are that the Focusrite Saffire is better than the 400F, must check one out:
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/SaffirePro/

[Anderton]

>

I don't use it exclusively, but it does the heavy lifting around here. I don't feel like I'm working in a limited sphere at all, in fact, aside from Sony Acid, it's the only program that lets you edit acidized loops so you can fix the problems on loop CDs that the manufacturer didn't

I don't master in Sonar, but absolutely do tracking and mixing. If you haven't checked out what it's up to lately, you might be surprised.

[Music Calgary]

I have checked it out lately. Definitely limited as a "sole source" audio tool. There's just no question about that whatsoever. But please prove me wrong by posting an impressive recording which was tracked, mixed, and mastered in Sonar. I'm eager to be proven wrong when it comes to software limitations.

I don't master in Sonar, but absolutely do tracking and mixing.

Precisely my point.

[Anderton]

The only program I've seen that really places equal emphasis on mastering and tracking is Sequoia and to a lesser extent, Samplitude. Compare something like the sample rate conversion artifacts in, say, Logic compared to Audition or Peak and it's obvious why most pro mastering engineers choose dedicated programs. It seems most hosts recognize that mixing and mastering are separate processes, so are optimized for one or the other.

I think that the future of host development is to fold in quality mastering options, but we're not there yet, with the exceptions mentioned above.

>

I already said I didn't master in Sonar:confused: The various tracks I've released over the past few years (some are on my web site, www.craiganderton.com) were done on Sonar or Acid, with the live performance on my podcast done on Ableton Live (but mastered in Wavelab and Har-Bal).