Can't figure out which mixer to use

Hi and welcome to the Cakewalk forum

I can only assume that you are reading about a specific mixer. That still surprises me though because recording two tracks only certainly isn't a limitation of USB.

For instance, you mention the OCTA-CAPTURE, which I also use and you can record ten tracks simultaneously via its USB connection.

What outboard mixers have you considered so far?

Maybe a difference between USB1 on old mixers and USB2 on new mixers?

USB 1 could barely handle stereo.  But USB2 can handle 16-24 realistically, and USB3 can do that and more with less latency.  So USB ain't the bottle neck.
 
Some "USB" mixers simply send the mixer output to the USB output so you can capture that stereo mix to your computer - great for documenting rehearsals and recording shows but lacking when it comes to multitrack recording.  Other mixers can replace your interface and deliver 8-16+ tracks in and out of your computer.  That is more what you are looking for, if I'm interpreting your question right.  And a mixer can help if you are doing multitrack recording often.  Setting up mics and sending and bussing signals and headphone mixes is easier with the right board.  But  higher quality is usually available by buying a board and interface separately, although it can be cheaper to buy an all in one.  But there are compromises at the lowest end, such as USB 1 and other restraints that only become apparent once you start using that board.
 
If you are using an octatrack you can simply add an analog board in front of it.  The roland has perfectly acceptable sound and you can get most of the benefits of a hardware board by simply finding one with direct outs and use that with the octocapture.  Unless you go with an extremely low end board you won't compromise your signals enough to matter and for band recording you can skip the latency of the Roland and SONAR by sending a speed of light signal from your analog board to the band while you worry about recording the proper signal.  That's what I'd do, if I'm reading you right.  I would not risk replacing my good interface with a cheap board with worse conversion and lesser pres (most likely) for a little convenience.  And remember, most pros choose separate hardware - I can't think of a new pro board/converter combo since Allen and Heath.

There is a thread about the Soundcraft http://forum.cakewalk.com/Soundcraft-Signature-MTK-m3417894.aspx
 
You'll see the OP gave up because the multitrack USB output was about half the level he desired. 
I still like the features of that board over the similar Presonus studio live series. But for me it would be a live mixer first not a studio interface. Those 2 are Analog boards with USB multi channel interfaces. From there you get into digital boards which are better but not for everyone. Many require an iPad to run, I kind of want the physical faders to be there. 
The one I was looking at for the studio because I felt the audio drivers would be a higher quality was a Motu interface. Either that of RME. You'll want to upgrade from the Roland if your going to have clients coming in.. I wouldn't trust one after the numerous threads with issues with drivers. 

Oh wow, this is a lot of information to go through. I appreciate the detailed replies and will go through them one by one, trying to understand them. Thanks so far, i will reply with probably some more questions :)

AT
USB 1 could barely handle stereo.  But USB2 can handle 16-24 realistically, and USB3 can do that and more with less latency.  So USB ain't the bottle neck.
 

 
I see. USB3 would be the way to go then.
 

AT
Some "USB" mixers simply send the mixer output to the USB output so you can capture that stereo mix to your computer - great for documenting rehearsals and recording shows but lacking when it comes to multitrack recording.  Other mixers can replace your interface and deliver 8-16+ tracks in and out of your computer.  That is more what you are looking for, if I'm interpreting your question right.  And a mixer can help if you are doing multitrack recording often.  Setting up mics and sending and bussing signals and headphone mixes is easier with the right board.  But  higher quality is usually available by buying a board and interface separately, although it can be cheaper to buy an all in one.  But there are compromises at the lowest end, such as USB 1 and other restraints that only become apparent once you start using that board.
 

 
But are there mixers that can make me record 24 tracks at the same time in Sonar? I mean, do they exist at all?
Am i asking something crazy? Unheard of? I just want a full band all mic'ed up to be able to record all tracks at the same time. I can't be the only person who wants this?
 

AT
 
If you are using an octatrack you can simply add an analog board in front of it.  The roland has perfectly acceptable sound and you can get most of the benefits of a hardware board by simply finding one with direct outs and use that with the octocapture.

Sounds great but wouldn't i need 3 Octa Captures then?
 

Cactus Music
There is a thread about the Soundcraft 
 
You'll see the OP gave up because the multitrack USB output was about half the level he desired. 
I still like the features of that board over the similar Presonus studio live series. But for me it would be a live mixer first not a studio interface. Those 2 are Analog boards with USB multi channel interfaces. From there you get into digital boards which are better but not for everyone. Many require an iPad to run, I kind of want the physical faders to be there. 
The one I was looking at for the studio because I felt the audio drivers would be a higher quality was a Motu interface. Either that of RME. You'll want to upgrade from the Roland if your going to have clients coming in.. I wouldn't trust one after the numerous threads with issues with drivers. 

I'll go through that thread. Thanks!
 
Yeah, i don't mind upgrading from that Roland DI. I just still don't know to what.

There are lots of mixers that record. Fewer that have 24 inputs. Some smaller units can be expanded to 24.

I have a Tascam 2488. When I slave my RME to the Tascam via SPIDF and the Audient to the RME that gives me 24 concurrent tracks six of which cannot be mixed to the mains.

This link looks like something I'd try if it weren't for the gear I own.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/F8

You can use up to three RME UCX units or UFX units together. In the case of UFX units I think that gets you to 72 in/out.

gswitz
There are lots of mixers that record. Fewer that have 24 inputs. Some smaller units can be expanded to 24.

I have a Tascam 2488. When I slave my RME to the Tascam via SPIDF and the Audient to the RME that gives me 24 concurrent tracks six of which cannot be mixed to the mains.

This link looks like something I'd try if it weren't for the gear I own.



You can use up to three RME UCX units or UFX units together. In the case of UFX units I think that gets you to 72 in/out.

Great, i will check this out. Thanks!

The UFX+ has MADI for 94/94 channels.
 
You have to plug in other MADI compatible units, but it gives you a single input for up to 94 channels to the computer (USB3 or firebolt - I mean thunderbolt).
 
Me, I don't want the trouble to set up that many mics. Who does?
 
Someone would have to pay me.
 
:-)
 
You can hook up external compliant mixers to the RME units. Idk about the tascam 20x20.
 
That said, while RME UCX supports a mixer, I haven't met or hear of anyone using an external mixer. The closest is people who get good with the RME Remote Controls. For the most part, we all do it in the computer or on the iPad.
 
RME's iPad solution doesn't wander. You are tethered and not wireless. I don't know of any effort to enable untethered wireless wandering from RME units. When I say tethered, I mean you have an actual USB cord connecting the iPad to the UFX/UCX.

gswitz
The UFX+ has MADI for 94/94 channels.
 
You have to plug in other MADI compatible units, but it gives you a single input for up to 94 channels to the computer (USB3 or firebolt - I mean thunderbolt).
 
Me, I don't want the trouble to set up that many mics. Who does?
 
Someone would have to pay me.
 
:-)
 
You can hook up external compliant mixers to the RME units. Idk about the tascam 20x20.
 
That said, while RME UCX supports a mixer, I haven't met or hear of anyone using an external mixer. The closest is people who get good with the RME Remote Controls. For the most part, we all do it in the computer or on the iPad.
 
RME's iPad solution doesn't wander. You are tethered and not wireless. I don't know of any effort to enable untethered wireless wandering from RME units. When I say tethered, I mean you have an actual USB cord connecting the iPad to the UFX/UCX.

No idea what you are saying but i'll figure it out :)
 
Thanks!

RME UFX and UCX can be controlled using mackie interface plugged in through midi ports.

https://www.rme-audio.de/download/fface_ufx_e.pdf

See page 88.

This gives you physical faders and pan pots etc for your interface. I don't have any friends controlling an RME this way.

There is another way to put in a hardware controller for the interface...
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ARCUSB

This device is made by RME for RME users.

...

Another tool for controlling the interface is an iPad.

...

The most common controller is a computer. Using a touch screen you can adjust settings silently.

The four methods above all require a device physically wired to the interface. That means you cannot take it with you into the crowd.

The Tascam US 20x20 is a good candidate, I would think.  8 pres, 10 ADDA converters, while the other 10 of 20 ins/outs come from the optical (ADAT) and Spdif in/out.  So $500 for 20 input/output channels, tho you need to find an ADAT unit or mixer output to get to 20.  All good quality hardware and USB 3 (which gets me down to 4-5 ms latency here at home).
 
Other than having to add an ADAT ADDA it should be pretty simple to physically route the appropriate mixer (needs line outs for each channel or plenty of buss and subs) to the inputs.  But then you have to set up the TASCAMs soft mixer for internal routing.  Then set up SONAR's soft mixer.  So, it can get a little complicated which means you just have to be careful.  But it can be done

Unless it is a controller mixer, the mixer simply controls its own internal sounds.  SONAR (and your interface with a its own soft mixer) don't change at all.
 
You can't ignore SONAR's mixer - it controls how much of the signal from your mixer gets into SONAR.  And you still mix out of it, using automation.  That is how it is usually done.  In that case, the mixer is static and the levels should be zeroed out.

AT
Unless it is a controller mixer, the mixer simply controls its own internal sounds.  SONAR (and your interface with a its own soft mixer) don't change at all.
 
You can't ignore SONAR's mixer - it controls how much of the signal from your mixer gets into SONAR.  And you still mix out of it, using automation.  That is how it is usually done.  In that case, the mixer is static and the levels should be zeroed out.

Confusing. Unless i'm reading it wrong you are saying you use the Sonar mixer and then you say it's static at 0 level?