Hello, I’m trying to decide between a Soundcraft Spirit FX16 + Audient EVO16 + 8-channel ADAT expander, or a Soundcraft Signature 22 MTK.
My main use is techno and modular synthesis. I like recording individual modular voices through the mixer’s analog EQ, and as far as I understand the FX16 direct outs can be recorded post-EQ, while the MTK’s USB multitrack recording is pre-EQ.
I also like sending software synths, vocals and other DAW tracks out to the mixer for analog EQ/coloration and then recording them back into the DAW. In the future I’d like to use the mixer’s master insert with a stereo bus compressor and/or saturator.
On the other hand, I also value simplicity, convenience and a fast workflow. The MTK’s integrated multitrack USB recording is very appealing, and I don’t want to spend my life dealing with routing and cables.
Would there actually be a significant audio quality difference between the FX16 + EVO16/ADAT setup and the Signature 22 MTK, or is the real difference mostly workflow and flexibility?
Sound quality matters, but workflow matters too.
Which setup would you choose and why? Have any of you used both approaches in a hybrid modular/DAW studio?
Thanks a lot
I’ve owned the MTK12. You aren’t really going to get any “analog EQ / coloration” from it. The EQs are very bland and lifeless; I would choose a software EQ every single time. And the mixer in general doesn’t have any sort of coloration to it. It’s very dry, sonically speaking. The fact that the EQs are also after the USB send makes it much less useful, IMO. And any sort of recall is impossible since it’s an analog mixer, so I quickly gave up the idea of summing through it and using it like a real mixing console. I also had QC issues with mine and pretty quickly got rid of it.
The best mixers for analog coloration and saturation don’t have built in USB interfaces, as those two things are often at odds with one another (vibe vs clean, digital signal taps). I would decide which is your priority and choose accordingly. An old Mackie desk will have much more vibe than this Soundcraft.
The SSL big six is nice sounding as a mixer, and nice workflow. The interface is ok-ish. To my ears, on the full mix analogue is nice, but if you capture the individual channels you might you might as well spend the money on a good-sounding interface. I like the sound of universal audio ones.
Thanks for the feedback. I’m looking at a used MTK22 for around €370 and, honestly, for this price…I like it because it offers almost everything I need: lots of channels, multitrack USB, sends/returns, mutes and a good hybrid hardware/DAW workflow, prefering analog sound and post eq record or direct outs… The only real downside for me is the pre-EQ recording, but that’s not a major issue, and for the saturation and colour i have external pedals compressors…
At that price, would you still choose something like a Mackie 1604/1642 VLZ, Allen & Heath MixWizard, Soundcraft FX16ii or fx16, GB2 or similar instead?because I’ll need to add an audient evo 16 and one adat or similar to record each sound and the price Will go to 600/700 Minimum.
Or would the MTK22 still be the best value? Another option I’m considering is a mixer with direct outs plus an Audient EVO 16 and ADAT expansion.
My priorities are 16+ channels, several stereo returns, inserts on the stereo bus for compressors/saturators, good analog sound, cue mixes and flexible routing. The SSL Big Six looks great but doesn’t have enough channels for my setup and i find It expensive.
Maybe mackie 1640 i its nice, but It has firewire and i have never used this, i would have any problems With this interfaces? I need adapters right?
. The SSL Big Six looks great but doesn’t have enough channels for my setup and i find It expensive.
direct out to audio interface is my preference but requires computer to be on and recording.
I do like send to my SSL Big Six mixer interface-> computer DAW for best of both worlds as I can use standalone or with the computer DAW
I Will ned more Channels With the SSL and i find It expensive
You could look at used A&H GL 2200 or GL 2400, ticks all your boxes, there are 16 and more tracks versions.
Here you can find good ones from 200-400€.
Add an decent interface and youre good to go.
1 Like
maybe something like ADAT expansion + audio interface? I use one with RME Babyface
Xcel Core? the new Yamaha digital mixers look nice too
If I was to start again I would probably grab a RME fireface UFX III audio interface to record direct to USB (or is it SD) when I could not be bothered firing up my computer
Yeah i know It, but if its expensive, and It doesnt have stereo outs only.mono or mono sum, or interface and few channels
This one With AN audient evo 16 and one cheap adat?
This would be better than the soundcraft mtk22? Or mackie onyx 1640i?
IS all in one and cheap…
Sorry if i misunderstood something but iam talking about that maybe
a great analog mixer in used condition (like the mentioned A&H, including post-EQ direct outs and diverse rec, group and what not outs and inserts. This could also be an old mackie, a midas, a soundcraft, depending on specs and sound, i just find that the old GLs are a bargain for their sound and specs)
plus an interface with a number of in and outputs what ever you need
plus cables
might be a cheap but flexible and good option.
I would say it depends on how you like to record. If you’re fine with getting that analog mojo from somewhere else and just using the mixer as basically a front-end audio interface, then the MTK is probably fine. I was just trying to say that its not going to really do anything magical to the signal before its turned digital. However if you want to record in a way where you are using the mixer to actually scuplt the sound before you go digital and doing minimal ITB processing, I would look elsewhere. It really depends on your goals. The fact that the EQ was meh (and that it was post USB) and the effects were meh really made the ‘mixer’ component fairly negligible for me when using the MTK12. It just felt like I was using a crappy audio interface with faders, which isn’t the same thing as using a mixer.
I’d stop focusing on what is the ‘best value’ and focus on what you need. Is this your first audio interface? What do you have now? I would probably try to get something as new as possible, as that is going to have the best converters, and converters are the most important thing an audio interface has, as those are the only things that can’t be bypassed.
1 Like
What is even the point of using a hardware mixer to record pre-eq direct outs if you’re not using the mic preamps? You might as well just go direct into an interface. At that point it’s just a large, expensive monitor mixer with the downside that your rough mix doesn’t get saved.
Of course you can use the sends and return those back to mixer channels to record them to the computer. But you could do the same thing with an interface and the sends in your DAW.
1 Like
I would advise you to stay away from the Soundcraft MTK22. It’s known to have a design flaw with the power supply that can fry it. I think it gets too hot - and there’s no power switch.
The first one I got second hand - it was working at the seller’s place, but when I plugged it in at home it was DOA. Thankfully it wasn’t that old so the seller ended up returning it.
I ended up buying a new one, which lasted about a year before the USB section fried (not to mention a few channels developing bad faders along the way)
Look online and you can find many similar stories - it’s a piece of crap
Thanks. I used to have the Allen & Heath ZED-16 and I really liked its sound, but it could only record the master output and the recording quality wasn’t great.
I Also tried the audient evo 16 and ssl2, the audient was nice, but i like more having a mixer, i like to adapt and sculpt the sounds With analog eq and then record It.
What I’m looking for is a mixer that allows me to use its EQ and analog character while recording each channel separately with decent audio quality. Then I can finish the track inside the DAW. I prefer analog character and warm sound, feeling that the mixer IS like an instrument too.
I’d also like to send individual synth tracks from the DAW back through the mixer, add some analog color, and record them again. I’d like to do the same with the final master bus( i can do this With AN external compressor/saturator but i prefer a mixer With some character but IS not a must)
Sometimes I’ll just record the stereo master for quick live jams or live sets, and other times I’ll record everything as multitrack for more detailed mixing and production.
is there an all-in-one solution you would recommend?
Would a setup with a dedicated audio interface, an analog mixer, and ADAT expanders provide significantly better audio quality than something like a Mackie Onyx 1640i?
My budget is not very high, so I’m trying to find the best balance between sound quality, flexibility, cost and what i need