In addition to the above, if you don’t care about recording the DAW FX through the BiG SiX’s stereo channel (to apply EQ essentially), you can also send all DAW FX sends into one of the additional external inputs, press the “External from USB Return” switches, and have it printed onto your Main Out when recording. That way you don’t use up a dedicated Stereo Input Channel for this.
If you wanna record the DAW FX individually without external EQ you may just as well record it in the DAW.
Lastly, apart from the 4 Mono Channels (with EQ, Compressor and level control), 4 Stereo Channels (with EQ and level control) and 2 External Inputs (without EQ, but with Level out control), you also have an additional “Sum IP to Main” Stereo Input (without EQ, or level control) which gets added to the Main Bus before the compressor.
Add the fact that the Stereo channels can be mono’d, and you can Essentially Sum 12 mono channels with EQ (four with pan) plus 3 stereo channels (without EQ), bringing the channel count up to 18 (16 via USB).
The Eagle-eyed reader will have noticed though, that if you send your outboard effects / DAW FX to the External Input(s), you can not record this input directly via the USB interface.
This matters to me because I use only outboard effects (BIM and BAM).
There is a workaround for this as well though, if you wanna track a manual performance of the delay parameter, for example, and have it recorded as an audio track with only the BIM on it.
To do this you route all the other channels you need to listen to during the performance to BUS B, then activate monitoring of BUS B also. Then the External Inputs are solo’d on the Main Out which you can record with USB interface Ch. 15/16.
Once your recording is good, route this back from the DAW to the External Input that previously carried the outboard effect and press the relevant “External from USB Return” switch, overriding the audio signal from the physical outboard effect.
Voila.
As these External Inputs is also summed into the Main Bus before the compressor (and Main Insert), it’s probably a good idea to turn the compressor and (Main Insert) off while tracking this effect, unless you want it applied twice - which is of course a very valid approach also.
You can also use this technique for tracking any of the other channels, if you wanna apply an outboard insert effect on them (compressor, SSL Fusion, etc.). Especially since the stereo channels don’t have inserts on them like the mono channels.
And… you can use this technique for tracking sub-mixes of multitracked drums, for example, and then commit to the resulting two-track to free up channels.
I could go on, but will stop here before I get carried away
Ultimately this is all pretty evident from near reading the manual (hint, check the section on “ST CUE 1 TO G COMP & SUM TO MAIN BUS”)
I use pioneer fx unit on master insert so always have master meter on that. My work around. Crazy design if you ask me, to not have master meter all the time.
Recording a set has to be using physical connections.
Question: Does the XONE:96 have the possibility of routing the send/return to VSTs in a DAW, and then back to the mixer?
According to the manual I would think so. The Sends can be routed to the USB, and I assume it’s super easy to setup f.x. in Ableton a channel with effects, and route the output of that channel to a channel on the Xone:96.
I’m super keen on the BIG SIX, just because of that functionality, but I’m also looking for a mixer to use in my hybrid techno DJ sets, so the Xone:96 seems much more suitable.
Then again this gets me thinking, would the Big Six be suitable for DJ-ing? There filter on the Xone is super nice, think I would really miss that on the Big.
I have both the Xone 96 and Big Six, and use both… there are similarities and differences (obviously), but I wouldn’t like to part with either of them.
I see the Xone 96 as my mixer of choice for making music and creating… it’s really versatile for sound sculpting, I use the channel EQ and filters a lot (the filters (2 of them!) are particularly good, esp with the Drive control and the ability to have LPF, BPF, HPF and any combination of them).
I do use the Big Six for tracking too, it’s channel strips are really good, but I think of it predominantly as a mixing mixer (less of a performance mixer than the Xone 96, but it’s still no slouch at that either).
If you are doing ANYTHING DJ related, the Xone 96 is the one.
Honestly can’t go wrong with big six for that. They flexible routing options will open up a hybrid workflow like no other mixer can that I know of that is also analog. Been using it for a while now and it’s unmissable.
Like @CCMP says though big six isn’t really suited for DJing. Xone all the way for that. Also great as studio mixer but not as flexible as big six where you can route anything from daw, the rough the mixer, to hardware and back etc.
Damn… I guess I need both then! Nut sure if my wallet likes that!
This might be important: I also have all the USB controllers from SSL (UF1, UF8, UC1), which I LOVE! Really giving that DAW workflow a hands-on experience.
Those controllers are excellent for mixing, and adjusting EQ/compression super fast and intuitively. But what I really miss from my setup is the possibility of using 2-3 send/returns, and have them easily accessible. Really want to be able to just glance at a mixer/controller and see immediately which channels are being sent to what send channels. Both the SSL units and Push 3 fail in that regard since one needs to do some menu diving for seeing the sends, so I’ve been mapping two EC4s to take care of send/returns. But it’s not as easy to use as a dedicated mixer with send knobs. Totally something that can be done with the Xone / Big.
What I’m thinking now is how the Big Six would fit into a workflow with the other SSL USB units? I assume that the UF8s would be kinda redundant if I have a Big Six, but the UC1/UF1 should still have some value.
I’m really torn here. Probably not going to buy both of these mixers, but can’t really decide which one to jump on! Such a luxury problem!!!
If it helps (or maybe it’ll add to the confusion), I use an Analog Heat mk2 for the tone-sculpting jobs I like to use the Xone 96 when I’m working on the Big Six… so, a Big Six plus Analog Heat set up is a really powerful ‘best of both worlds’ for me.
The Xone 96’s drive circuit is relatively subtle compared to the AH, but it’s really good in combination with the channel EQ and filter, and that’s how I view it, as a full signal chain.
I think the Xone 96’s filter is nicer than the AH’s, the AH’s filter can quickly get very peaky… I feel like I rarely go above 30% on the AH’s resonance control, and regularly have the Xone 96’s at 60-100%… but I suppose these are different characteristics of the types of filters they are, one’s designed for full mixes in a DJ context and one is more of a self-oscillating synth type filter… both are really useable.
The guy making it designed the play differently model 1, master sounds mixers and some of the most highly regarded AH mixers… his stuff is all amazing to play on/through. But yeah it is another 4 channel DJ mixer, master ISO EQ probably makes it a little more suited to electronic music.
the BiG SiX
Nut sure if my wallet likes that!
Such a luxury problem!!!