…Small mixers. Why in the holy hell do I have to pay premium for a mixer with 32 vocal mic preamps? A few mono inputs and even fewer stereo inputs. Id have to buy a huge premium mixer to get a bunch of stereo inputs. 16 inputs means 10 mic preamps, four mono inputs and 2 stereo inputs. Why?!
All that I want is a good small mixer that won’t break the bank, with like 4-8 stereo inputs, 2 aux send and return would be nice too if I wanted to do multiple outboard effects or a stereo effect.
I don’t think one exists. But if it does can the Elektronauts give me a clue? How is everyone mixing multiple stereo pieces of gear?
Yeah stereo inputs seem unimportant to most mixer brands, yes they always seem to slap too many mic pres/xlrs for my needs, there are a few rack mount mixers such as the Samson SM-10 which I use, but it is fairly barebones and functional, 8 stereo channels, no eq, mon and fx sends, no returns but there are 2 additional stereo line ins that can be used as returns.
Also look into installation/zone mixers which can be handy, Tascam do a couple MZ223 and MZ372 which look interesting although I have not tried them.
yeah rack mount mixers are the best for just paying for what you need when you’re synth/drum machine/etc focused. i.e. just routing signals into/out of your DAW. I only really EQ once I’m mixing, so I don’t miss that. while I’m jamming ideas or actually writing, I don’t bother with it. so these are great for me. I have and love the Samson SM-10. also the Speck X.Sum is incredible; in one rack unit high, you get 16 stereo channels.
Most instruments are mic’d/tracked in mono so the mixer world reflects that. That being said, someone could probably make a tidy profit making some small format mixers for electronic musicians that have more stereo instruments.
yeah I don’t get the OP’s issue if after 4-8 stereo inputs and 2 aux sends/returns. the 1202 gives that at a reasonable price. yes, you’ll have to deal with two of your stereo channels being split into mono channels. and yes, you’re paying for pres that you may never use. but in this case, since it’s a low channel count and a reasonable price, it’s not the end of the world. and that also gives you flexibility should you wish to use vocals, guitar or mono-output synths at some other time.
Wow thanks for the replies everyone! I have done searches here and have dug through a lot of threads but nothing really seemed to be what I was looking for. With this many new avenues to explore I’ll be able to do some more research. Thanks everyone!
When I started this quest for a small mixer I got a Mackie 802 VZL4 after considering the Radial Engineering Key Largo (which does 3 stereo in but is costly). At that time the Bluebox did not exist, but now that it does I would certainly buy this instead. Better footprint (and more than twice the price but also more inputs).
Hi I was curious what is so bad about sending stereo synths to 2 hard panned mono channels? Not being snarky or anything, just genuinely curious. I am currently debating sending some of my stereo synths as mono or using the dual split mono channels. To me, a synth with onboard stereo effects probably needs 2 channels, but I am interested in who uses the FX and still just sends a mono out. It seems like a mono delay, phaser…etc could really help place the synth in the mix and then you can widen it with a plugin or stereo reverb pedal.
Just some random musings since a mackie 12 or 16 channel could really suit the OP.
BTW I make dance music so it really benefits from a more mono focused mix anyway.
I don’t think that’s an issue, in my case it’s really more a form factor issue: those Mackie things are too big. But if you can live with unnecessary preamps and mono channels and the footprint, it’s great.
The main issue when doing stereo synth to two hard panned mono channels is that you have 2 faders for a synth, and they are not necessarily easy to move at the same time (while moving yet another one).
They make plastic fader bridges that snap over either the fader posts or the whole fader knob to link channels mechanically. Doesn’t help you with EQ, mind, but it’s something.
I’ve be jonesing for a mixer/recorder with built-in FX and a send/return, and this is the smallest one Ive seen: essentially 9”X9”. It is essentially a poor man’s Tascam Model 12.
Anyone here have any experience with Phonic mixers? I know from searching that they are a budget brand, but just looking for some anecdotal experiences because this machine doesn’t even have a proper review out there (from what I can see).
I’m in a (sort of) similar position.
I have a Mackie 802 VLZ4 sitting in the UK but haven’t been able to fly over to pick it up (or see my family). It served my small footprint needs well when it was in use (2 machines at a time with an fx send for pedals).
I’ve been eying up the A&H Zed 10 mixer as a possible substitute, as all I’ve got at the moment is a little Mackie 5 channel.
The 1010 Bluebox is tempting but there’s a minor offputting factor of having to buy a bunch of 3.5mm converter cables.
I used to use a little Phonic mixer about 10 years ago for playing the MD / MM combo.
Did the job it needed to, felt reasonably solid if memory serves me right.
