Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: 999 recording/ mixer

Expand Messages
  • junglephone
    In my opinion, the Mackie mixers are the biggest bang for the buck. They sound great and they re cheap. I run the 999 throughh a 1202 VLZ and I notice no
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 4, 2007
      In my opinion, the Mackie mixers are the biggest bang for the buck.
      They sound great and they're cheap. I run the 999 throughh a 1202 VLZ
      and I notice no degradation in sound. If I was going to add fx units,
      I'd go analog as much as I could afford to. Things like Moogerfooger
      delay, Vermona Retroverb, even some of the Electroharmonix reissues.
      Just my personal aesthetic - YMMV. As soon as you digitize the 999,
      you're going to get some degradation and softening, even with the high
      end stuff. That being said, the digital stuff is convenient and can
      sound pretty good with some judicious tweaking. I've been setting up
      plug-in effects loops from my DAW to the Mackie with some nice
      results. Reaktor, Waves, Logic, etc. But if you're strictly a hardware
      guy, just beware of the Swiss army knife approach to effects units.
      Sometimes the units that do one thing do them better than the multis.
      Oh and if you are using digital fx, I'd recommend using the sends on
      your mixer as much as possible rather than just plugging the 999
      directly into the fx unit. That way you can mix the fx with the pure
      analog signal thereby retaining the sound you bought the 999 for in
      the first place.

      Just my $.02

      --- In jomox@yahoogroups.com, Shagghie <shagghie@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hey Rui-
      >
      > That's exactly how I use all my drum machines, exactly! However, I must
      > warn against something perchance otherwise obvious...you must use a very
      > very high quality mixer and effects unit to preserve the dynamics of the
      > 999. I tried, due to budget, to use a Behringer mixer (one of those
      new 3-u
      > mixers, with on-board effects, etc.) The sound was *horrible* after
      going
      > through that thing! I kept it for awhile, to keep as it's own 'low fi'
      > cheapo effect processor for certain drum parts. It's so easy to over
      drive
      > the inputs on it, that I used them to add distortion to snare, etc. lol.
      >
      > Get a very high quality board if you are thinking of working this
      way. It's
      > great for live use...e.g. 'Jamming the mixer' and you're correct about
      > adding effects chain to it...like and eventide eclipse or HAxxxx
      unit. But
      > again, stick with really HQ stuff...the Lexicon I'm using now still
      degrades
      > the overall sound quality even when in 'bypass' mode...
      >
      > Also, I can't recall the name of it, but ask companyofquail (watson)
      for the
      > name of that really nice blue-faced rack mount mixer he recommended
      to me
      > for the same purpose....
      >
      > HTH,
      > Shag
      >
      >
      > On 2/26/07, pixfodase <rupix@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > ah!
      > > just pulled the trigger on a 999! :)
      > >
      > > was here thinking how you guys are using it, specially if you record
      > > the separate outputs or just record the mix output. it seems that due
      > > to the lack of EQ and filters it'd be better to use a dedicated mixer
      > > with it.
      > >
      > > I'd also gain more control for live usage (faders, eq sweeps, etc)
      > >
      > > And coupling it with a multi i/o fx processor things could become even
      > > more interesting.
      > > Is anyone using it this way?
      > >
      > > Rui
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
    • pixfodase
      thanks for the replies! I was surprised to see that the voices are muted from the master output when you patch a cable to the instrument single output. this is
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 5, 2007
        thanks for the replies!
        I was surprised to see that the voices are muted from the master
        output when you patch a cable to the instrument single output. this
        is very convinient. I already have 4 numbered patch cables connected
        to my fx boxes. When I want to process a channel it's just a matter
        of patching in the right cable. Not ideal, but quick and convinient.

        This thing sounds really tight. I'm going to set up a cool rig around
        it :)

        Rui




        --- In jomox@yahoogroups.com, "junglephone" <junglephone@...> wrote:
        >
        > In my opinion, the Mackie mixers are the biggest bang for the buck.
        > They sound great and they're cheap. I run the 999 throughh a 1202
        VLZ
        > and I notice no degradation in sound. If I was going to add fx
        units,
        > I'd go analog as much as I could afford to. Things like Moogerfooger
        > delay, Vermona Retroverb, even some of the Electroharmonix reissues.
        > Just my personal aesthetic - YMMV. As soon as you digitize the 999,
        > you're going to get some degradation and softening, even with the
        high
        > end stuff. That being said, the digital stuff is convenient and can
        > sound pretty good with some judicious tweaking. I've been setting up
        > plug-in effects loops from my DAW to the Mackie with some nice
        > results. Reaktor, Waves, Logic, etc. But if you're strictly a
        hardware
        > guy, just beware of the Swiss army knife approach to effects units.
        > Sometimes the units that do one thing do them better than the
        multis.
        > Oh and if you are using digital fx, I'd recommend using the sends on
        > your mixer as much as possible rather than just plugging the 999
        > directly into the fx unit. That way you can mix the fx with the pure
        > analog signal thereby retaining the sound you bought the 999 for in
        > the first place.
        >
        > Just my $.02
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.