I'm even more confused now!!!!

RussG

OK, so a bit of a follow on from my last thread.
Ive been reading up on mixers, amps, sound interfaces and DAW software and now my skull is well and truly f***ed!!!!
I can only tell you what I want in layman terms, so here goes.
I have been very fortunate lately to drop on to some cheap instruments, including bass guitar, lead guitar, keyboard, guitar amps and speakers etc.
I am learning to play bass, and my daughter wants to learn lead, keyboard and do vocals as well.
We have set up some space in my spare room for all out gear, including a pc desk.
What we are looking for is a system that will allow us to connect 1 x mic, 1 x keyboard, 2 x guitar to our pc, via USB.
Now after reading up for hours, Im thinking along these lines:
Using this mixer, which I think is  a power mixer,

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Behringer-Premium-Preamps-Compressors-Interface/dp/B008O517IC/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3STHECXTUS2FA&keywords=behringer+usb+mixer&qid=1554136224&s=gateway&sprefix=behringer+usb%2Caps%2C160&sr=8-2

so with my understanding I will not need an amp between this and the PC when connecting via USB?
I have been advised that this mixer will allow me to connect the four instruments I listed at the same time.

The PC will be running Cubase 4 (as its cheap!). Reading whats in the software box it mentions a serial dongle...I presume thats a USB connection and not standard serial port (because thats well old!!!)

So, if the mixer is powered, and takes the four instruments, will it produce four different tracks at the same time, and feed in to the PC and Cubase, so each track can be digitally edited, or will it amalgamate all the four instruments in to one music track?

Also, will I then be able to use the headphone jack out of the PC, to connect the PC output to an amp and my passive speakers?

Sorry for the total ignorance, and if any of you can help, please remember, I really am not technically minded in this area!!!

Thanks in advance
Russ and Rosie

Musicwolf

RussG said:

Using this mixer, which I think is  a power mixer,

It's not a 'Powered Mixer', which is a term used to describe a mixer with a built in amplifier which can be connected to passive speakers.  This mixer will produce line level output which will need to be sent to either active speakers (speakers which contain speaker + amplifier in the box) or a separate amplifier which then drives passive speakers.

RussG said:

So, if the mixer is powered, and takes the four instruments, will it produce four different tracks at the same time, and feed in to the PC and Cubase, so each track can be digitally edited, or will it amalgamate all the four instruments in to one music track?

It won't record 4 different tracks.  It will produce a stereo track containing a mix of all 4 instruments.  The relative levels of each will be determined by the mixer at the time of recording.

Note that it has 2 mic / line inputs and 2 sets of stereo line inputs.  What it doesn't have is a high impedance (Hi Z) input to take an electric guitar or bass directly.  The keyboard should be fine into a line input.

spark240

@RussG - If you want to record the channels from your mixer you will need a very different animal.

Your original post I think said you wanted to plug all your instruments into a mixer and then onto Passives monitors, you didnt mention recording to PC ?...hence you needed a Powered mixer.

If you don't want to direct all your inputs to a PC, then you need a mixer with a USB out that can carry multitrack signals to your PC/ DAW, but...you will then need a stereo amplifier to get the sound to your passive speakers.

If you can clarify exactly what you want to do, and maybe a budget...you may get some more accurate suggestions ;-)

RussG

See, this is why I am lost....I dont really know what I am talking about.
I think, as we now have a PC upstairs, it would be nice to be able to record on it, individual channels so we can play about with them on the PC. Then have an output to speakers from the PC. If that makes sense?
I am guessing that any interface between the instruments and the PC, that can do all that is going to be expensive.
Would a cheaper alternative be to record each instrument individually and saving it as a track and then loading it up to the DAW?
As far as budget is concerned.....as cheap as possible LOL

spark240

Russ - so they key to this is how many things you actually want to be able to plug in and record at the same time.

A simple interface can do lots of things...but its all about number of inputs.

Personally I use a 16Ch mixer interface as I like to be able to record acoustic jams with a few guitars , mics etc.

If you only need to do say 3-4 inputs at a time then much simpler unit will be fine, from say Audient, Focusrite, Presonus, MAudio.

Most of these will come with free DAW software or you can use something like Reaper which is popular for starters.

Something like this...https://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_xenyx_1204_usb_b_stock.htm

Im not too familiar with that Behringer I assume the DAW will see all the inputs via USB so you can record all inputs direct to separate tracks on the PC, you would need to check.

If you can live with 2 channel then there are lots more to choose from.

Someone on here will have a 2 channel interface for sale at some point.

RussG

perhaps it may be a good idea to get my arse to my local music shop?

spark240

Yep!

thecolourbox

Would one of those Boss or Zoom desktop multi track recorders do this neatly? I'm sure there is a zoom one with at least four inputs that would record straight to wav on the multitrack's SD card then you can import the files to the computer? I keep meaning to learn how to use the Boss one I have but for this application it wouldn't work as there's only two inputs at a time I think

PolarityMan

I dont know why you would go for anything other than a 4 channel audio interface for this job..theyre getting so cheap these days.

Freebird

Check out the Audient audio interfaces.

Jalapeno

Somebody mentioned Reaper ^^^^^ (as opposed to Cubase), firstly it is actually cheaper and a lot more straightforward. Personally I like Tracktion (also cheaper).

If you're going to record "live" - somebody will have to press record on the PC, so you'll need it nearby.

Start with a portable multichannel recorder maybe - the computer stuff starts cheap but it get more and more complex and expensive as you add to it.

Something like Zoom R16, or a Boss BR800 - you can plug them into USB sockets and remix in your package of choice.

andy_k

just my 2 cents-or pence,
I use reaper, it does all I need, and does it well.
Somebody here was selling a Zoom R16, which is also what I use, for recording 8 tracks simultaneously at rehearsal,
it can do it on its own, or it can do it via usb into reaper--8 tracks, 8 mic inputs.
and then, when you have it set up at home, it works as a mixer in the DAW,
there was also an R8 on here, but note--it only has 2 mic inputs.
I definitely recommend getting into reaper, it is a fantastic piece of software, and the R16 does a lot for not a lot of money.

shrinkwrap

Zoom R8 can only record two tracks at a time - any more must be overdubbed. That might not be obvious from what Andy K says there.

markv

Jalapeno said:

If you're going to record "live" - somebody will have to press record on the PC, so you'll need it nearby.

I found out the other day that you can remote control Reaper with your phone for exactly this purpose

PolarityMan

I'm going to add some further murk to the discussion and that is...do you really want to record simultaneously? It's not the normal way that people do this.
 
The reason I ask is that to make decent quality recordings you are probably going to want to isolate performances of each instrument (especially true if you are not really awesomely tight players). That means none of the tracks will have bleed from other instruments (like you would get if you had several mics setup) and critically mistakes in the performance of one part wont affect the performance of another.

By that I mean, say one person slips a little bit out of time, naturally the other musicians will all adjust and as a group come back together. The problem is if you want to overdub on that performance you need to be able to either recreate that timing inaccuracy or fix all the tracks at once.

For most people I'd say that you need more than 1 input at a time for is if you plan on recording drums or multi-mic setups on say acoustic guitar or an amp cab. 

Using this method you would be using your DAW to layer up a track one piece at a time and each time you would be building on a good eprformance.

RussG

PolarityMan said:

I'm going to add some further murk to the discussion and that is...do you really want to record simultaneously? It's not the normal way that people do this.
 
The reason I ask is that to make decent quality recordings you are probably going to want to isolate performances of each instrument (especially true if you are not really awesomely tight players). That means none of the tracks will have bleed from other instruments (like you would get if you had several mics setup) and critically mistakes in the performance of one part wont affect the performance of another.

By that I mean, say one person slips a little bit out of time, naturally the other musicians will all adjust and as a group come back together. The problem is if you want to overdub on that performance you need to be able to either recreate that timing inaccuracy or fix all the tracks at once.

For most people I'd say that you need more than 1 input at a time for is if you plan on recording drums or multi-mic setups on say acoustic guitar or an amp cab. 

Using this method you would be using your DAW to layer up a track one piece at a time and each time you would be building on a good eprformance.

Bloody hell.....never thought of that!!!
So each instrument recorded on its own, on its own track and imported in to a DAW. im so dumb LOL
I guess that would mean that I can buy a basic audio interface, skip buying a mixing desk as the DAW will do all that, and feed out to my passive speakers from the PC via a simple amp?

Jalapeno

Not to say you CAN'T record live, just don't if you plan to multi-track or tinker with things later.

PolarityMan

RussG said:

PolarityMan said:

I'm going to add some further murk to the discussion and that is...do you really want to record simultaneously? It's not the normal way that people do this.
 
The reason I ask is that to make decent quality recordings you are probably going to want to isolate performances of each instrument (especially true if you are not really awesomely tight players). That means none of the tracks will have bleed from other instruments (like you would get if you had several mics setup) and critically mistakes in the performance of one part wont affect the performance of another.

By that I mean, say one person slips a little bit out of time, naturally the other musicians will all adjust and as a group come back together. The problem is if you want to overdub on that performance you need to be able to either recreate that timing inaccuracy or fix all the tracks at once.

For most people I'd say that you need more than 1 input at a time for is if you plan on recording drums or multi-mic setups on say acoustic guitar or an amp cab. 

Using this method you would be using your DAW to layer up a track one piece at a time and each time you would be building on a good eprformance.

Bloody hell.....never thought of that!!!
So each instrument recorded on its own, on its own track and imported in to a DAW. im so dumb LOL
I guess that would mean that I can buy a basic audio interface, skip buying a mixing desk as the DAW will do all that, and feed out to my passive speakers from the PC via a simple amp?

Its definitely worth weighing up if you really need the extra channels as for example a 2 channel interface will be literally peanuts.

RussG

PolarityMan said:

RussG said:

PolarityMan said:

I'm going to add some further murk to the discussion and that is...do you really want to record simultaneously? It's not the normal way that people do this.
 
The reason I ask is that to make decent quality recordings you are probably going to want to isolate performances of each instrument (especially true if you are not really awesomely tight players). That means none of the tracks will have bleed from other instruments (like you would get if you had several mics setup) and critically mistakes in the performance of one part wont affect the performance of another.

By that I mean, say one person slips a little bit out of time, naturally the other musicians will all adjust and as a group come back together. The problem is if you want to overdub on that performance you need to be able to either recreate that timing inaccuracy or fix all the tracks at once.

For most people I'd say that you need more than 1 input at a time for is if you plan on recording drums or multi-mic setups on say acoustic guitar or an amp cab. 

Using this method you would be using your DAW to layer up a track one piece at a time and each time you would be building on a good eprformance.

Bloody hell.....never thought of that!!!
So each instrument recorded on its own, on its own track and imported in to a DAW. im so dumb LOL
I guess that would mean that I can buy a basic audio interface, skip buying a mixing desk as the DAW will do all that, and feed out to my passive speakers from the PC via a simple amp?

Its definitely worth weighing up if you really need the extra channels as for example a 2 channel interface will be literally peanuts.

what would you say is peanuts???.............ill need software as well i guess

PolarityMan

Something along the lines of a PreSonus AudioBox USB Audio 96 goes for under 40 quid on ebay, you could prob find something cheaper if you kept an eye out too although you want something that has windows 10 copmtaible drivers.

Software wise reaper has a free unlimited trial and is pretty cheap if you want to license it to get rid of the nag screen

hubobulous

Yep. An external USB sound card and Reaper is all you'll need. 2 or 4 port, with HiZ and a mic input is really the only thing to look out for. I'm not sure a mixer is the right thing here.