my issues may have more to do with my particular unit, but I’m getting inconsistent noise and unreliable power performance that are slightly maddening, made more pronounced by the fact that I’m just pretty underwhelmed with the k-mix in general. I find it kinda frustrating to set-up (not discounting user error playing a big role there) and the interface is far from my favorite.

the spec sheet and form-factor is very good, but it’s just not working super well for me. if someone was making the same basic unit, but without the midi controller bit and with actual faders, it would be a more attractive proposition to me.

1 Like

Also my experience with Behringer. It really was crap 20 years ago. But what they build now is technically up to spec and good build quality. Have quite some experience with the small Behringer mixer range I used it on many different projects. Also bought it for other projects that people toured with. I’ve seen them operate great for many years and just getting chunked in crates and battered. Only week point are the external power supplies. Especially the connector into the mixer has very thin breakable pins.

Hello everyone! New guy here on the forums. I got a MOTU Ultralite mk4 because of this thread (needed a new interface anyways). Is there any purpose of using an audio interface and an analog mixer together? I’m looking to send the individual outs of my Elektron RYTM to my interface, but there’s only 6 Analog Ins in the interface…

The front two inputs will also accept line level so you have 8 unless you plan to use those for mics.

An analog mixer can still pack a lot of functionality besides just mixing: Mic preamps, EQ, analog effects loop. That being said, you may consider picking up a used behringer ada8200 which would add 8/8 channels if I/O for you. I picked one up for $120 used at GC. Would compliment the ultralite well and you would have the other 6 inputs free to use for something else.

1 Like

Ahh awesome!! This seems like something that would work in my setup, thanks for the suggestion. I’m going to try to find one.

For better sound quality than the Behringer and not much more cash, also check out the Focusrite Scarlett OctoPre and OctoPre Dynamic. Great-sounding front ends, the mic pres will complement your MOTU well, and surprisingly affordable. You can occasionally find them used as well.

2 Likes

Great I’ll check that one out. So if I get the mic pre interface, I wouldn’t need the mixer anymore?

Totally different purposes.

There is a mixer built into your MOTU that allows you to route, internally, any inputs to any outputs. That’s super useful for building up routing chains, insert effects, or using it as a format converter. It’s also, for some folks in combination with the app, enough for doing a show or the typical requirements of studio mixing (e.g. headphone / monitor mixing and routing).

If you want to get more hands-on, an analogue external mixer can add things as @bradfromraleigh said already, like (different) preamps (your MOTU has very good ones already, you’d only want others if you want a specific sound), hardware EQ (not necessarily better or worse, but unless it’s a very good mixer, you can get excellent results from software already), and of course physical faders. Will that help your studio or live use? Hard to say - it depends on how much mixing you do and what it’s for. Mixing is not usually required for recording sources - it’s more for live listening of multiple sources at the same time, or for actual mixdowns when you’re trying to take all the tracks from a project and mix them into a two channel final pre-master. Some people do that in the analogue domain, most do it in the DAW. An analogue mixer won’t really offer much if you do it in the DAW.

Really it comes down to what and why you want to mix and in what domain (hands-on analogue, virtual inside the MOTU, or in post, through the DAW), and whether you feel that the specific piece of hardware has a sound you want. Remember, analogue mixers, even the best ones, degrade the sound slightly every pass through them. Once or twice is fine, but several passes (record, playback and mix -> re-record onto another track, repeat) can build up the noise floor and have other accumulative side effects. It’s a perfectly viable workflow, but you need to know why you’re choosing it to really benefit from it.

In short, if you’re just starting out, an analogue mixer will probably not add much to your workflow unless you need to mix up the whole band at once and hear it, live, and maybe catch a 2-track mixdown or send it to a PA or you don’t want to use the MOTU for headphone mixes or something. Otherwise, just multitrack it to a DAW and do any realtime “performance” mixing in the MOTU.

The other devices we are talking about take advantage of the ADAT ports on your MOTU to give you more simultaneous inputs (and outputs in some cases). They aren’t mixers and don’t affect whether or not you need or would make use of one other than to add more channels that you need to decide how to integrate.

4 Likes

I have a Behringer Xenyx 1002B. It’s compact, 10 channels, well built, reliable, inexpensive, and it has faders instead of knobs. It can run on batteries but I’ve never tried that.

I purchased mine around 3 years ago and have no complaints.

1 Like

For example, I use a Motu Track 16, the afore-mentioned Behringer mixer, and a 16 point patch bay such that I can route individual inputs directly into the sound card, or into the mixer.

My speakers are connected to the patch bay as well, so at any time I can swap 2 wires on the patch bay and have either my sound card feeding the speakers, with the mixer output going into the Motu and then on to a DAW; or I can have the mixer output going right to the speakers, for a “DAW-less” setup, and then I can patch the soundcard output into the mixer to use the computer as an instrument, rather than a DAW.

Just one more opinion, if you plan to live track multiple people in a band context, I would absolutely get a decent mixer with direct outputs that will feed straight into various inputs on the MOTU so you can still multitrack the group. Its just faster to have knobs and faders for EQ and gain control when everyone is waiting on you to hit the record button. But you may be better/faster with a mouse than I am.

1 Like

I had a Behringer 1002B for a year and a half. It was my first proper mixer when I moved into hardware. Got lots of good use out of it and recommend it to beginners since it has great features and won’t break the bank. And it’s pretty solidly built.

After I had expanded my setup though, I wanted to get a slightly larger mixer. I found a Mackie 1202 vlz4 for a great deal on eBay.

I was utterly blown away. I had to go back to the 1002B to confirm. Literally unplugged all my stuff from the Mackie and routed everything back to the Behringer.

Holy noise floor. The Mackie was significantly quieter! What I thought was analog hiss from my devices was mostly just the Behringer.

The 1202 has been clean and crisp and it even changed how I programmed my synths. I often leave my filters a bit more open now and program envelopes more deliberately. I can hear more nuance in the upper harmonics. I notice more details in the mix and I’m nowhere near cranked on the gain. Most of my inputs are at half volume and everything sounds great.

Love that it has dedicated aux returns too.

I still recommend the 1002B for people who have only a handful of devices and are on a budget, so they can use the aux sends and return them to an open channel.

On the plus side for the 1002B, loved having sliders and individual clipping leds per channel. To be fair though, a couple of sliders would be a tiny bit noisy when moving them, but only through my headphone output for some reason? Per channel overload indicators should be a feature on every mixer though.

4 Likes

A 1202 VLZ pro was my first mixer, it really was super. Another plus for the Mackie is that the used prices are generally reasonable.

3 Likes

Agreed. I’m still using my 802VLZ. The pots need treatment from time to time now with deoxit pot lube to keep them from scratching, but overall it still finds good use as a utility mixer for live jams and small gigs. You can use any mixer’s insert outs as direct outs in a pinch by not fully plugging the insert jack in all the way and using a mono (TS) cable - this lets you do multichannel simultaneous recording with most any mixer.

2 Likes

I’ve been using an 802VLZ for some years as well. Same deal with the occasional scratchy pots but nothing that wasn’t treatable.

anyone use MOTU as a matrix router for eurorack? the output dBu seems like it should be fine, i’m just curious if anyone has tried it.

1 Like

Curious to know, what’s a matrix mixer and how can I turn my MOTU interface into one??

1 Like

Basically, any input into any output (or combination of outputs). Look at the 4ms 4x4 VCA Matrix.

The MOTU may be able to accomplish this in software, however, my older Ultralite pairs the outputs for stereo use and cannot be changed - they may have made this possible in the newer software mixing tools. That being said, its still doable - just in stereo pairs.

1 Like

Could someone with more knowledge than me please look at the specs on the MOTU M-4 and figure out whether the inputs can tolerate eurorack signal levels?

Thanks!!!