Originally Posted By: cooltouch
Charlie, sorry I missed your post. That Behringer is an interesting looking unit, but the price is a bit steep. I note that there is also a smaller 12-channel version of your mixer, which sells for the same price as the Behringer. I suppose you would recommend it as well.

I'm still trying to figure out the advantage of bringing multiple channels into my DAW's software as opposed to doing the mixing on the mixer and then bring a stereo signal to the DAW. The way my system is configured, I actually output the audio mix from my DAW's soft synth MIDI instruments to my Mackie, where it's combined with the audio signals from the outboard MIDI instruments (keyboard, rack synth, and guitar synth). I then send this mix back into the DAW to record to a .wav file, using my sound card's software mixer to keep track of the ins and outs. With this setup, I have to listen to the mix from the headphones out on the mixer. This has worked well enough and I'm wondering what the advantages are of doing it the way you suggest.

I'm guessing the chief advantage would be that I wouldn't have to export and import mixes, right? I can have everything mixed in the DAW, both internal synths and external modules. I can see how this would certainly simplify things. What other advantages to this method would there be that I'm not seeing?


I suppose you would recommend it as well?
Yes and No. Yes, because it shares the same Midas preamps, OS, FX and routing as all the other X series digital mixers. These
features have proven to be rock solid and are top rate in quality. No, because there are mixers with the 2X2 USB interface like
the XR12 that are easier and also fully featured that in consideration of staying within your budget, are simply better deals.

I'm still trying to figure out the advantage of bringing multiple channels into my DAW's software as opposed to doing the mixing on the mixer and then bring a stereo signal to the DAW.
Control and efficiency. I'm a big fan of using a real mixer in a recording environment. It doesn't matter if I'm capturing a
live performance, remote recording session or a studio setting. Properly setup, you can match the recording quality of high
dollar audio interfaces with an analog mixer feeding a dual channel interface at line level. Regarding multiple channels, a 24
channel mixer will be 3 times more versatile than an 8 input audio interface. Here's why. set channels 1-8 to output to 1-8
inputs to your DAW which allows you to use your DAW's Fx and VST, VSTi's features. 9-16 on the mixer as return signals from the
DAW for external processing through the mixer preamps and FX's
and 17-24 for external devices, monitor mixes, headphone sub mixes and external feeds such as sends to streaming, broadcast etc.
And you have Aux outs/returns to use.

You have the benefit of analog summing using a mixer. You can use multiple faders with the mixer in real time.

I have to listen to the mix from the headphones out on the mixer.
Which is good. It's latency free.

One feature found on the Behringer XR series digital stage mixers including the XR12 is the MIDI in/Out. This offers the benefit of MIDI controllers to transform the XR12 from a remote IOS/Android App to a physical MIDI Controller device such as a Behringer X-Touch. You can build a nice digital recorder for your studio a piece of gear by piece of gear over time.

Last edited by Charlie Fogle; 01/02/19 03:02 PM.
BIAB 2025:RB 2025, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.