Mixer / interface question

[skoora]

I grew up recording analog w/tape machines so trying to wrap my head around doing an analog mixer with a DAW. I have a Scarlet 18i20 interface.
So, am I basically running direct or bus outs from the mixer channels to inputs on the Scarlett and then assigning the outputs of the DAW Tracks to available outputs on the Scarlett to feed into line inputs of unused channels in the mixer?
I’m used to large format consoles where inputs and tape machine playback can live on the same desk channel but I imagine that’s not doable with a small format mixer and a DAW.
I thought about the Tascam model series but I believe it’s only the 16 and 24 that have analog front ends, EQ etc but on the flip side the digital 12 series is the only one that can be a DAW controller. But all of those have direct communication for recording with the daw.
Is the answer get an octo pre to expand interface inputs and outputs and just get a straight analog mixer with enough channels to include playback.
I don’t want a huge mixer because this is just for me at home but would like to leave a bunch of gear permanently plugged in (or at least use a patchbay) and eventually expand on outboard gear.
Just missing tactile recording/ mixing and totally uninspired by, in the box production.

 

[tjnx]

Is the only purpose of the mixer to provide tactile control? Not that it matters but doing it the current way adds additional AD conversion. Look into a midi control surface for your daw. Right now you don't get to save fader values on the mixer so you just wind up mixing and printing.

 

[skoora]

Is the only purpose of the mixer to provide tactile control? Not that it matters but doing it the current way adds additional AD conversion. Look into a midi control surface for your daw. Right now you don't get to save fader values on the mixer so you just wind up mixing and printing.

Not just tactile control, but ease of using inserts for outboard gear without sweating latency and not eating up interface, ins and outs and to actually even use the board’s EQ. Plugins would still be on the table within the DAW and if I wanted to automate, I could do that still.
I had looked at the Faderports for a minute but would prefer an actual mixer.
I got briefly excited when I saw the older Mackie Onyx 1640i but its Firewire is long since incompatible with Apple (I have an M chip macbook).
Always a kick in the pants when older gear is spec’d out so much better than much newer gear. Has 16x16 DAW track capability.

 

[Speeddemon]

Wouldn't one of the smaller, older A&H Mix wizard desks be of use then? I remember those having inserts as well as direct outs on most channels, which means you can leave most outboard gear connected?

 

[skoora]

I owned an A&H board in the late 90’s and wasn’t very impressed with it. I actually preferred an 8 Bus Mackie I got instead. The Onyx 1640 might still be a contender as a straight analog console it because has the Perkins EQ section with two bands of sweepable mids, inserts for all channels and DB25 connects for direct outs on every channel. They’re also real cheap used right now.

 

[Speeddemon]

My experiences (did a few years FoH stuff as well) were the other way around. I found A&H built more robust, nicer faders and a more complete feature set than Mackie's. Especially the dreaded SR2 from Mackie had an almost screechy sound.
Of course Midas was preferred to both and even Crest in some cases.
Unless you're connecting to an Apollo AD converter, I'd think there's little benefit of having DB25 connectors over individual jacks in a home studio environment. It's obviously best to check how many channels you want to record simultaneously at most and choose your mixer based on that.

Also, the Mix wizards (like the 14:4:2) also have double mid sweeps on EQ and 6 aux sends, on which 3&4 can be switched pre or post EQ), but more importantly, they have 100mm faders opposed to the Onyx's 60mm ones.
To be fair, my experience was with the previous series; VLZ Pro and those were so-so. Okay for the time. The Onyx do seem as an upgrade.

 

[skoora]

My experiences (did a few years FoH stuff as well) were the other way around. I found A&H built more robust, nicer faders and a more complete feature set than Mackie's. Especially the dreaded SR2 from Mackie had an almost screechy sound.
Of course Midas was preferred to both and even Crest in some cases.
Unless you're connecting to an Apollo AD converter, I'd think there's little benefit of having DB25 connectors over individual jacks in a home studio environment. It's obviously best to check how many channels you want to record simultaneously at most and choose your mixer based on that.

Also, the Mix wizards (like the 14:4:2) also have double mid sweeps on EQ and 6 aux sends, on which 3&4 can be switched pre or post EQ), but more importantly, they have 100mm faders opposed to the Onyx's 60mm ones.
To be fair, my experience was with the previous series; VLZ Pro and those were so-so. Okay for the time. The Onyx do seem as an upgrade.

The DB25’s aren’t a preference to me. I was just noting that they at least give you a direct out option on a small format mixer where almost all don’t. I’ll give the Mix Wizards another look.

 

[Greazygeo]

I have a Tascam DM-3200 that I used with Logic. Mic pres were nice, TC Electronic fx. Great mixer. , but unfortunately it is firewire and doesn’t work with my mac. I could hook up to myApogee via light pipe and may try that someday.
What about aStudio one?