It is strange that Behringer would choose 16-bit converters on their hybrid mixer, especially considering the onboard effects are 24-bit and obviously require an AD/DA chipset as well.

Maybe they got a "deal" on a bunch of converter chips!

the point is they pass the savings on to you!

wow
absolutely pathetic
the guy couldn't debate his way out of a paper bag

Wow! are you still standing by your nonsense? You've either deluded or a troll. The Xenyx converters are toy town 90s budget converters. Sure there were some top-end 16 bit converters that still sound nice today - these are not such an example.

Parts bin lash ups made down to a price - off the shelf KT FX chips.

Yes, but those toy town budget converters are "far ahead of anything the Tascam Model series have to offer".

Don’t feed the troll, he’s posting the same bot-like nonsense about the top of the top high-end manufacturer in other threads.

Well, thanks for checking out the videos links I posted. I really can't see how you can now suddenly switch so fast and abruptly and now claiming you "care less about pres" and that you "never bought an interface for it's pre's", yet in outrage a few posts earlier you emphatically asked: "So, they [Xenyx pres] are perhaps right up there with Neve and SSL?". As you saw and heard from those videos Xenyx pres are absolutely something special and more than hold up their own against some of the most expensive preamps out their. Good audio engineers who know exactly what they are doing know just how important a well made preamp is. So, why would you suddenly switch up so fast like that as if preamps the world over don't matter anymore? Don't have to answer, am just saying.

From you: "I'd like to see Behringer come out with something that would directly compete with the Model 12"

There is nothing Tascam has done in making their Model mixer series that Behringer hasn't don't better with Xenyx in an almost overkill of engineering, lol. Tascam's Model series are almost like cheap bootleg versions of my Xenyx UFX1604/UFX1204 boards. If need be, the value of my UFX boards to me, as audio tools, make it worth it for me to pay the out-of-warrantee cost to keep them in top shape for years to come. My Xenyx UFC boards likely inspired Tascam to make their Model series and since Behringer discontinued these UFX magical consoles, Tascam and Yamaha (better than Tascam) saw an opportunity to fill that void. My UFX board are armed to the teeth with feature like:

- 130db of dynamic range (all Xenyx),
- bandwidth from below 10hz to over 200khz (all Xenyx),
- built-in 24bit/96khz audio interface,
- built-in 24bit/48khz USB recorder (16 simultaneous tracks),
- absolutely superb sounding console (all Xenyx)
- magical routing options that are non-existent and any Tascam Model series,
- basic awesome routing features (all Xenyx),
- two really good sounding 24bit effect engines (all Xenyx),
- 2 stereo usb returns which pass through the channels strip's gain (magical),
- killer sounding eq section with 2 sweepable mids (total audio engineers sculpting dream)
- EQ bypass on all channel strips
- ability to print my mixes with or without onboard eq and compression simultaneously (optional),
- ability to use onboard eq, compression and fx engines as hardware inserts in daw (i use this all the time - killer! sounds better than most of the plugins)
- Complete standalone operation mode without ever touching a computer,
- 4-busses,
- inserts,
- Midi transport control for daw,
- and more

The quality of my EQ section alone with 2 sweepable mids is probably worth $2,400 and is heads and shoulders above the entire Tascam Model units. I've done work on my UFX mixers with results that easily rivals and stand right up against the quality of respected commercial mixed records and albums and I can tell you Tascam, Presonus, Yamaha (still very, very good), Soundcraft Signature (the worst - had to return mine) and others don't even stand a chance to my Xenyx UFX boards. The Xenyx UFX's are discontinued consoles but the other Xenyx's, even without all the special features of the UFX line, are almost impossible to beat simply because they all have the same base circuitry dna and exactly the same killer Xenyx preamps.

I say all this to say, I think you're a bit uninformed and therefore outdated in thinking your Tascam Model 12 is somehow special when in comparison to my UFX console your Tascam is like a scam even though it's not the intention on Tascam to make it look like so. Tascam corrected a lot of their mistakes made on their Model 24 and 16 but the Model 12 had to be designed as a digital mixer. I think you might be better off getting the more powerful Flow 8 digital mixer (x32 dna) from Behringer: killer audio quality, modern features, super compact (~9in), insane routing option, built like an absolute tank, Midas mic pres that likely offer better performance than the pres on your Model 12 and much more.

Ah you're talking about the UFX firewire range - not the normal USB ones - yes they have better converters than most of the vanilla Xenyx mixers - they are perfectly good but still not top-end gear. Again excellent value but nothing out of the ordinary and they offer multitrack recording (but not track by track like the Tascams) - I'd still take the Tascams thanks.

Oh - and PS - I don't think they make the UFX range any more...

You're a "Gear Guru" get a good quality audio interface. You don't have to push so hard looking for gear beef, lol. It doesn't exist!

I just now saw your self description. LOL, wow, didn't realize earlier!

-Good luck!

Lacking commonsense yet spewing insults means nothing. Just fake outrage, lol.

Currently, actively sold Xenyx mixers are not "hybrid mixer". I actually have and use a special, but discontinued, true analog-hybrid, 16ch Xenyx mixer (UFX1604) and there are big technical differences. The X32 series are full hybrid mixers, lol.

Onboard effects on a non-hybrid analog mixer being 24-bits used internally and merged with dry audio material has nothing to do with the mixer having a convenient audio interface tact on regardless if the interface 16-bits or 24-bits. Ya'll seriously reaching for straws. LOL, smh.

The man clutching at straw is the one claiming a budget Behringer mixer/recorder that's no longer in production to be the best thing since sliced bread.

the one reaching for straws is the one defending 16 bit tracking conversion because a "mastering studio" OUTPUTS a 16 bit file for delivery. The one who joined the forum this week and has 11 posts all praising Behringer to the point of obsession.

but thanks for the laughs, anyway

High quality audio interfaces abound at affordable prices, and I'm sure you're aware of this. No need wasting all that energy attempting at attacking a non-existent enemy over a non-existent gear beef.

No obsession here except for creating killer sonic art! Knowing ones tools is also very important. The perceptions you project are totally wrong and not in line with the reality. But, even then, it is better to obsessed with original creative art, knowing ones the tools well as a craftsman and improving ones skills with patience over time.

Here, listen to this mix real quick, you'll probably forget about gear for a sec. If you didn't see the video you will never know what console it was mixed in because talent & skills rules over everything! ???: https://rumble.com/v3jha6w-dub-mixin...x2442-usb.html

Enjoy!

Cool. 16-bit vs. 24-bit has very real headroom consequences depending on what you're doing, that's all.

I just thought it was strange they'd boast 24-bit effects, but have 16-bit conversion on the USB interface.

As stated in other threads we own a Tascam Model 24 and have found that mixdowns from recordings done with it sound really good.

However we have so far mixed in the DAW in our respective homestudios or sent the tracks to an aquaintance who owns a studio for mixdown and mastering.

That being said, I feel like you could get a decent mix with the Tascam. There are limitations when it comes to outboard though since there are no inserts and stuff like that.

I don’t deny that it makes sense to use a DAW or switch to other gear for professional productions even when the recording was done with the Tascam.
But the Tascams have inserts on the first two mono channels and 2-3 aux busses.

Are there any (good) shootouts on any of these lower priced mixer/interfaces?

I'm curious about the analog nature of the Tascam 24 or other analog mixers. Plus the one knob compressors that these all seem to have (are those even analog)?

Is it better to have a low priced analog eq or comp that is very limited as far as far as how you can set it?

Or a digital eq and comp that is essentially the same as a plug-in?

And reverb on the tascam 24 is digital, right?

Not to me! Of course, this is Gearspace, and many people are into the bragging rights and the "purity" of analog-ness. Though a device that records to SD and DAW seems to me to have already missed that train. My priority is functionality. Even if I believed that bad analog beats the best digital - which I don't - having finer control over my mix would take precedence. This unit has a 3 band EQ and only the mids are sweepable. I'd be fine with that for tracking, but very frustrated with it for mixing.

One review I read said that you cannot mix through the compressors:
and apparently only two of the channels have hardware insert jacks.
I read a review where a guy talked about putting plate reverb on a vocal. If they are squeezing a real analog plate inside that chassis for $1200, I'd buy two of them right now.

This is how it seems to me...almost nothing about it seems analog except the limited EQ.

If the EQ is anything like the EQ on an old little Mackie mixer I have, than I pass.

That’s the difference between the digital M12 and the M16/24. On the M12 you can record and/or mix pre-eq, post-eq, pre-comp and/or post-comp. I like that for live work: mixing with the eq's and comps but recording dry. I don’t think analog has an advantage at under 100,- per channel.

The 12 is a digital mixer. The 16/24 use analog circuits.