What is best little mixing board for doing remotes?

[josh]

   Previously we did all our remotes (high school games,etc) using analog Scoop Reporters but now plan to use a wireless connection and one of the software Codec type tools Audio Compass, Ustream or Skype... We're leaning slightly towards Audio Compass because based on their website, it appears they offer comprehensive tech support..

     We plan to use a laptop connected to a small, mixing board with two mics (Electro Voice 635A) connected to the board.  What mixing board(s) would you recommend for this purpose?

        Your help is truly appreciated!  Thank You!  josh

[OKCRadioGuy]

If you're careful with it, an Alesis minimix 8 would be good because it has USB audio connectivity.  Otherwise I'd say just a nice old Mackie would do the trick.

[OKCRadioGuy]

Also, keep in mind M-audio, Lexicon and others have USB sound interfaces that offer pro mic inputs and line level inputs, plus monitoring right in the interface.  If you don't plan on having many ins, you might consider just the right USB interface instead of dragging a board out and having to connect it all up.

[DudeFan]

The Alesis is a good board. But beware the power supplies. We got about 3 years out of ours before the power supply went south.

[ChiefOperator]

I like the Mackie series.  The newer models are not too expensive.  I have found, however, that many cannot properly set the gain structure.  If that is a problem, you could look at a Shure, which would have only the level controls for inputs as well as a master level (simpler to configure). 

[RealityCheckr]

How about a Shure M267. Simple, easy, balanced.

You may say "its only mono". Yes, that is true, but if you are using the Internet to do remotes you may very want to use mono so as to keep the overall quality good.

[OKCRadioGuy]

And, the true reality check these days is that you could probably find a old 267 Shure mixer on ebay for the right price too !

I still use one for my football remote broadcasts.  They are take up very little room, are simple and rock solid. If not much complexity is needed, they are hard to beat still in the year 2010.

[greg.hahn]

The nice thing about the Shure M-267 is that it has a built in limiter to keep you from over driving your codec. That can be very helpful for a ball game where the talent isn't watching the meter so much, and during an emotional point might start screaming into the mic.

But that and phantom power are -all- that the M-267 has going for it. There's no EQ, there's no effects, not much of a monitor system. (There is a headphone jack with a level pot.) That may be a good thing if you're sending out talent that isn't very technically savvy, because a lot of knobs tends to confuse people like that.

On the other hand, if you want a few more bells and whistles, and have somebody that knows what to do with it, the Mackie 1202VLZ is my remote mixer of choice for most applications. For even bigger remotes I use a Mackie 1604.

So it really boils down to your application and your users. Any of those mentioned will work. If simplest is best, go for the Shure.

[Rob Stutson]

Personally I like the Yamaha Audiogram6. 2 mic inputs (with phantom power) & adjustable limiters, 2 line inputs, a USB sound card and it all runs from the USB port of the computer so no power supply issues.

[josh]

 I like the fact the Yamaha requires no electric outlet.. How is durability on it?  THANKS!  josh