Cuemix vs mixing in DP

[billgers]

I'm looking to replace my ancient 828 FW mk3 interface before it retires itself unexpectedly (I think I have exhausted the world's supply of available adaptors/extenders etc. while keeping this thing alive), and as I have considered various interface options, the MOTU Ultralite mk5 appears to tick a lot of boxes. This has got me thinking about Cuemix. I'm curious: if I mostly use VI's and if I am already mixing in DP, what functionality does Cuemix really offer me? I've been using MOTU interfaces since they first came into existence and Cuemix has always seemed like this thing that lurked in the background that I didn't really interact with except very occasionally. Am I missing out on something? Do I need the effects in Cuemix? Should I be using the Cuemix mixer instead of the one in DP? If so, why?

On a related note, please let me know if there are better interface options out there (Babyface? Clarett+?) for my needs. Are there compatibility issues with using a non-MOTU interface? I'm mostly doing instrumental composition in the box with occasional vox or live instrument recording.

Thanks!

[bayswater]

The short answer is that Cuemix deals with signals before they get into your computer, or after they leave the computer, while the DP mixer deals with signals that are in the project in the computer.

The ostensible advantage of Cuemix is that you can do a lot with the signal before it reaches the point in the signal path before it is recorded, and you can hear what will be recorded without the latency that happens if you process it in the DAW.

So Cuemix does pretty much what an external mixer does. When I got my 828-3, I removed the physical mixer from my setup. If you usually just run a signal into DP, record it, and then do everything inside DP, then you’d probably never use Cuemix.

On thing to keep in mind, something that sometimes confuses people, is that Cuemix runs in the MOTU unit, not on your computer — just the interface appears on your computer — all the processing is happening in the MOTU unit. Even the interface doesn’t need to be on your computer — you can do just about everthing with knob twiddling.

[billgers]

Thank you Bayswater for the thoughtful response. Plus, you used one of my favorite words ("ostensible")

I used to have a 2408 years ago and IIRC I routed my rack of samplers into a Mackie 1604 VLZ mixer and then into the back of the 2408 and then back to the mixer on the way to the speakers. This setup caused weird things to happen like the time that I record enabled a track in DP and this somehow caused a digital feedback loop that permanently damaged the hearing in my right ear. At some point (maybe when I got my 828? - I can't remember) I ditched the mixer and went fully in the box. All this time I have been mixing from within DP, but I was wondering about Cuemix since it is featured heavily in the advertising for MOTU interfaces, so I figured I may have been missing out on something. As for knob twiddling, I really miss having dedicated knobs and sliders, but trying to do a mix with a couple of tiny knobs on the front of an interface seems harder than just using the software. Perhaps I need to look into a control surface at some point...

[mikehalloran]

The 324 card that came with the 2408 did not have CueMix but the later 424 cards do.

Most Fast USB 2interfaces since 2019 do not have mixers: 1, 3, 5, 7 output hard L while 2, 4, 6, 8, output hard R. MOTU’s M2/4/6 are that way, too. Most have switching that allows you to monitor in Mono while tracking and Stereo while mixing. The M4/6 have an Input/Playback blend/mix combined with extremely low RTL (round trip latency) that lets you adjust those levels making CueMix unnecessary for many of us. My M•Audio AIR 192|14 and many others have this, too but that is not found on any Scarlett interface.

Except for the M2/4/6, most MOTU interfaces do have an internal mixer that you can set up as you like plus CueMix if you want to use it.

[HCMarkus]

Good summary by Bays... no need for CueMix (or the newer Pro Audio Mixer) with VIs!

But the internal mixers can be very useful for creating near-zero latency monitor mixes when tracking vocals, guitars, drums, etc, which is what I use the mixer in my 828ES for. Once tracking is done, all the mixing in my studio happens within DP.

[James Steele]

But the internal mixers can be very useful for creating near-zero latency monitor mixes when tracking vocals, guitars, drums, etc, which is what I use the mixer in my 828ES for. Once tracking is done, all the mixing in my studio happens within DP.

Useful for my external hardware synths, too. Although I sometimes use Aux Tracks for monitoring but I’ve found them inconsistent. Sometimes the latency is imperceptible, other times I have to use the internal mixer in the 828es. I need to investigate. I DO miss the “direct hardware playthrough” option of my old PCIe-424 systems. But that’s ALL I miss!