Behringer mixer

[ashulman]

Anybody have experience with the Behringer mixers? They are pretty cheap and I only need it occasionally.

[christiaan]

http://homerecording.com/bbs/showthr...threadid=85695

And there a lot more threads like that. The search option is very useful.

[MISTERQCUE]

Originally posted by ashulman
Anybody have experience with the Behringer mixers? They are pretty cheap and I only need it occasionally.

This is a joke right!!??

[acorec]

Originally posted by ashulman
Anybody have experience with the Behringer mixers? They are pretty cheap and I only need it occasionally.

I have a Behringer MX8000 from 1997. It was the lawsuit one. Excellent mixer. 6 years, perfect working order. Same as my brother's Mackie. We exchange mixes all the time. Idedtical sound. I really can't sat about the new ones. They get alot of bashing here. I love mine and use it all the time. People love the mixes I get on it. I can;t complain.

[MISTERQCUE]

Never hear d of a Behringer MX8000.
Maybe you mean the MX9000?

1st off, you cannot compare Behs's MX pre's to Mackies VLZ's
as the MX's preamps only have an input sensitivity rating of only -+12dbu while the rated input sensitivity of Mackies VLZ's go as hi as +23dbu's making the MX9000 an unacceptable unit when using hi-sens mics' for drum-micing!

I could go on and on but I've wasted wayyyy to much time on Behringer mixers!



All I can say is, if you're happy, then I'm happy!

[acorec]

Originally posted by MISTERQCUE
Never hear d of a Behringer MX8000.
Maybe you mean the MX9000?

1st off, you cannot compare Behs's MX pre's to Mackies VLZ's
as the MX's preamps only have an input sensitivity rating of only -+12dbu while the rated input sensitivity of Mackies VLZ's go as hi as +23dbu's making the MX9000 an unacceptable unit when using hi-sens mics' for drum-micing!

I could go on and on but I've wasted wayyyy to much time on Behringer mixers!



All I can say is, if you're happy, then I'm happy!

It is an MX8000 48 track mixer. The pres in the Behringer and the mackie are on the same level of horrible. Myself and my brother both use outboard pre-amps. The boards sound the same. I don't know about the MX9000.

[MISTERQCUE]

Originally posted by acorec
It is an MX8000 48 track mixer. The pres in the Behringer and the mackie are on the same level of horrible. Myself and my brother both use outboard pre-amps. The boards sound the same. I don't know about the MX9000.

I'm just curious, but have you ever done an A/B comparison
bet the Mackie and the Behringer?

The SR Series has a low-cut filter centered @ 75hz; The MX doesn't. The MX's pre/post auxes has a gain of only 15db while the SR's ride at 22db. The MX's XLR input range maxes out at 14dbu's;SR's peak at 28!
Let's not EVEN go into eq shelving capabilities (lo&hi) as the SR's surpasses the MX's range in freq'y processing by at least -/+12-14dbs.
Power consumption? The MX's uses a ridiculously 400watt power supply supposedly to allow for improved transient responses whereas the SR's uses 5x less power yet provides equal or better than signal translation(& mind you, this is from a Company that supposedly copied Mackies design yet scrimped on perf components!).

You state that they both "sound the same"! I can't understand how you arrived at that conclusion when SR provides superior
quality in signal translation,freq'y processes and overall operation
than the MX.
Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT stating the Mackies are the BEST out there, but by FAR, an overall better unit than Beh's MX's!

Peace.

A Former & NEVER AGAIN Owner of Behringer "SUCK-@SS" Mixers.

Q.rM

[darrin_h2000]

Im using a little 8 channel on my karaoke rig that has been perfect ever since Ive had it. But Id buy a soundcraft if I could do it over.

[acorec]

Originally posted by MISTERQCUE
I'm just curious, but have you ever done an A/B comparison
bet the Mackie and the Behringer?

The SR Series has a low-cut filter centered @ 75hz; The MX doesn't. The MX's pre/post auxes has a gain of only 15db while the SR's ride at 22db. The MX's XLR input range maxes out at 14dbu's;SR's peak at 28!
Let's not EVEN go into eq shelving capabilities (lo&hi) as the SR's surpasses the MX's range in freq'y processing by at least -/+12-14dbs.
Power consumption? The MX's uses a ridiculously 400watt power supply supposedly to allow for improved transient responses whereas the SR's uses 5x less power yet provides equal or better than signal translation(& mind you, this is from a Company that supposedly copied Mackies design yet scrimped on perf components!).

You state that they both "sound the same"! I can't understand how you arrived at that conclusion when SR provides superior
quality in signal translation,freq'y processes and overall operation
than the MX.
Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT stating the Mackies are the BEST out there, but by FAR, an overall better unit than Beh's MX's!

Peace.

A Former & NEVER AGAIN Owner of Behringer "SUCK-@SS" Mixers.

Q.rM

Printed specs are a wonderful thing. They sell lots of product. As an electronics engineer, I know that I can make any component look great. You have to know how they measured the parameters. There are many standards to go by and they all come up with better looking or worse looking results. Yes, I have a/b'd both. I do it all the time. My brother has the Mackie and I the Behringer. Most of our equipment is the same including monitors. We bring mixes back and forth all the time. We track at our houses and share the mixes. In actual sound, we both hear no differences. That is real world. The specs are something else.

[Mark Scheuerman]

I have an mx9000 & find it a little noisey, a little crosstalk, the eq is just ok, the pots & faders are all quiet but some of the buttons are noisey. This is just a toy for me, if I were serious about studio mixing I definately wouldn't choose this mixer. It's all for fun anyway, isn't it?

[MISTERQCUE]

Originally posted by acorec
Printed specs are a wonderful thing. They sell lots of product. As an electronics engineer, I know that I can make any component look great. You have to know how they measured the parameters. There are many standards to go by and they all come up with better looking or worse looking results. Yes, I have a/b'd both. I do it all the time. My brother has the Mackie and I the Behringer. Most of our equipment is the same including monitors. We bring mixes back and forth all the time. We track at our houses and share the mixes. In actual sound, we both hear no differences. That is real world. The specs are something else.

Wrongggggg! Aforementioned specs were provided by expert testing of eachs rated performance.

The specs I have stated were provided during A/B analysis by
well-known engineer,Bill Parks @ prorec. Using an omni mic on a single channel on each board, mic'ing a snare and amp-micing, he was able to determine signal-input sens't'vity ratings of each boards pre's, effective freq'y cut/boost and sweeps and total output performance. Guess what, Mackie rated higher in all aspects more than 2 fold!

Both sound alike? Please. Brutha', I mean no disrespect whatso-ever, but run a playback a single track thru each boards outputs
and keep eq on both flat. Using the same monitors and amp,listen carefully to the channel's output. You WILL notice some sort of "discoloration" or such emanating from the Behringer
due to it's large transformer mixing line noise with signal.

The post prior to this one sums it all up in a nutshell!

However, like I said prev'ly, if U're happy than I'm happy 4 you!

Nuff said!

Peace
Q.rM

[acorec]

Originally posted by MISTERQCUE
Wrongggggg! Aforementioned specs were provided by expert testing of eachs rated performance.

The specs I have stated were provided during A/B analysis by
well-known engineer,Bill Parks @ prorec. Using an omni mic on a single channel on each board, mic'ing a snare and amp-micing, he was able to determine signal-input sens't'vity ratings of each boards pre's, effective freq'y cut/boost and sweeps and total output performance. Guess what, Mackie rated higher in all aspects more than 2 fold!

Both sound alike? Please. Brutha', I mean no disrespect whatso-ever, but run a playback a single track thru each boards outputs
and keep eq on both flat. Using the same monitors and amp,listen carefully to the channel's output. You WILL notice some sort of "discoloration" or such emanating from the Behringer
due to it's large transformer mixing line noise with signal.

The post prior to this one sums it all up in a nutshell!

However, like I said prev'ly, if U're happy than I'm happy 4 you!

Nuff said!

Peace
Q.rM

Are you for real? You have to get a life. I don't really care about what anyone says. I use the board and it sounds just like my brother's Mackie. The sound has never been a topic of discussion between us. My board records snare drums and everything else just fine. I do alot of recording and the board gives me pro sounding recordings everytime. What do you want me to say? Look at all the cheap mics that are so poular now. People flamed many of them for a long time until someone who is respected said that the mic is great. I don't know about new Behringers. I know my 1997 board sounds the same as a Mackie of the same year. You are overlooking the point that I have a/b both boards for 6 years! You think some guy over at pro whatever.com has done that ? Sorry, but my testing has lasted 6 years and I have an excellent ear.

[MISTERQCUE]

Whatever!!

Have fun with your "mixer".