Mackie's so-called "useless" EQ section. Got any thoughts?

tarnationsauce2

tarnationsauce2

Welcome to the jungle.
I had a chance to use a Mackie Analog 24x8, and I must say I was shocked that the EQ was pretty nice. And I've used a lot of mixers over the years, like SoundTracs, Neve, A&H, Traynor, Tascam, Behringer, MAckie VLZ etc. Some mixers I used in live and others in studio, and some in both situations.

I wonder is people get the impression of crappy EQ from using the VLZ (or SR) series Mackie mixers. The VLZ (SR) doesn't have as powerful of a EQ section as the MAckie Analog 8 buss series recording mixers. Not to mention higher s/n ratio.

I want to get people's opinion (if you have one) about the 24.8 (or 32.8)... not the VLZ series. Of course I won't be using the master busses except for monitoring. I'll be using it only for recording with my MOTU 24, so I'll be using the direct out's from each channel. So the lack of headroom of the master section is pretty much irrelevant to me.

I got to say, I plan on researching this board some more, I might replace my SoundTracs with the Mackie 24.8 with a meter bridge.
 
I have used the Mackie 8 buss boards more than I would like to admit. I understand that everyone has their own taste, but I found the EQ on the Mackie to be darned near useless. It seemed very slow. You make a change and slowly rotate the boost or cut knob and nothing happens till all of a sudden, there it is, but way too much of it. I also felt like it did not sound very "pretty" when using the EQ. It seems like for every change you make, it creates two new problems for you. For that reason I avoid the EQ section unless absolutely necessary.

As far as other issues with Mackie 8 buss boards go.... Talk to some techs that do repairs on Mackie's. They will all tell you that thaey get more Mackie mixers in for repairs than any other board, and often due to just standard regular use. The pots are horrible. They seem to be more succeptible to outside dust and such and gunk up much faster. I do not know why this is because they use the same pots as other Mackie mixers which do not seem to have this problem. It is pretty well known that the 8 buss series in specific has a lot of longecity and repair issues.

Some other Mackie issues... Channels in all of the pre Onyx series Mackie's seem to have real problems with crosstalk. Hit a channel hard sometime whil it is muted and then solo a channel on either side of it and see what you hear;) Headroom.... The Mackie preamp has plenty of headroom on paper and is fairly quiet, until you hit about 30 db of noise at which point you start to really hear the effects of the Mackie circuit. Clipping.... Never hit the red light on a Mackie channel, it is displeasing and instantly obvious that something disastrous has happened. Many consoles out there really start to sound good as you enter this area. The Mackie reminds me of what happens when you hit a cheap converter with a signal 6db over 0.

Before any Mackie 8 buss owners chime in here wanting to defend the mackie name, keep in mind that just because your specific console may not have broke down (yet), this does not mean that these problems exist. The new Onyx series has addressed every one of the problems I have mentioned and is a whole different beast. Mackie 4 buss and lower models seems to not need nearly as many repairs. Lastly, I was a Mackie dealer for almost 7 years so my experience comes from dealing with LOTS of Mackie consoles, and not just one;)
 
I think alot of it really goes into the pyschoacoustic realm. (Outside of tech talk)

Of all the higher end consumer stuff, mackie always seems come up as the "not the best thing I've ever heard, but not the worst either". Mackie pride themselves on having a pretty quiet board.

I personally think the mackie EQs do very well for what they are. However, matching them up to Neve EQs, SSL (E Series for example) or even an amek is a completely different story. I don't find myself making drastic EQ changes on an Amek 9098i (for example) compared to any mackie consoles I've worked with.

Of course the other issue is the flexibility. On a small format board like the 24.4, you're limited to something like a 3 to 4 band semi parametric eq with a fixed hi pass filter. Whereas comparisons to an SSL 9000J (for example) are like comparing a little league baseball frield to a MLB stadium. Hi and Lo Pass filters with variable cut off frequency selection, that incredibly nifty "Sheen & Glow" feature you find on the Amek (or selection between J and E eq on the 9000J...which gives you two different sounds in one eq) as well as good control over your highs to lows. Very powerful stuff.


I don't know about other engineers, but those are key features to me. And I'm a guy that *hates* using EQ.

You mentioned that headroom is irrelevant, but it is worth mentioning that the summing amp of the board is a huge player in how a board like the mackie will stand up to other boards. So a quiet summing amp, yes, for the most part. But powerful...I'm not too convinced yet.


My conclusion on the mackie is simply what it's always been: "you get what you pay for".
 
There are two main groups of people who are Mackie haters and who love spreading popular myths abut them: those who believe that anything short of a Neve or an SSL is just plain crap, and those that have never used a Mackie (or anything else, for that matter) and want to sound as k3wl and knowing as the elitists.

Mackie EQs are nowhere near as awful as they are often made out to be by the popular mythology. They are not Rupert Neve quality by any stretch of the imagination, and they are a bit bolder and more "American-sounding" than something like the Allen & Heath, but when used as they should be - as live or as tracking EQs - I'll take them over the EQs on comparable Soundcraft, Yamaha, Alesis or Spirit models without skipping a beat any day.

The thing to remember is to not really expect too much from them. They are great for gentle control of what's going in to the tracking or into the PA and for tongue and groove style EQing and stuff like that. For SFX EQing or major sound shaping they are a bit coarse, especially at the extremes, and you'd probably be better of with a dedicated EQ for that (of course that's true with most econo-strip EQs anyway.)

G.
 
Thanks, good stuff to hear guys. Everything will be put into consiteration, even price. I know if you look around you can find a 24.8 w/ a meter bridge for 1,300 (less than half retail).

I did notice the EQ pots seemed to work on a log scale, rather than a linear scale. Hence the not much change... then pow! I think that's something to get used to.

(also in my original post, I meant the VLZ has lower s/n ratio than the 8 busses :rolleyes:)
 
I'll give Mackie one thing -

Mackie's EQ section made me a better engineer by forcing me to get things right at the source.
 
That Mackie board does indeed have a quite good EQ section. It is different in color and sweep then the EQ in British consoles like Soundcraft and Allen and Heath. The use of equalization dynamics in the signal chain is almost a lost art today. When someone asks me what the difference is between Mic A and Mic B I point towards the EQ section on the board and say "an eight of an inch". The Mackie 24/8 has EQ good enough for any pro/prosumer/hobby application. Good luck on your upgrade!

Chip Evans
 
Last edited:
maybe the tech's get so much Mackie gear in because it has been like the top selling product in mid to low range that its simply a matter of statistics?
 
Lee, the fact you dont use EQ. as much when using an SSL or Neve( as Im sure nor do other engineers) if a studio has those desks, they most likely have top end mic's, have a real "room" to record in and most likely have their mic placements down. All these features together used/performed correctly would I think reduce the need for eq. Im thinking cheaper board converts to also working with cheaper mic's, less of a "room" and knowlage.
 
Actually, they have taken into consideration that Mackie has sold so many consoles. How though does that explain why 1602's and 1604's (which combined probably sold 25 times more than all Mackie 8 buss consoles) don't come in as often? Not only that, but they are also carried around (exposed to abuse) more often. When you factor in those things, the 8 buss doesn't look so hot. It sold less, is abused less, yet breaks down more.

As far as the Mackie EQ goes, it certainly may be OK for any hobbyist, but in no way shape or form should it be passed off as a "pro" EQ. It just plain sounds bad to me, and does not function properly. Makcie EQ's are not logarithmic or dynamic. +3 is supposed to be +3, and +9 should be +9. Yet it does not feel like that when you use it. The new Onyx stuff however is nowhere similar to the old VLZ and VLZ pro designs, thank goodness. If you want to be a pro Mackie guy and proclaim it's greatness, at least try and use their good stuff as an example instead of what many people consider to be what almost killed Mackie.
 
Well, I am just your average AV engineer, who like every other AV engineer in the world has owned at least one Mackie in his lifetime for some utility purpose and has worked probably every Mackie board there is at one time or another because they are so ubiquitous. You'd be suprised the A-list pro settings where I have tripped across Mackie being used. If you have watched a promo commercial on WGN-TV (local or on nationwide cable), you have watched a network TV commercial that was likely entirely mixed on a 1604VLZ, believe it or not. If you have watched any episode of the Simpsons in the past 6 years or so, you have watched a network TV program that was entirely mixed on a single little D8B.

I'm not a pro-Mackie guy, I am a pro-truth guy. I'm not saying that Mackie is the best thing since sliced bread, I'm just saying that they get slammed far more often than they deserve.

Now, I will agree that the Mackie SR series is nothing to write home about; I in fact downright don't like those very much. And (for reasons I can't rightly explain) their 24-in mixers seem to just plain suck with noise and crosstalk compared to the 16- and 32-in mixers.

And as far as the noisy pots situation, here's my understanding of it (at least how it was explained to me by a local tech with a couple of decades of experience): The trim pots are more succeptable to contact corrosion than other pot designs are; this tends to make them noisy after time if they are not regularly exercised. It's not dirt and dust, as the contacts are sealed from the outside, but rather oxidation and corrosion. The reason so many repair techs see so many of them - and this is just as true for the VLZs as for the 8-bussers, BTW - is because of the trim pots' sealed design, they cannot be cleaned (other than through exercise), they can only be replaced. And that sucks, true enough. I am starting to have this problem with some of the channels on my current 1604VLZ, as a matter of fact. But it took 6-7 years of studio and outside on-location work for it to happen.

As far as the EQ goes, I guess it's largely a matter of personal taste and technique, but personally I don't care if I'm using a Behringer or an AMS Neve, I use *very little* channel strip EQ for tracking. Just a little bit of shaping, maybe. If I have to really crank around the EQ dials, either I adjust my recording setup or move to an outboard EQ on the insert, or both. Channel strip EQs, IMHO, have never been intended for heavy lifting in tracking. And for that kind of use I have found the Mackie EQ section to to be more than useful. Again, admittedly they don't come close to EQs on strips that cost 5x-10x as much, but who could possibly expect them to? Is everyone suggesting that it's the Neve way or the highway?

Again, compared to their real competition; Bheringer, Alesis, Peavey, Yamaha, Spirit, Soundcraft, Allen & Heath, etc. I'll take the Mackie over any of them, except maybe the A&H (depending on the sound I'm looking for.)

Just one man's opinion, but there are some brands that deserve bashing more than others, and it just seems to me that when the dust is all settled, that Mackie gets more bashing in the mainstream threads than it deserves.

G.
 
I agree, and I am not really anti Mackie. Like I said, I was amckie dealer. I do however believe in calling something what it is. The techs I have dealt with are replacing a lot more than just the little trim pots. They are also having to fix aux send and EQ knobs and pots quite frequently. The bottom line is that in general, Mackie is cheap, reliable, and readily available. It sounds OK and will get the job done. The 8 buss series in specific though does not fit this bill. It is NOT reliable if you look at the big picture. My only complaint with Mackie comes when I roll up somewhere and their poor little engineer happily shows me his Mackie like it was a Neve or a Midas. People that don't know better get sucked in by the hype and have no chance to actually learn or get better because somewhere along the way they have figured that they are already there. Me personally, I will take the Allen Heath any day of the week over the Mackie. Especially once you get to he ML range. However, the 1604 and 1402 and 1202 are very common little boards. In the past there ahas been no competition in this area of the market. Those three smaller boards are also very reliable and vrtually bullet proof. Call it what it is, and I have no problems:)
 
For me the Mackie's EQ sound a bit less "musical". Not saying they arn't practical or have a good use, just not the most astetic sound for my ears. Now if I only had access to the Mackie, I wouldn't mind it so much. They do a good job for the lower cost boards.
 
xstatic said:
I agree, and I am not really anti Mackie. Like I said, I was amckie dealer. I do however believe in calling something what it is. The techs I have dealt with are replacing a lot more than just the little trim pots. They are also having to fix aux send and EQ knobs and pots quite frequently. The bottom line is that in general, Mackie is cheap, reliable, and readily available. It sounds OK and will get the job done. The 8 buss series in specific though does not fit this bill. It is NOT reliable if you look at the big picture. My only complaint with Mackie comes when I roll up somewhere and their poor little engineer happily shows me his Mackie like it was a Neve or a Midas. People that don't know better get sucked in by the hype and have no chance to actually learn or get better because somewhere along the way they have figured that they are already there. Me personally, I will take the Allen Heath any day of the week over the Mackie. Especially once you get to he ML range. However, the 1604 and 1402 and 1202 are very common little boards. In the past there ahas been no competition in this area of the market. Those three smaller boards are also very reliable and vrtually bullet proof. Call it what it is, and I have no problems:)
Click to expand...
Fair enough :).
 
"Actually, they have taken into consideration that Mackie has sold so many consoles. How though does that explain why 1602's and 1604's (which combined probably sold 25 times more than all Mackie 8 buss consoles) don't come in as often? Not only that, but they are also carried around (exposed to abuse) more often. When you factor in those things, the 8 buss doesn't look so hot. It sold less, is abused less, yet breaks down more
"sounds like what my father used to say..just has more stuff to break( on the 8 buss), thats why he purchased stripped down cars :p
 
Well, it certainly is not that much more stuff to break. It is not just me, but pretty well known throughout the industry.... 8 buss Mackie's are a no no;)
 
jmorris said:
"Actually, they have taken into consideration that Mackie has sold so many consoles. How though does that explain why 1602's and 1604's (which combined probably sold 25 times more than all Mackie 8 buss consoles) don't come in as often? Not only that, but they are also carried around (exposed to abuse) more often. When you factor in those things, the 8 buss doesn't look so hot. It sold less, is abused less, yet breaks down more
"sounds like what my father used to say..just has more stuff to break( on the 8 buss), thats why he purchased stripped down cars :p
Click to expand...
A 1602 or 1604 could be carried with one hand, that's how light they are.
The 24.8 is something about 70 lbs with a meter bridge.
People think they can lug around a 70 lb box of sensitive components like they could a 20 pound Mackie. An 8 buss has a lot of inertia if droped from only 1inch.
 
xstatic said:
It is not just me, but pretty well known throughout the industry.... 8 buss Mackie's are a no no;)
Click to expand...
Well, I gotta tell you x, it may be "pretty well known" in your orbit of the industry, but over in mine no such thing is known. I know and have worked with several project studios and mobile production studios based upon 32.8s that are performing very happily with no complaints and nary a repair over the years. And while techs don't like the sealed pots, that the repair rate on Mackie is otherwise nothing startling as a percentage of units sold. I know one tech who tells me for every Mackie he gets on his bench he'll get 3 Yamahas.

What I DO know is that people don't like selling or repairing Mackie because the margins are thin compared to many other brands. What good is selling a Mackie at 25% gross margin when one can sell a Spirit or an Alesis at 32% or better? And why replace a pot for $59/hr when one can spritz an open pot with contact cleaner for the same labor rate? There's not a lot of money being made off of Mackie except by those who use them. That is the real source of a lot of the bad press they get.

G.
 
Abuse is not the source of the 8 buss problems. Most of those 8 buss consoles do not get tossed around or even moved around at all. They just are more trouble prone than all of the other Mackie's. That could also be why Mackie stopped making them as well. I am not debating that there aren't plenty of Mackie 8 buss consoles still in use and still working just fine. What I can tell you though is that all of the ophter brand name 8 buss consoles seem to stay out there a little longer, and retain their value a little better. I can tell you right now, the huge amount of crosstalk between Mackie channels is enough for me to not purchase one. I also prefer an EQ that feels natural and usable to me. As far as the preamps go, I have no problem with them. As long as you stay within the first 70% or so of them (which is usually the case) the are pretty quiet, but are also fairly characterless. They don't really help you or hurt you, which is what a lot of people actually like. The problem here is that in the same price range their are not a whole lot of options that are better. You have yamaha M series stuff.... decent sound, strnage layout fro an 8 buss board. You have Soundcraft ghost... good layout, decent sound, does not take to road wear very well though.... You have Allen Heth GL series, nice options between different GL's and built pretty well, once again decent sound. The GL's at this point would be my choice or a new Onyx 8 buss. The newer GL's are starting to use some of the technology and circuits from the ML series and really sound a lot better than the older GL's. It seems like of these groupings that Mackie and Allen Heath are the only two to really give an overhaul to their lineups and address issues that have existed for a while. The new Soundcraft GB series could also be a contender in this area, but i am not sure what their pricing is like yet. Personally however, I would give up all of these consoles and their features and find a way to live with the restricitions of the 4 buss Midas Venice. Sonically I feel like it is not even fair to compare it to the other consoles listed here. It definately has logistical limitations (4 bus, no phase reverse, no pad, aux pre/post limitations, post fade/EQ direct outs). However, in my opinion the far superior sound easily outweighs those limitations. I remember even having to put away a 48 channel Allen Heath ML5000 one day because Social Distortion decided they would rather use the little Venice instead.
 
Man, say what you will about Mackie mixers.... I just know everybody and their mother owns a 1202 VLZ and uses the hell out of it. I love mine. Its one hell of a secondary/whatever you need it for mixer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top