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

[djchris73]

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.

You posted this June 6, 2006. Mackie still has 32.8buss mixers on thier website today, Mar 6, 2007. I called Guitar Center today in Pasadena, Ca and said they had few and if they ran out they could get more. Are you sure that Mackie stoped making them?

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.

This comments smacks of Neve, Midas, Trident, Amek and SSL elitism.

 

[xstatic]

Get your info right. When I posted that, Mackie was discontinuing the 8 buss series as it was known then. If they decided not to, it isn't my problem. If they never were going to, then I received bad info form the Mackie guys themselves.

You can call me elitist if you want. I know the truth. The truth is that there are several other consoles in the same ballpark price range that I would have no problem using. That does not seem to elitist to me. Its actually more realism. Mackies are hardly ever accepted on any riders. In general if I roll into a venue and the house guy is stoked about his new Mackie, that usually tells me a lot about the rest of the rig right away. Its rarely a good thing. If all that sounds elitist to you, thats fine by me. My clients and I all see it as being realistic.

 

[Ford Van]

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 concur! Although I was never a Mackie dealer, I have worked live sound for many years and have spent at least 1 thousand hours mixing on Mackies! The EQ is simply almost useless!!! It does nothing at all to flatter the sound, and I totally agree that if you do engage the eq to "fix" something, two other problems arise.

The consoles tend to sound very harsh when you start hitting them hard too!

I will take a Soundcraft Spirit over a Mackie any day. While the Spirit line wasn't exactly a "gem", it is MUCH more pleasing on the ear than any Mackie I have heard.

 

[Ford Van]

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.

.......

 

[SonicAlbert]

When I used Mackie boards I used the eq for cutting, not boosting--as much as possible anyway. The biggest problem I had with the eq was that it was in the circuit all the time, there was no eq bypass switch.

I didn't think the eq was as bad as some people were griping, but then again you certainly didn't want to go hog wild boosting bands all over the place either.

 

[tarnationsauce2]

When I used Mackie boards I used the eq for cutting, not boosting--as much as possible anyway. The biggest problem I had with the eq was that it was in the circuit all the time, there was no eq bypass switch.

I didn't think the eq was as bad as some people were griping, but then again you certainly didn't want to go hog wild boosting bands all over the place either.

THe 8.buss series of boards do have an EQ in/out switch.

 

[boingoman]

A sweepable HPF would have been great on those boards.

I will take a Soundcraft Spirit over a Mackie any day.

Or Allen and Heath GL, Soundcraft GB4/GB8, or Crest HP.

I do have to say, we had a 24X8 that we beat the shit out of for five years on 100 shows a year, it never had a problem. Mackie's serious QC problems seemed to start around the release time of the power amps and VLZ-Pro stuff, which has gotta be what- 6-7 years now?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Mackie's serious QC problems seemed to start around the release time of the power amps and VLZ-Pro stuff, which has gotta be what- 6-7 years now?

Yep, the -Pros came out in 2000.

I have also had nothing but positive QC experience with the 24.8s, as well as my own '98 or '99 VLZ [non-Pro]. It always puzzled me how they got such a bad rep for QC, because my experience has been quite different. This might explain the disparity; I think every 24.8 I have ever worked on was a last-millenium model that has been around forever.

Maybe the new stuff has problems, but the older stuff have been workhorses for me. OK, maybe not the best EQ in the world, but relaible and able to take a beating.

G.

 

[xstatic]

Maybe there is a certain point in time where things changed and they had more problems. I do not know that for certain. I only know what I have seen and heard I do not think that it was a QC issue though. I think it was poor design and/or implementation that caused the problems. None of the techs seemed to think that it was a specific console issue, but more the combination of the choice of parts and design.

I will still attest though that the 1604 and smaller, and even the 4 buss mixers seemed to be pretty bulletproof. The way the channels go out in series though is not a happy thing. Then again, there have to be some design and build compromises in order to maintain an affordable product.

 

[eyeteeth]

I've had a Mackie for longer than I'd care to admit. when I first got it... I thought it was great... loved it... EQ did what I needed it too... Over the years I've grown more discerning, consitantly studied my work, and others, and experimented looking for better ways to do things. now, I don't use the EQ. I concentrate on getting the best sound I can straight from the source straing into the computer, then any tweaking I do comes during production. All I use the Mackie for now is basically monitor routing, and well... the Mic pre's. Which I am also in the works of getting "replacements" for.

I'll go start a "Best Mic Pre" thread later to get everyone's blood boiling.

It's a case of making use of the resources I have. But as long time Mackie owner... i guess they're maybe a little more useful than expected for the boards price range, but nothing to really get excited about.

 

[Robert D]

Here in my neck of the sonic woods, Mackie EQ isn't reputed as "bad", just very plain and un-inspiring. I think that has been a reasonable assesment.

 

[XLR]

I have a 1202. The EQ's not bad for low end rolloff but generally I don't care for its quality. For non-critical live sound it's OK. For recording, there are many freeware EQs that sound better and are more flexible as well.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I have a 1202. The EQ's not bad for low end rolloff but generally I don't care for its quality.

One of the good things about the 1604 is that it at least has the 75Hz roll-off button on each channel so you don't even have to use the EQ for that.

G.

 

[XLR]

My 1202 has that also. In the few times I used the low end rolloff I preferred the sound of the EQ low shelf.

 

[xstatic]

Maybe a part of the reason that many people consider the Mackie EQ to be bad is where people try and use it. If you are comparing it to a Behringer or a spirit, it isn't bad. However if comparing it to a Soundcraft series 5, Midas, API, Neve etc... then the mackie sounds pretty horrid. I guess a part of the problem in my end of the industry is that Mackies are not acceptable replacements for these consoles. Artists and engineers expect better but there are always those guys who try and throw the cheap crap at us and try to convince us that its all the same. Generally, if I roll into a venue running a Mackie, there is a really good chance that the Mackie is just the tip of the iceberg and that I will be fighting other issues also all night.

However, if you roll into a 150 seat bar with a small stage and 2 monitor mixes, then the Mackie is perfectly appropriate. In those corcles the Mackie is a solid product. I guess it depends on your goals, clients and resources. Sometimes maybe I forget that. I really am not anti Mackie like some of the negative feedback may imply, but realistic. The stuff I do generally requires more than what a Mackie has to offer and does not meet the minimum requirement.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Maybe a part of the reason that many people consider the Mackie EQ to be bad is where people try and use it. If you are comparing it to a Behringer or a spirit, it isn't bad. However if comparing it to a Soundcraft series 5, Midas, API, Neve etc... then the mackie sounds pretty horrid.

It's all a matter of perspective in that regard, I think. X, you and I have goone around this in the past, I really don't want to do that again, especially since I agree completly with the above quote.

When put in the full spectrum of available equipment, the Mackies may only be middle of the road, at best...if that. But compared to some of the stuff that's considered "standard operating equipment" on this forum, from Yammie MG-series to Presonus Firepods to SP condensors...well, you get the point; many Mackie products shine in comparison. One of the bands I work with live on a regular basis - yes on the 150-200 person club circuit - switched a year or two ago from a Soundcraft Spirit to a (used) 1604VLZ Pro for their manifold. The upgrade in sound was suprisingly huge. Compared to that Spirit, the Mackie sounded downright crisp and clean and unveiled. (Their equipment guy is actually switching again to an Onyx this spring or summer; it'll be interesting to see if it makes as big of a difference as the switch to the VLZ did.)

Does that Mackie even compare to a Midas or the like? No way. The jump from Mackie to the big boys would be as big or bigger than the jump from the Spirit to the 1604, no question/no comparison. But to just write off Mackie does seem to be a bit on the cliquish side. Especially when it seems that the Mackie name seems to get singled out as the red-headed stepchild to get picked on all the time (especially when there no Behringer around to kick .) I sit here and read the huge number of times that even lesser gear are discussed regularly around here and don't receive anywhere near the vitriol from "the pros" that Mackie does.

It just seems like it's cool for the in-crowd to pick on Mackie, but somehow a little less cool to pick on others (again, except Behringer ). Not very scientific or professional if you ask me. Either speak your (and I don't mean you specifically xstatic; don't take this post personally at all) mind and trash everything that's not A-list, and truely be an elitist, or be equally fair to all brands (except you-know-who ) and call them to the carpet when appropriate and give them credit when appropriate. But this general "I'm cool because I'm a Mackie hater" bit gets to be a real tired cliche sometimes.

G.

 

[xstatic]

I hear ya Glen. I htink you and I may be more on the same page on this issue than we realize. If it makes you feel any better though I am not biased against the Mackie stuff any more than the rest. I dislike all the cheap stuff equally

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I hear ya Glen. I htink you and I may be more on the same page on this issue than we realize. If it makes you feel any better though I am not biased against the Mackie stuff any more than the rest. I dislike all the cheap stuff equally

Fair enough.

G.

 

[Ironklad Audio]

yea, so...let's just say that if you aren't hitting the big-time, mackies will do you just fine

if you're trying to cut a platinum album, move farther up the list

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

if you're trying to cut a platinum album, move farther up the list

I'd say if you're trying to cut a platinum album, save your money and don't buy any mixer.

Use your money to hire a good engineer/producer instead, and let him pick the board/room that you rent for a few days to cut it.

G.