Mixer - Mackie or A+H?

NeoMagick

New member
I'm in need of a decent mic pre strip, but short of the DMP3 or the Octane, there isn't a whole lot to be had (aside from the berry ADA8K, but i try to contain my laughter).

I currently have a Motu 828mkII which I use quite happily, only my band and I are starting to do some more recordings. Now, I'd like to get something primarily for me so I'm not limited to 2 mic pre's, but having additional flexibility (like being able to be used in live shows) is a big bonus.

I've been looking primarily at the Mackie 1642 VLZ Pro. For the price (MF: $600), it's hard to beat, especially given that -
A) 8 of the 10 preamp channels have a direct out that I can feed to my 828mkII.
and B) It's a 16ch mixer (8 of which are stereo), that I can use at live shows.

I, personally, have had really good experiences with Mackie. I was trained on a Mackie 24x8, and loved every minute of it. A friend of mine has a 1202 VLZ he uses for his recording work, and produces very fine results with it (he also has a couple of ADK mics, which contributes a lot, I know). My engineer, however, says that the people he work with avoid Mackie like the plague, as they tend to make things sound like cardboard.

I have to admit, I've never sat down and tried out a Mackie board head to head with another. I've used other boards (Yamaha, Yorkville, Alesis, a few others) during shows, and they've always worked well, but I've been performing rather than sitting and listening, and they've never been put up against a Mackie.

I've looked at Allen and Heath boards, and I like what I see, especially the PA12 or PA20. The PA20 is a bit higher than I planned on spending (i'm budgeting around $750). The PA12 is perfect for me personally, but isn't so great for live usage, as we tend to use 16 channels on a board. They're a bit higher priced (but i'm willing to save a little and pay a bit more for quality - i do want it in the next few weeks, however).

So - has anybody sat down and compared an A+H and a Mackie? Anyone happen to have both an A+H and a Mackie sitting next to each other they could do a couple of takes on and send over? Or just general experience they could share? I'd appreciate any insights you guys have.
 
I've used Mackie VLZ's in the past. They are clean and last years but the EQ is very harsh. When searching for a new board nearly everyone with experience on this BBS recommended A&H. I ended up getting a Soundcraft M Series because A&H was out of my pricerange. After using the M Series it was clearly more musical compared to the Mackie VLZ due to its EQ. A&H is said to have better EQ than the Soundcraft M series; given what I've heard on this board if I had the option I'd go with Allen&Heath.
 
Yes, VLZ is certainly not a musical EQ to say the least. But of course, good sound guy will get better use of the VLZ eq than a Midas.
 
My sound guy just asked me to get the 1642VLZ, for the number of mic pres and the sub groups. But he's thinking for gigs primarily, not for recording. I'm thinking vice versa - I'll take better sound over versatility any day.

I'm gonna go to a guitar center in the next few days, where they've got the PA12 in stock (which the guy was advising against, because it's version has built in poweramps, and will be much more susceptible to transformer and EM noise), so I'll try the PA line of pre's against the VLZs. He was strongly reccomending the Mixwizard WZ3 line. It's a little pricier (by a couple hundred), but $800 for an 8 or 10 pre board that sounds beautiful is much more justifiable (in my mind) than $700 for a 16 pre board that sounds mediocre. Even if I order it and then bring it back, at least I can try it out head to head, so I'll know.

Either way, i've got a lot of experimentation ahead of me. Thanks for the input guys! I'll try and lay down some tracks with whatever I can bring home over the next couple weeks to put up for comparison.
 
SamIam89 said:
Yes, VLZ is certainly not a musical EQ to say the least. But of course, good sound guy will get better use of the VLZ eq than a Midas.


What? I would love too see how you explain this one.
 
My guess is that he meant that a good sound guy could get a better sound out of a VLZ eq than a total nitwit could out of a Midas. I think. I dunno. :)
 
That would be my guess too, had to check. I have never heard an instance where the Midas did not sound better than a VLZ.
 
Back
Top