which of these 3 mixers would you pick (and why)?

ps...

PS: I'm not really concerned with the number of channels...more the quality I'd be getting in terms of sound, the mic preamp, etc.
 
..try to Mackie VLZ PRO series if you are looking for quality of preamp...why?....cause i trust the opinions of the many people on this BBS who have reccomended it time after time after time......
 
Mackie is the best...forget the rest

Get a Mackie in the price range of the others you're looking at, I'm sure they have one close to the prices of those others, I think the 1202 is only a little over $300. You WILL NOT be sorry by going with Mackie. The pre-amps are the best available for the money. I've been using a 1604 VLZ for a few years now and have no need for anything else in the forseeable future.
 
Mister Q nailed it, run like hell from
Behringer Mixers.

I have a Spirit 16:2 Mixer. I really havent
done much with the pre-amps, dont know how good
they are. I use it for a keyboard mixer mainly.
It is really quiet, and it was $179 new at
Guitar Center!!
I have never heard anybody say a bad word about
the Mackies, I would go that route also, but
if you are on a real tight budget, the spirit
might be worth a look. David
 
Ok, I have a question.....

....why does everyone say run from Behringer Mixers?? I am not trying to be a smarty here, but I am considering buying one only because right now I (well, my band) can't afford, unless I find it absolutely necssary and do some sweet talking and probably alot of waiting for money, a VLZ Pro. Thanks in advance!!

Brandon
 
Oh please MQQ... let me knock Behringer this time!!!

Brandon....

3 phrases............ shoddy, substandard workmanship.... very poor-sounding pres...... horrible, nasal & rough-sounding EQ........

If the workmanship holds, it might pass for PA use... but it's not even a contender as a recording board.

Bruce
 
"Da da da da!!" the horns blast as Bruce comes to the rescue once again!! :D Ok, I don't know what I'm going to do yet, but that answers my question!!! Thanks again Bruce.

Brandon
 
Here is an idea....

Look into anything that soundcraft or Allen and Heath makes.

Better then the garbage can sounding Mackie stuff.

Good luck.
 
Re: Here is an idea....

Sound Cracker said:
Look into anything that soundcraft or Allen and Heath makes.

Better then the garbage can sounding Mackie stuff.

Good luck.
Click to expand...
Yup, Soundcraft and A&H make excellent boards... but FYI, while you are entitled to your own preferences (just as I have mine) there are pro's out there using Mackie in production all the time...

As a matter of fact, Nile Rodgers talked in detail about the Mackie pres in Howard Massey's book "Behind the Glass", describing them as clear and uncolored, very usable, and accurately reflecting the signal without imparting its own characteristic. Now I'm pretty sure a top-notch producer/artist at his calibre who would have his choice of gear is not going to resort to "garbage-can sounding" equipment.

Bruce
 
Good day Bruce...

Well, I am willing to bet though that any of those guys would be willing to use the product because they would receive good press from doing so.

No secret that Mackie has spent a considerable amount of money to push their crap on the masses.

I have heard more then anybodies share of crappy sound out of new releases. Open you ears and you will hear it too!

Nobody in their right mind, or not receiving an endorsement stiped would use a Mackie pre amp over the many other fine products they can afford to use. NOBODY. Mackie is a compromise, not a choice.

Good day.
 
Is that you, ED????????????? :eek:

Anyways, I hear ya...

But the "compromise" argument makes no sense when major producers/engineers (as I pointed out Nile Rodgers and several others in Massey's book) who can use high-end gear, don't.... Now obviously, I'm not saying a Mackie will outperform a Great River or Manley, but they are hardly unusable... talk to Mike Rivers on R.A.P. (rec.audio.pro) - he used to work at Mackie - knows their gear intimately (but he's objective about it)......

Anyways... we all have our preferences - but in the end, what matters more is the artist's performance. If John Lee Hooker or Stevie Ray Vaughn recorded thru a Mackie or Great River pre the performance will still shine thru. I've never EVER heard anyone say "...yeah... Texas Flood was allright, but I really HATE the way Stevie's guitar sounds thru that console - he should have used brand xyz - it would've sounded MUCH better..."

Ya know what I mean??

Bruce :)


[Edited by Blue Bear Sound on 02-13-2001 at 04:08]
 
I may "get it" more then you think friend!

I stand firmly behind my post.

Mackie is the same company that has bought muti-page ads in magazines and disguised is advertisements to look like articles to make the reader think it is NOT an advertisement. This is misleading, and should make one suspect a companies motives for doing so.

I used to make a living recording. Most of my peers cannot even come close to making the same kind of money any more recording bands like we could even 5 years ago. With that in mind, I think that maybe you might "get it" when I claim that some engineers out their are using gear because they are being paid to do so. Think Jordon endorsing Nike rather then Addidas here. Nike has more to offer in incentives.

No small secret in what you are saying about people not hearing the difference in sound quality. In fact Bruce, you illustrate what I meant quite well. Thanks!

Recording is not so much about achieving a great sound at the signed artist level anymore. It is about getting the product out, and getting as many names behind it as possible. Any kind of hype is welcomed to sell a couple extra CD's. Mackie is quite aware that having Nile's name associated with their product is good for business. Nile can't really complain about the stiped he recieves to tell all that it "Sounds great!". Ask him some time if he recieves ANY kind of reward from Mackie to endorse their product. He would never be able to look you in the eye and say no.

Mackie is a compromise.
 
I stand by mine too!

But hey - I absolutely respect your opinion... from your 9 other posts so far, it's quite clear you're not a novice here or in the industry. There's nothing saying two pros need to agree on gear!! (For example, as may have been evident, I'm not partial to Behringer gear!) ;)

You can always email me if you want to take this discussion off-line...

Bruce

:)
 
Peace friend.

It is not like I haven't ever used a Mackie pre amp before, and actually thought it was the ticket.

But I agree, if something is working for someone, then it must be at least alright.

Ahhhhhhhhh! Bring back the days when you only had to consider whether to use a Neve, API, or Ampex preamp! Anything else was a Tascam, and only used for demo's!

And it would seem that you have a wee bit of experience yourself.

Good day Bruce!
 
To illustrate a point...

...and of course, I'm not saying that we should adhere to a lower standard by any means, but sometimes, whatever you got at the time really works.

For example, I was going thru some of my archives just last night and cleaning out old 4-track stuff (from WAY back when)... some of it I was curious to hear again so I hauled out an old 4-track (Fostex 280, in case anyone's curious) and popped the tapes in...

Yikes... I remember that warbly cassette multitrack sound - good dose of wow and flutter on that machine making pianos sound horribly wavy, but anyways, I digress... a majority of stuff I thumbed my nose at (you mean I actually used to think that sounded good??), but there were a few lead and rhythm guitar tracks in there that I raised my eyebrow at... they actually sounded very good as I listened back thru the studio's console. And back then, all I had was a SansAmp and the built-in Fostex pres!! :eek:

Well the SansAmp was good, but those Fostex pres are pretty bad....... anyways, the point is - the sound worked at the time, and listening back now, with an arguably more experienced ear, it still holds up!

Does this mean I won't jump at a chance to buy an SSL, in favour of a PortaStudio's "console" (ok maybe an extreme comparison, but still!), not bloody likely!! ;)
But bottom line, it ain't always about the gear..........

Bruce
 
maybe you guys are big wheels....but

I am not writing this to piss anybody off, but why do I continually see people knocking good, affordable equipment
(like Mackie, just for example) because they are "pro's" and they wouldn't be caught dead with one? Has anybody noticed the name of this BBS? It's called HOME RECORDING. If we were all "pro's" like you guys, we would have all the fancy shit too, and we would be discussing this at PRO REC. But most of us aren't "pro's", and while I DO learn alot from you guys and you vast knowledge base, alot of what you say here doesn't apply to the average "home-reccer" out there. I have a Mackie 1604 VLZ that I just love. It does everything I need it to. I also use an SM57 for vocals, and I think they sound wonderful together. Now, I can see you both cringing at the obviously terrible sound I must be getting, and dismissing me as a complete amateur. But I am happy with the sound I get, I'm not making music for anybody's approval, although I want the best quality possible too. I can honestly say that the sound I'm getting with this "cheapo" equipment is better than I have ever gotten in studio's over the years (37 years worth of musical experience).
I'll bet if you were presented with the same equipment the Beatles recorded on...knot knowing where it came from, you would throw it in the trash. But it is still some of the best recorded material out there. Good sound is an accurate reproduction of real life. It doesn't take thousands upon thousands of dollars to get that if you choose wisely. I respect everyboys opinions, but you guys should be trying to help us little guys out there instead of telling us we have to have Neve consoles and Nuemann mics and all that crap. This isn't the place. I know I will get flamed, but I have big shoulders :) bOb
 
Hi Bruce.....I think you're cool

I think you know what I was trying to say :) Although I am a semi pro musician, I'm just a home-reccer who is raising a family and can't afford all the really good stuff. I know you were making a point, and although I seemed to include you in on mine, I was trying to reinforce you too. I have learned alot from reading your posts, especially the one you answered the other night about why analyzing a control room and EQ'ing it to balance it won't work. I had no idea! My point was also that the greatest equipment in the world doesn't mean squat without someone who can put it to it's best use...I think you were making that point too. I have been in many studio's with awesome equipment, Neve's, Manley, SSL, Nuemann, Pultec and all that stuff. Sometimes it still sounded like cardboard because some of these guys didn't know how to use this stuff (niether would I).
If we are as SoundCracker says, being mislead by Mackie's propaganda, then my $.02 says that he is victim of the same type of disease....the "I won't work with anything but the most expensive equipment" syndrome. Of course a Mackie isn't as good as something 20 times it's price, but the difference in quality is not 20 times, I'll gaurantee you that.
And now I'll shut up after this....the original post of poor westermane was to ask which of 3 mixers would be the best buy....and I think all would agree that a Mackie would be better than any he listed. That was my original point :)
Keep telling us how to use this stuff guys, not make us feel belittled because we don't have what you have! Lets Rock!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top