Mackie Hr824 Mk1...whats your input?

[CoolCat]

If one is used to a boosted midrange and a quick rolloff on the top and/or bottom, then a flatter response will - relative to that reference - sound like it's "missing" midrange

G.

I was re-reading and I think you nailed it on that. It makes sense.

enough reading...time to go listen some more.

I think I'll put the settings back to zero...thats where they show the real deal.

The reverb tails, its right in that 4K shrill range....that intro..

"He's a Real Nowhere Man.." has a lot of reverb tails. pretty cool to hear.

 

[CoolCat]

The problem with that idea, though, is that such scooping of the middle does not actually exist in the vast majority of louspeakers, consumer or prosumer.
G.

I think they can "cut it" in the crossover easily.
Irratating "shrill" freq range is right around the crossover range in a two way.

Many articles of the Mackies refers to the 2-4K range as being the "shrilly" range...also I think aluminum dome tweeters have a bit more of this because they are actually reproducing things better....but this doesn't mean they don't sound "shrilled" and "harsh". (materials)
I had JBL's that had this "shrill" too, but though they were hard to listen to, fatigue, they were probably more truthful speakers.

Again the vocal reverb tails is right in this area and imo, is something to really listen for when checking for "truthful" speakers. but it seems most, including pro's, flip the -2 switch, which I did myself right away...human reaction to make it sound pretty.

There's probably other ways a designer can chop out the freq to make a speaker sound pretty. As you mentioned increasing the low end can make it appear the mids are less....

the foam in the room takes out highs, not sure what range this is. but the first thing Ethans articles lead me too was the removal of handclapping in the drywall bedroom studio.

soundzzz... sibilance is another undesirable in this shrilly freq range humans don't like.

oh well off to my metal transportation device....later

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

You're in the right general area, but there are a few apples vs. oranges in there:

I think they can "cut it" in the crossover easily.

Five problems with that explanation:

1) There's a big difference between a 2dB crossover notch that spans maybe a third of an octave at most, and an intentional "scooping of the midrange".

2) This is a potential property of two way speaker design regardless of whether it's a "consumer loudspeaker" or a "studio monitor".

3) While virtually all studio nearfields are of 2-way design, consumer loudspeakers are of 3-way design as often as they are 2-way. On these 3-ways, any such crossover notching that may exist would not fit a "midrange scooping" pattern.

4) Neither the 824s or the NS10s exhibit such a midrange notch. The 824s remain +/- 1.5dB throughout the midranges, the NS10s actually exhibit a strong *bump* in that range.

5) Anybody who caims that there is any kind of intentional hyping or scooping in general on consumer loudspeakers simply has never actually looked at very many lousdspeaker response charts, has lousy ears, or is a Sam Ash salesperson who actually believes their own hype.

Irratating "shrill" freq range is right around the crossover range in a two way.

Many articles of the Mackies refers to the 2-4K range as being the "shrilly" range...also I think aluminum dome tweeters have a bit more of this because they are actually reproducing things better....but this doesn't mean they don't sound "shrilled" and "harsh". (materials)
...
soundzzz... sibilance is another undesirable in this shrilly freq range humans don't like.

Weeeelllllll, be careful; we could be throwing the baby in with the bathwater here. While there are no specific, hard boundaries, typically "shrillness" centers around the 4k area rather than ending there, something more like 2.5k-5k or so. And sibilence is usually higher than that even, usually found somewhere around 5k-8k.

Yeah if you have too much 2k it can sound kind of tinny and honking, but shrillness normally comes from above that, and probably won't be affected much by a 2-way crossover itself.

And again, even the "worst" frequency will only sound shrill if there is too much of it. If a flat-responding speaker in a good room sounds shrill, that's an indication that the "shrillness" exists in the source program material, not in the speaker's reproduction.

the foam in the room takes out highs, not sure what range this is.

Well, this is an important factor to consider. Not all "foam" will absorb well at all frequencies, and some can reflect at some frequencies. Also is the quetion on whether all first reflection positions are covered. I'm not an expert on foam materials, and I'll defer to Ethan on that subject, but I'd depend as much upon diffusion as I did absorbtion, as absorption can add it's own color to the sound based upon it's own absorbtion curves.

G.

 

[Lt. Bob]

I haven't heard the Mackies but I wanted to comment on Southsides' position concerning supposedly 'hyped' consumer speakers. This is the one thing where I feel almost everyone has it wrong and it's nice to see someone come out with a few stats opposing that viewpoint.
Yes, if you're gonna look at cheap crap that you'd buy at Circuit City like Bose POS or similar ..... then those speakers are pretty horrible sounding. But, to me and very many other audiophiles, that's not what we think of when we think of consumer speakers. we're thinking of Focal. or Dynaudio, or Paradigm, or Infinity .... or Theil ,,,,, or so on and so on.
Speakers that are made for audiophile type customers are designed to be as flat as possible, much like 'monitors' because flatness is the holy grail of audiophiles as much as it is of engineers. Hell, we don't even like tone controls on our components. It's supposed to be flat enough to not need them.
If you buy cheap crap then it very well may have been made with a little 'extra excitement' built into the response curve. But once you get up into stuff that's more like the prices of those Mackies ...... there's no reason to think that a speaker that some company stuck the word 'monitor' into the product description is any more flat than a good quality consumer speaker.
I'd take a nice pair of Paradigms and put them up against almost any of the monitors in common use among home recordists.
And there are plenty of supposed 'monitors' where the word monitor is nothing more than a marketing term.

 

[CoolCat]

we're thinking of Focal. or Dynaudio, or Paradigm, or Infinity .... or Theil ,,,,, or so on and so on.
Speakers that are made for audiophile type customers are designed to be as flat as possible, much like 'monitors' because flatness is the holy grail of audiophiles as much as it is of engineers.

yes its definately relevant..
even then they all sound different, i guess its all in the design. I've always thought its weird how they all are flat per specs but they all sound so different. I would think engineers try to be flat and marketing/sales want pretty and "specs on paper" that are flat. (or at least a good soundtrack to make them sound great)

I'm liking the Mackies, I think the DYNBM5A were a bit easier to listen to. YSM1P's were closer to the DYN's imo...like a cheaper level of DYN's. But the YSM1p's were close enough to not justify spending the extra $600 for my hobby HR room needs and am very happy with them all around on all points.

The Mackies to me are more like the JBL family I've heard briefly, especially the tweeter...add a little more bass, and a little more in the vocal reverb tail area than the YSM1p's. subtle but noticeable differences. These seem to cover more range and the amps seem to really have more volume under the hood than the YSM1p"s.
They are the $1000+ level like the DYN5A.

the 6" vs 8" is possibly a main difference too.


SG, some great points you made..
I think about that comment the flatness shows the quality of the tracking.
And the addition of the lowend does change the mid's.


As far as the bass being tight or not tight? it must be relevant as I think its gorgeous sounding...but then I haven't heard Blue Sky System Ones or DYN BM15 or 6's etc..

I did read a old bizarre post, where a dewd in Indiana got a pair of Mackie Demos and one was US and one was China?
...he was saying one Power button clicked the other didn't and there was a huge sound difference.
I checked mine out and both are the same (they click). I don't know if these are refurb, clearance of the backroom shelf speakers for the new "egg" 824, or how there could be different version singles floating around?
Anyone got an input on this? strange...

As far as I can tell only the white lettering on the back is slightly different...
I'll pop out the speakers and see if their the same on the US and the China made. They sure sound the same to me on this limited-short time of listening.
I heard no difference between the US and China built.

SG,
I don't get the Mfg code? These seem different than the CODE key you posted. I wonder if these are the same year or several years apart or maybe its just the amplifier thats not the same?...or maybe just the black metal case thats not the same? just curious.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

SG,
I don't get the Mfg code? These seem different than the CODE key you posted. I wonder if these are the same year or several years apart or maybe its just the amplifier thats not the same?...or maybe just the black metal case thats not the same? just curious.

I only know what I told you earlier; that was the manufacturer date code key I got from Mackie's own forum some time ago, and that it works correctly for mine. The date code is located on the back metal panel, on the lower right, just to the right of the serial number, right on top of where the AC power cord plugs in.

What do your date codes say?

Geez, CoolCat, I'd really stop sweating the details. USA, China, Zimbabwe, click or no click, who cares? If they work OK and sound equal to you, the rest is irrelevant.

G.

 

[CoolCat]

hahaaa... no sweating, I actually enjoy this kind of study and myth busting.

for example, I found it very interesting, coming across the guys post who actually worked for Mackie and mentioned their test methods and named the mic brand etc..

And I'm curious if the drivers are different. Mackie touts no "matching pairs needed" as every single speaker gets ran through the same QC testing. Each speaker is held to tight specs. Some mfgs, take great pride in charging extra for "matched sets" only, with LEFT and RIGHT posted on them, where the Mackies don't.

As far as breaking down the product,

the cabinet: No concern.
materials and design are the same from 1996 to 2007 (unti the "egg" started).

Speakers: Most likely no difference. Vifa as I understand it, probably same
for all years. Mackie doesn't build the speakers.

Amps: No difference, probably outsourced or built at some factory by a machine. From what I saw exact same board, exact same revision, no change between US and China on the MK1's I have.

Personally I find Mackie did an outstanding job of applying resources into this monitor, especially in the inital design and all the data and testing. (search 1996-1997-1998 articles). I think the intentions were there and money was no issue at the time most likely, so a great job and effort was put into these monitors. The amount of testing and bringing in of design engs to do this project was for real... a company that started with two guys.

I haven't seen really any reliability posts anywhere until the recent China built stuff years and then there's a few with power switches not working. The new "egg" speaker supposedly has a known power on switch problem too, which Mackie will fix without questioning per 2qty GC sales rep dewds.

hell if this sweating it! G.... I love to sweat. give me some BArefoot MicroMains and I'll gladly sweat over them too...or some BW800's or...DYN AIR..Blue Sky Ones....or...

 

[CoolCat]

Mackie HR824 speaker removal US and China

Ok, I got the damn cabinets open.
FYI for anyone doing this someday.

1) You need the T screwdriver...not a standard screwdriver.
2) The Faceplate is very difficult to lift up. I worked around the bass/bottom two screw holes. Prying gently the face plate lifts. The woofer stays in place while the metal faceplate can be lifted. The tweeter will stay with the Metal faceplate.
3) The cables require unplugging! this was tricky due to the short wires....needle nose pliers.... unplugged the ac c0nnector and the speaker connectors.

4) Recommended....once you get the speakers and face plate out take the foam baffle out of the tweeter side and you'll find the wires rolled up and tie-wrapped. I cut the tie wrap and this allowed for plenty of wire length. (obvious they build this from the back initially!)

Anyway....took some pics and may have some more.

But again the US vs China myth was a washout...bullshit....both speakers Identical!!!

and state on the label MADE IN NORWAY.

the woofer info. MSPKP22WP2104 QC 4ohm DPB35 (both the US and China built)

the tweeter 25TAF/G-MD H0899-06ohm made in NORWAY...
US dated 25/04
China dated 23/04

posted some pics, the passive radiator with the speakers removed...a couple blurry shots of the speakers....notice the one shows the metal ring, that was a surprise when taking the speakers out.

so if some hear a difference in the amp and speakers....ok.....

 

[CoolCat]

You can check the manufacture date on those demos pretty easy. There is a manufacture date code printed on the back of the amp on the back of each monitor, right next to the serial number. Here's how the code supposedly breaks down, per the Mackie forum:

n -- Decade
M -- Factory Code M8, M1, etc
n -- Factory code 2nd digit
n -- Year
n -- Month 1st digit
n -- Month 2nd digit

For example, my monitors are coded as

9M1811

which would mean that they were manufactured in Nov, 1998 at wherever factory M1 is located. Which sounds about right, considering I got mine delivered somehwere in the middle of 99.

Ok, found the MFG DATE sticker. Mine were underneath where the cables plug in....

both monitors state MFG DATE OM8409

so the secret code is:

MFG DATE= Sept, 2004

Factory M8?

this date also aligns with my speakers (from NORWAY ) both stating 23/04 and 25/04...

I find that humorous..all the China vs US shit...only to find out the speakers are from Norway....

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Ok, found the MFG DATE sticker. Mine were underneath where the cables plug in....

both monitors state MFG DATE OM8409

so the secret code is:

MFG DATE= Sept, 2004

Factory M8?

this date also aligns with my speakers (from NORWAY ) both stating 23/04 and 25/04...

Not exactly all that mis-matched after all; both from the same factory in the same month. Glad to see the GC sales guys got their story right yet again . "M8" is a legit factory code, I've seen it used before, but I have no information breaking down which factories the various codes represent. If you really felt like tracking it down, I'll bet ya it could be had for the asking at Mackie's support forum.

G.

 

[mrface2112]

so, are you buying them?

the real question is: do they make your mixing job easier? b/c that's what it's all about......if mixing on them turns out better mixes with less hassle and time invested.

the complaint i always heard (and had) about the ASP8's i've got is that they "sound too good". i soon learned that when mixing, if i can make the mix sound kickin on the ASP8's, then it'll sound good elsewhere. IMO, you should not have to fight your monitors.


cheers,
wade

 

[CoolCat]

verdicts not in yet...

the mixing thing is where it all falls apart as far as "theory".imo.
seems in mixing anything frkn goes...from Auratones to BW802 or whatever..HR824's....
Again I have no complaints with my YSM1p's, and as I have no clients etc...its just HR gearhead play here. But its really hard to beat the YSM1p's for me (many reasons like money, tones, brand new one owner.. etc..).

i agree, the idea of painfully listening to any speaker doesn't seem to fit.
yes, if I can mix a bit that will come too. i'm just kickin the wheels, testdriving....they seem to be very well built and more hours needed for listening and ensuring there's no problems with them too. the price is fantastic on this pair, so thats tempting to get into this level of monitors.

so far their great speakers, a nice build, and a really interesting read. I want to really test them out this weekend and record some (track).

trying to find out where the M8 is...and this weekend will be some more time with the Mackies, hopefully.

The Mackies are probably getting into the ASP8 arena too, they are not little room speakers....

 

[CoolCat]

$1200 versus $450

A late night of listening and reconfirmation.

The YSM1p's still had a large mid range present, as I read the posts here, the "rolloff" as SG mentioned earlier fits in this definition; in short, the low end bass was missing on the YSM1P's most likely due to the 6" wafer and lesser powered amplifier. Is this more like the NS10, is this a "magical" phenomena to get better mixes...or at least help?

The Mackies bass was gorgeous, but it "tricks" the ear in that the mid range is less....when its really just the bass being available. I think I'm reiterating what SG said.

Again on certain types of music they were more similar, light track acoustic for example the two brands were similar. imo.
When I threw some hip or techno dance at them the Mackies made the YSM1p's sound like an 4cylinder versus a 8cylinder. The power of the Mackies and the bass, including the 8" speaker was really a "wow!".

But a big concern was "Do I trade bass for midrange?"

The YSM1p's, in this side by side, probably sound more like a NS10 described earlier, with the Mackies, imo, more of a scientific flat.

Enter the control panel of the Mackies.
I woke up and thought about matching the speakers to prove this theory.
By dropping the bass at 80hz. By cutting the room bass using "A" and by leaving the HiFreq switch at 0......the mids appeared in full force, matching more like my 6inch YSM1p's. The bass was removed allowing the woofer to not work as hard. Was the bass removed? Yes.

By putting the system back to the flat settings of 37hz, 0-hifreq, "C" which is the flat setting...the Mackies sounded great, but they also in a extremly interesting way make various CD's sound different.

This test left me really believing the settings on the control panel of the Mackies. You can have "flat" or you can have a more "traditional" sound by removing the bass most speakers can't produce,via the switches on the back. (and these are very noticeable setting changes).

Which one is better to mix with? I haven't a clue...probably Auratones?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

But a big concern was "Do I trade bass for midrange?"

There's no trade off. One is not at the expense of the other. It's all in the ear, not the speaker.

I wouldn't put it so much as saying that extended flat range tricks the ear into thinking there's missing mid-range. It's not a true psychoacoutic effect, and it is in fact opposite of what Fletcher-Munson curves would suggest should be happning.

I just think that it's more that some people who like or are used to a midrange emphasis in their loudspeakers then to start thinking that such a response is a reference for "flatness". It's this skewed mental reference that causes them to think that what is in reality truely flat is instead hyped on the edges and scooped in the middle.

Put simply, there's not as many trained ears out there as one would like to believe that actually know and what different response curves actually sound like. There tends to be a personal prejudice among many newcomers that what they like or are used to - i.e. what translates easiest for them - is "flat" for them, and therefore must be close to truely flat.

Which one is better to mix with? I haven't a clue...

We've been saying it all along, CC. Wade said it quite well when he said that it's whatever allows you to make your best sounding mixes with a minimum amount of effort or fatigue. What Wade didn't mention, but I've been trying to emphasize all along, is that the loudspeaker which fits that definition is naturally different for every person.

(This doesn't count some pros who have trained themselves to be able to work with some industry standards like NS10s, which like many UN translators, may not speak their favorite language, but they have become fluent in it because so many studios speak it.)

G.

 

[CoolCat]

yes, I appreciate your inputs..been learning a few new things.
a new "wiser" perspective on a few things.

not to state the obvious but there is a 6"cone versus 8"cone issue going on too.

but the Mackies are really impressing me in that they are showing to be doing what is in the articles, the switches really are cutting and boosting exactly what they state. the low end is there!
its amazing on my 6" its just not present, I don't recall such a difference with the DYNBM5A between the YSM1p's.
is it 6" vs 8"?

Either way the ability of the Mackie HR824 to deliver a full range w/LowEnd and, with eq switches, a "6"cone sound" is impressive. in a word versatile.

I have them posted for sale for $600-700...or my YSM1P's for $375.

and in the mean time, I'm going to record and do some tracking.

left them on all night all morning and have tunes playing through them in repeat mode..Travelling Wilburys..the first one.

7 days left...

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

is it 6" vs 8"?

Unlike when women claim that "size isn't everything" and are usually lying through their teeth, in this case it's actually mostly true.

While size does factor in, it is not in and of itself a reliable indicator of quality or quantity of bass response. There are so many other variables involved: things like internal cabinet design, driver design, amp design, etc. all play into it just as much.

I've heard plenty of 8"-based loudspeakers with wimpy or sloppy bass response - including many with more than one 8" driver, and some with 12" woofers that weren't much better. I've also heard some speaker designs with 4" drivers with clean, tight bass that would put those to shame.

And vice versa.

G.

 

[CoolCat]

YSM1P article from MIX magazine....

"Built in the style of Mackie's HR824, the piggybacked amp module....."

 

[mrface2112]

Wade said it quite well when he said that it's whatever allows you to make your best sounding mixes with a minimum amount of effort or fatigue. What Wade didn't mention, but I've been trying to emphasize all along, is that the loudspeaker which fits that definition is naturally different for every person.

Thanks Glen. I left that last part off b/c i've said it (as have so many others) so many times over the years around here that i figured it was obvious at this point.

i listened to and demo'd a LOT of monitors when i was last looking, and it was obvious to me after about 5 minutes that the ASP8's were the ones that fit with how i work and what i wanted to hear. i mean, it was *obvious*.

then i waited. and looked. and saved my pennies. and waited some more. and looked more. and eventually i got a pair for $600 at Retard Center one Labor Day a couple years back (new in box). this was after i'd offered $900 for a pair not two months prior and was denied.

i consider them not only one of the best upgrades i've ever made to my studio (upgraded from m-audio sp5b's), but also one of the best deals i've ever gotten on gear. honestly, when you think about it, monitors are probably one of the most important pieces of gear you've got outside of your ears and your room's acoustics.


cheers,
wade

 

[CoolCat]

$600 very nice deal for ASp8's. Are your mixes translating well? what did you have before? what was the biggest notice of positive change?

off topic..
its really strange this whole mix concept...and low end reproduction or..er...lack of.
To mix on speakers, that are incapable of producing lows, is like blindly making judgements isn't it? am I missing the obvious again?

SCENARIO:
Picture some pro's at desk by a river, with tangerine lava lamps and crystal meth eyes...
mixing away on a gold tracking record, adjusting bass freq's, on Auratone size.

Suddenly someone adjusts the bass eq,
the speaker with spec sheet that smiles, ...ok...enuff..

"thats it!" the engineer yells, looking at his 5" Auratone...
"thats the bass adjustment we needed!!!!"

but in reality their not even hearing the lowend!because the Auratone doesn't even reproduce low end!!???? WTF????

As SG said the NS10's aren't much different, they don't go down low? So all these years people mixing on NS10's without hearing the bass?

ok off topic...who cares.

 

[mamm7215]

For Coolcat...

Were you ever able to a/b with the YSM1P's and a sub? I'm facing this problem right now. I have a WELL treated room but fight bass all over with these monitors. Accurate bass is just not what these monitors do well. I'm debating adding the YSS1 sub or taking the Yorkies back to get some Adam A7's. I'm just not sure the Adam's with a 6.5 woofer will be any better than the Yorks with sub. I've also heard some good things about the Yamaha HS80's, any experience with these?