Mackie 1604VLZ-PRO Vs. Soundcraft 200SR VS. Tascam M-126 VS. Yamaha 2404

[stevieb]

So, this guy wants to trade a Yamaha 2404 board for something smaller. I have three such boards- a Soundcraft 200SR, a Tascam M-216 and a Mackie 1604VLZ-PRO. He is interested in either, and I am having some difficulty is deciding which I would prefer to trade away.

First, let me tell you why he wants to trade, and why I want to. He wants a physically smaller board- he's tired of carting his 24-channel board to gigs. I would like to have a bigger board- I occasionally find myself needing a few more channels, and it would be nice to split the board at sound check.

What I can tell you about my 3 boards:
All have 16 input channels, 4 groups, etc. Below are some of the ways they differ:
MACKIE- most modern board, made in the USA (not China) has direct outs for ch. 1-8 which means it could work better for recording, and is rack-mountable, which is good for space, not so good when peering at little print.
SOUNDCRAFT is rather a work-horse. Has out-board switching power supply (other two do not) which probably could mean less noise. Built as a live-sound board, which is 95% of my use. Inserts can be pressed into direct-out service, of course. Each input channel has switchable phantom power, too. EDIT: This is the only of the three that has individual channel strips.
TASCAM seems to be a consumer-quality board, unlike the Soundcraft's pro-quality, road-ready build. Tascam has 8 RCA "Tape-In" jacks, which I suppose are intended for mix-down (and made to be friendly to the Tascam 38 R2R from the same era- I have a Tascam 38) Also has inserts, which can be direct-outs if need be.

I like the XLR outs for the mains and groups on the Soundcraft and Tascam, but most of the stage snakes I have ever encountered have TRS returns, so I gotta use adapters or re-wire my snakes. The Mackie is a little more snake-friendly (it never wants to hit the snake with a stick...)

I have read about the Yamaha 2404's pre-amps are not the best, whereas the Soundcraft, being made in England, has those British pre's everyone goes ga-ga for.

Next, my questions posed:
1. Which of my boards is a better deal for to trade away me, from a standpoint of value and usability? The Mackie seems to be better for recording, right? Or, maybe not?

2, Is this even a good trade for me, or should I pass? He's all over the Soundcraft- that, plus knowing if I let it go, I will probably never find another (and I do like that board) is making me hesitate.

Most of what I do is live sound, but I do some recording- 8 channels are all I ever will need for recording- if I have needs beyond that, I go to my son's pro 48-channel studio in New Orleans.

Thanks.

 

[tmix]

Of all your Mixers, the soundcraft would be the one I keep for recording purposes and if it fits the bill for your live use too all the better.

I have a Mackie and it is OK for live use, but I feel sounds really lifeless when I record through it.
The Yammie mixers are OK live but I don't know that they are anything special for recording unless they are the transformer balanced ones.

 

[stevieb]

Thanks for the post, Tom. The only thing about the Soundcraft is, it is a live-sound board- no direct outs, for instance. Still, I am leaning twards keeping the Soundcraft, mostly because it seems to be the most robust board- I feel it can take a lot more road use.

Anybody else? If you only know of one or two of the boards I mention, tell me what you like and/or don't like about them.

Thanks.

 

[stevieb]

Bump. Cm'on, folks, surely SOMEONE has an opinion of at least ONE of these boards.

 

[bozmillar]

I'm sure a lot of people have opinions about these boards, but none of those opinions really matter. Are you willing to give up some of these features? does the yamha have features you need? given the way you described your boards, it sounds like you think some sound better not because you can hear a difference, but because other people have said so. I'd say use the board that has the features you want. Nobody here can really tell you what features you want.

 

[stevieb]

boz, good point, but there is one luxury I don't have- that of being able to listen to the boards back-to-back and determine which I like the sound of and which I don't. (Actually, maybe I do have that luxury, I could ask the owner of the Yammie for a temporary trade- 2 weeks, and if either of us are unhappy, we "un-trade." That worked well for me once with a couple of vintage Fender amps, and was a royal PITA with a Strat copy and some Texas Special pickups. Hmmm...)

I have heard some unflattering things about the Yammie board, about the pre-amps being dull and boring. Actually, heard the same about the Mackie board...

 

[bozmillar]

boz, good point, but there is one luxury I don't have- that of being able to listen to the boards back-to-back and determine which I like the sound of and which I don't. (Actually, maybe I do have that luxury, I could ask the owner of the Yammie for a temporary trade- 2 weeks, and if either of us are unhappy, we "un-trade." That worked well for me once with a couple of vintage Fender amps, and was a royal PITA with a Strat copy and some Texas Special pickups. Hmmm...)

I have heard some unflattering things about the Yammie board, about the pre-amps being dull and boring. Actually, heard the same about the Mackie board...

Take this for what it's worth, but my general rule of thumb is that if I can't tell it's crappy by listening to it without an A/B test, then it doesn't matter. I figure that if I, who have been working very closely with audio for the past 10 years, can't hear that something sounds bad by listening to it, then 99% of the people I will be recording for won't be bothered by it either. Then there would be that small percentage of the population that can hear it and does care. It's such a small market to cater to.