Cheap Mixer

  • Thread starter Thread starter rnb259
  • Start date Start date
rnb259

rnb259

New member
Hey ya'll, wats a good cheap mixer for someone just starting out, to learn and grow with. I was in the market for one and i was just wondering wat everyone else has to say about equipment and durability of some affordable mixers.

Thanks
 
I see that alot of musicains use (Kybd players esp.) the Mackie mixers. Cheap and durable. They come in all shapes and sizes. Just 1 suggestion of many. good for starters and easy on the pocketbook.
 
before you decide on mackie....figure out how many inputs you'll need and how much you want to spend
 
For good quality, low cost check out the Yamaha MG range.
MG10/2 2 bus $99
MG12/4 4 bus $199
 
I second the Yamaha suggestion.

I bought an MG12/4 a few months back, and I love it! Granted, I've never heard a Grace Preamp or RNP or anything, but the pre's sound good to my untrained ear! My friend has a Mackie, and I can get the same sounds out of my Yamaha, and I paid $100 less than he did! (He has a DFX12.)

Take a look on eBay, I got my MG12/4 for $150!
 
I'll second the vote for Yamaha. The drummer in my band just bought a Yamaha MG16/6 for around $300 at Guitar Center. We've been using my little Mackie 1202VLZ for practice and recording. I was a little skeptical about the pres in the Yamaha, but we did some recording last weekend and I'm totally impressed! I cannot tell a difference between the stuff we recorded with the Mackie and stuff we recorded with the Yamaha. Granted, I haven't done a critical A/B comparison, but my first impression is that there is not much difference in sound quality.

The smaller Yamaha boards are obviously going to be cheaper than the MG16/6 but any of the Yamaha boards will be cheaper than the equivalent Mackie board. So, I guess what I'm saying is the Yamaha is a good lower-cost alternative to Mackie. Whatever you do... don't get a Behringer mixer, the pres sound like a tin can and you will probably be looking for a new mixer within a year.

Cheers!
 
Check out the Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro. I love mine!
 
Mackie v. Soundcraft v. Yamaha

Hi, newbie here.

Hope I'm not a pain, but from those comrades who endorse the Yamaha MG 12/4 and the Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro, I'd like to hear a little more detailed descriptions of what it is about the sound of these that you like. I agree with the posting about Behringer. . .to me, my MX 602A and MX 802A sound a little "transistory." I'm looking to upgrade, and am considering Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro for its reliability reputation and smaller size, the Soundcraft Spirit E6 for the overall reputation of its "British" sound (whatever that means), and the Yamaha MG12/4, simply because I've had great luck with other Yamaha gear. I want something that's a little warm sounding, to the extent possible in this price range. If there's no real difference, then I'll lean toward the Mackie because of size. . . my studio space is small.

I'm currently doing a lot of live-to-2-track-analog (Tascam 112MkII and Sony TC-KA3ES) recording of my jazz duo and/or trio. I put the trumpeter's mic (usually SM58) through ART Tube MP and Levelar. My bass goes direct (MXR Bass DI+). Percussion is mic'd with stereo pair Shure BG4.1 Condensers. A little bit of reverb (Zoom RFX300 or Alesis Nanoverb) is added in the fx loop for depth and dimension. Very simple setup. Quite awesome results, except for the slightly "transistory" sound I mention above.

Sorry for lengthy posting, and I appreciate any replies!
 
I haven't had any experience with the other mixers, but the MG12/4 I use sounds very neutral to my ears, although I tend not to use the eq. I wouldn't say it imparts any warmth to the sound. The pres are quiet unless you really wind them up.

The MG's been good for me, very reliable, no probs at all
 
there is also the new soundcraft compact 4 and 10 mixers.
but as they are new dont know how they sound. (british perhaps?)
i tried an alto recently. no neve. but sounded pretty good for the money.
sm57's and akg's seemed to like it. nice full sound i got.
another alternative is to build your own mic pre's like i do.
but you should take an electronics training course at night school.
to ensure you do diy safely.
you can build quite a nice preamp for about 20 bucks in parts.
the linear technology web site has a nice schematic of a mic pre.
look for the LT1115 op amp pdf. a few pages in is the mic pre schematic.
this is ULTRA LOW NOISE. if you take the output of this in to a line mixer
the line mixer could be used to control the gain going to the sound card.
i substituted a max 437 op amp which i found very pleasing.
but diy is another whole fascinating world you might not want to get into.
you can even build your own clones of the classic old mic preamps.
just search the net for schematics.
 
mackie v. yamaha v. soundcraft v. carvin

Thanks, apl, for the suggestion to look into the Carvin 162. I had forgotten about that one. On the Carvin web site, they have links to 2 reviews of it: one by Pro Audio Review, and the other by Videomaker. Interestingly, both reviews commented that the sound of the Carvin is "tube-like," and "warm" in addition to low noise, etc. I'm sure all of the units (Yamaha, Mackie, Soundcraft, Carvin) are sufficiently clean. . . .somewhere I would've seen reference to a dissatisfied customer if any of them wasn't. But I've never heard anyone refer to a small mixer as sounding warm and tube-like. I think for me it now comes down to a choice of Mackie (for size) and Carvin (for price and supposed "warmth").

Concerning the prior posting about making one's own mic pre's, are these really the key to the sound of a mixer, or would the "signal path" of each channel also be crucial? Perhaps the type of power supply is also a key factor?

Thanks.
Michael (a BIG fan of analog recording).
 
Man I wouldn't get sucked into those marketing phrases like "warm" and "tube-like". Just about every manufacturer claims their audio equipment is "warm." It's just a marketing gimmick and warmth is a very subjective measurement anyway. What's warm to you may not be warm to me.

In reality, at this price point, I wouldn't worry too much about the differences in pres between the Mackie, Carvin, and Yamaha. In the recording universe, the pres in those boards are at the bottom of the totem pole. My M-Audio DMP3 preamp sounds "better" than the pres in my Mackie 1202VLZ or the Yamaha MG series. Just do the math from the manufacturer’s perspective. In order to squeeze in 4 to 12 preamps in a mixer and still keep it a "low-cost" mixer, you are going to have to use to cheap (read: low quality) preamps.

I would look at those mixers more from a pragmatic perspective. Compare the options on each board, # of mic pres, # of direct outs (if any), etc. How many tracks are you planning on recording at one time? That's going to be a key factor in which board would work best for you.

Having said all that, there seems to be somewhat of a consensus around here that the Soundcraft boards are a step-up from the Mackie and Yamaha pres. I have never used a Soundcraft board so I cannot make that comparison. But I have used Mackie, Yamaha, and Carvin boards and there's not a huge difference in sound quality. But there are alot of differences in options.
 
mackie v. soundcraft v. carvin, etc.

Hi all,

Thanks for all the "input" (no pun intended) regarding small, inexpensive mixers. I decided to go with the Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro, mostly because of the size (I prefer as miniature as possible, and I don't need faders) and the array of outputs, effects returns, and monitoring routings. Plus, I found it on sale at B&H in NY for $340 incl. shipping!!

It should arrive by the end of the week. I'll post my impressions after I've had the chance to work with it for awhile.

Cheers,
Michael
 
Mackie 1202VLZpro impressions

I'll share my impressions of the Mackie 1202-VLZ pro thus far.

I love this mixer. The bass guitars sound really full and warm, with good definition. The trumpet sounds really detailed and warm. The stereo imaging of everything is excellent. It is very neutral, the way it should be.

The Mackie clearly has better sounding mic pre's than Behringer (even the UB1202 with the new IMP pre's). The EQ section of the Mackie is better, too. It's less transistory sounding than the Behringers. It's quieter, and more transparent. The overall build of the Mackie is nice. It feels and looks really solid. I'm Very happy with the purchase, because I accomplished my goal: to improve upon the transistory sound and slight noiseyness of the Behringers.

Michael Yoder
ambient jazz duo
http://www.ambientjazzduo.8m.net
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top