Mic preamps on Mackie 32x8 vs. Standalones?

O

Orpheus

New member
hi.

personally, i wished the mic preamps on my Mackie 32x8 had more gain. much more. .... but besides that, how do you think they stack up against the standalone preamps? at what price range of preamps would the Mackie preamps be equivalent to?

also, i heard that the VLZ mackie preamps aren't bad. are my mackie preamps the same or better?--i would think so, considering the 32x8 costs like 3-5 times more.... but i never see Mackie advertise such techology on the 32x8.

the reason i'm asking is that i'm contemplating getting a real mic preamp.................. so, if i spend less than $500 on the mic preamp, would i really be that much better than what i already have?

thanks.
 
Orpheus, VLZ pres are certainly usable - but when you use more than a few at a time it starts draining on the power supply. So, one channel of VLZ is going to sound much better than 24+ channels.

In comparison to other external pres, I'd say the VLZ is better than the very cheapest - but even when you get into pres like the DMP-3 and the VTB-1, you've already surpassed the quality offered by the VLZ. Pres in the $500 - $1000 range - such as the RNP, Grace 101, A Designs MP-1, John Hardy M-1... you get into a completely different scale of sonic quality.

so, if i spend less than $500 on the mic preamp, would i really be that much better than what i already have?
Click to expand...

Yep. In the $500 and under range - look into the Grace 101 for a clean single channel or the RNP for a dual channel that has a bit of color. For $200 and under, the DMP3 offers two clean channels and the VTB-1 single channel offers versatility.


Dan Richards
Digital Pro Sound
The Listening Sessions
 
Uhhh... what Dan said, to a point.

Things like the VTB-1 are pretty much a similar design as the Mackie with the capability of adding some quasi-ugly [not that that's a bad thing... it just ain't a pretty thing] distortion to the signal.

The design on the Mackie pre's is an IC op-amp based design which in this particular situation lacks headroom, depth, and real definition to the tone... as you get into pre's that are designed to a higher standard, you get a 'higher standard of audio' as a net result.
 
thanks guys.

.....i keep hearing about this RNP. who makes it?

also, are the pres on my 32x8 the same as those on the cheaper mackie boards?
 
jake-owa said:
Yes the pres in all VLZ boards would be the same ones.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's quite right. I don't think the Mackie 8-busses ever incorporated the newer XDR pre's, or if they did, I think it was quite some time after the mini-mixers started using them. Is your 8-bus a "non-VLZ" a "VLZ" or a "VLZ-Pro"?
 
I was just trying to say that the "VLZ" pres would be the same no matter which board they are in. "VLZ" pro (XDR?) would be a different thing as would non "VLZ" obviously.
 
Is your 8-bus a "non-VLZ" a "VLZ" or a "VLZ-Pro"?
Click to expand...
how would i find out? it's not like it says on anywhere on the board or power supply. it says "32x8x2 8-Bus Mixing Console." i don't have the original manual.
 
Orpheus said:
how would i find out? it's not like it says on anywhere on the board or power supply. it says "32x8x2 8-Bus Mixing Console." i don't have the original manual.
Click to expand...

In that case, it's the non-VLZ. Those are the first generation preamps.
 
Mackie 8-buss mixers don't have either the XDR nor the VLZ pres... as JS said, they contain the original Mackie pres.

That being said, I have no trouble making mine work for me - I use the 24*8!
 
but do you mean to imply newer 8-bus's have these XDR or VLZ preamps?--or no 8-bus ever had these preamps?
 
thanks.

if that is so..... then perhaps the 8-bus mixers have better preamps than the other mackie mixers? or worse?
 
I didn't know that.

I've heard many people who like the original Mackie pres the best. It's debatable.

I find them very usable for rock music.
 
Orpheus said:
if that is so..... then perhaps the 8-bus mixers have better preamps than the other mackie mixers? or worse?
Click to expand...

I think the general consensus is that they're worse, though I've heard of a few people that like them better. Either way, they'll be workable but far from spectacular.
 
Fletcher, with all due respect, must disagree on the "VTB-1 pretty much a similar design..." comment. Both the VTB-1 and DMP3 are appreciably quieter when run at full gain compared to the Mackie's "hiss".
(the edge on "quiet" goes to the VTB-1)

The DMP3, as pointed out by Chessrock previously, is Burr-Brown based. The VTB-1 is discrete A/B.
Not that that means anything necessarily by itself, however, I suspect some of the "superior" sound of each relative to a Mackie's cheap op-amp is due partly to these design differences.

There are certain microphones BTW, that match up to the VTB-1
just fine, like the (200 Ohm) Beyer M88's, or Sennheiser 421's. Quite a respectable sound, even for a pro level studio IMHO. Running a SM57, when it's set on 50 Ohms, fattens up the sound to create interesting results too.

Chris

P.S. Fletcher, I hope all this talk of "cheap" pre's doesn't seem
like discussing whether Ripple, Boone's Farm, or Stawberry
Hill is "best"! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top