Peavey PA-600 Mixer / Amplifier Series

[kind of blue]

Hey ,
Has any one ever used or recorded with the Peavey PA-600 Mixer?
I just bought one , it looks cool but it's not sounding so good, it's very bass heavy...it only has 6 channels and that's enough for me , because im recording 60's soul/garage rock...
Has anyone used it? if so , what do you think about it...

 

[Sheff37]

This is an old thread, but the gear is still out there so. Our first pa back in the mid 70's was a Peavey Standard and two 112PH speakers. When all we had were little Alamo and Harmony amps, it was Awesome. Then we got the 400 heads and matching cabinets. We were so LOUD the pa wasnt cutting it anymore. So we bought two C-700 speakers, which were big and Heavey. It sounded different, but not really louder. But for sure looked Cool. So even though the sound with the 700s was muddier, it didnt matter because it was still drowned out. So in 1979 we bought a NOS Peavey PA-600. And here was the thing, it was big and heavy and looked Cool AF, but it was no louder than the Standard PA head. In fact l think every amp we had used the Same 400 series power amp section. Including the PA-600. So we drowned that out too no differently. But it was something better than nothing, and all the Bigness made us look Serious. So the whole system Never cut live. Around 1980 the local FM station announced it was doing a Homegrown Album to promote the local bands, so we decided to use the 600 as a recording mixer. And everything coming out of it sounded like MUD. And this thing was mostly brand new. Since all we had was a 4 track 8-track cartridge recorder the 600 was adequate. Except it sounded like s**t as a recording mixer, so we used it only to amplify the vocals. And we ran the 600 into an old Alamo guitar cab l had with a single 8 inch speaker. Shoved that all the way up to the ceiling in the corner, and let the drums bleed into a Radio Shack stereo condenser mike. The guitar went directly to the 8-track and the bass was an overdub. We recorded 3 albums this way in 1975, so the process was tried. Our recording sounded awesome, better than anything coming out of any local studio. And they kept asking where and how? So l finally told them was used a Peavey PA-600. Which was kind of a lie, because we didnt use the mixer at all. Just one channel and the reverb into a 8 inch speaker. And l think we cut all the lows and cranked all the highs. We didnt use the EQ like you would normally. We adjusted everything until the vocals sounded good on playback from the 8 track. As far as running the instruments into the 600? No we didnt do that. That sounded like s**t too. So I put a Radio Shack SM58 clone in front of my Alamo guitar amp and ran that into the Peavey Musician 400 head, and the line out directly to the 8-track recorder. And there was some guitar bleed into the drum/vocal mic too. And that is how we recorded all the albums we did in our garage studio in the 70's until 1981. Sadly rumors got around that the Peavey PA-600 was this moster recording board. And for a while the price of a PA-600 went through the roof. I saw one sell on ebay for $3000 around 2006 or so. Then people realized the 600 was really just a Peavey Standard head in a giant big piece of metal that looked like a real mixing console. But it was just a Standard PA head in a new dress.

 

[Sheff37]

Now another thing that comes up is, how do l compare all the old gear with giant transformers and silver dollar sized transistors to todays Made in China chips and circuit boards? Well again, back in the day we recorded all of our live shows. I had a very high end Akai cassette deck we ran off the Biamp board. And those recordings hold up to this day. After we got rid of the PA-600 we got the 16 channel Biamp console and the Peavey System Two triamp speaker set which was a 15FH, 12MB, and a giant horn, which when you pushed too much air throught it, it sounded like you were frying bacon. This was in 1981. We got the CS800, CS400, and some small off brand amp for the horns and monitors. And it still wasnt Loud enough, but a big improvement. So the PA was like this giant set of reference monitors and you couldnt monitor the Akai deck per se. You just turned it on and let it fly. Now some of the guys were Not happy with these reference recordings, but l was. Still am, but could you do this today? The answer is no, and why? The guys in the band insisted it was the mixer, so in late 1984 we bought a brand new Mackie mixer. While it made everyone Happy, it really was a step Down as far as our sound went. Our new reference recordings were terrible. And the band broke up after that. So when l am asked new vs old? To get a Good recorded sound, you need a good Live sound. And everything after that Biamp console has been downhill since -as far as live sound goes. Now as far as recording goes, this new stuff is hands down better that anything that was ever made. With my Digitech processor l can get that Perfect tone recorded onto my Korg D-888. And l am fixing to get a Tascam Model 24 and SD-20 mastering deck. But that is all Virtual and Digital recording, which sounds undeniably fantastic. But this new stuff is Not the Same thing. Those big old amps and other gear really kinda sounded like "crap". But that is what Rock and Roll sounded like. And at the End of the Day there is nothing that sounds more Rock and Roll than vintage Peavey gear. I sold the PA-600 but still have the Standard PA head. Sold the speakers too, but if l am feeling nostalgic there is always a pair of old Peavey speakers for under $100 on craigslist. But as wonderful as todays new virtual and digital stuff is, live it is just too sterile. In the studio its great, but to me l hear all these new bands and new recordings coming out and they sound great, but it all sounds exactly the SAME.

 

[Sheff37]

One last note. The EQ section on the PA 600 is Not a true parametric EQ. It is a bunch of sweep filters designed to replace a graphic equalizer. And of course a Lot cheaper to manufacture into a mixer. But it was a FAIL because in an actual working environment there was No set of settings that actually did anything but cut the volume or muffle the sound.

The 2nd design flaw of the PA-600 was that each channel volume control cut the gain at the the Power Amp, and was Not an individual channel gain. I cant explain it right because the whole idea and design was just a complete fail. The feedback control kind of worked as l dont remember it ever feeding back, but the cost was overall system volume and tone.

Next was the power amp section. It put out 210 watts at 2 ohms. While the Standard PA head put out 130 watts at 4 ohms. Both had 4 big transistors on the back. So really it was the same power amp section.

The PA-600 had some pro mixer features, but we Never used them. We didnt have monitors back in the 70's. It didnt sound better than the Standard. That you just kind of turned on, set everything on 11 at hit it Full Steam. Yes it fed back, and you turned the master bass or treble down a little. But as l remember at the end of the night, every knob on the thing would be maxed out.

I still have my old Standard PA head. The PA-600 l let go in 1985. Peavey dumped it real fast and started putting graphic eq's in all their mixers. But we were done with powered mixers by then.