What mixer for recording and live use?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jbroad572
  • Start date Start date
J

jbroad572

New member
I am in the markey for a mixer that will serve both purposes. I will eventually have a band together that focuses mainly on jazz, r&b, contemporary, etc.
The boards I have been looking at are the Allen and Heath mixwizard and the Onyx 1640. I don't have a problem buying used and will probably do that. I believe the Heath has better preamps as I recall reading, but I like the ability to use FW to record even though it sucks that I won't be able to send post EQ. I'm also thinking 16 channels should be enough for my setup (1 or 2 vocalists at the most, sax, guitar, bass, drums, keys, maybe percussion).

I think I would even like to get to the point where I could run sound and lease my services to some local bands.
 
Between those two I would go with the Allen + Heath.

I've used one on two separate projects --- one studio and one live --- and have been more than impressed with the performance in both environments.
 
i've used a few A&H small-scale mixers, and i must say they sound gooood!!
 
Normally i would say the Allen Heath, but given your specific requiprements, I would go Mackie on this one. First, the Allen Heath is a little noisier, but that is fairly negligable. However, the Mackie has a bit more of an open and dimensional preamp quality to it, where as the Allen Heath is a bit more "forward" and thicker (heavier?) sounding to me. Given the specific genre's you mentioned, the Mackie would tilt that way a little more in my opinion.

Second, the pre EQ direct outs are exactly what you need if you are doing live sound on the console at the same time. This will save you a TON of mixdown headaches. Be aware though that the Mackie onyx 16 channel console is a 16x2 firewire card, and not a 16x16 so there will be no analog mixing unless an alternative sound card is used for mixdown.

Personally I would say that the Allen Heath Mix wiz and GL series do have better preamps than the Mackie VLZ and VLZ pro series. The Onyx however is a big improvement. Now I would view them more as the same quality, just a different tonality. I feel the same about the EQ as well. Truth be told, if I had to pick one of the two sounds for ALL types of work, I would go with the Mackie as its tonality is more neutral and leaves me the most options later. Once you get to the Allen Heath ML range though, I would once again prefer the A&H:)
 
Really, this is splitting hairs. They are both good boards. Personally it would come down to sound and features for me. As other mentioned, the Mackie is pretty neutral where as the A&H is a bit more colored. Eh, tough choice. I would probably go Mackie myself for the simple fact that I know the local service guy if it were to crap out (not that I would expect it would.... )
 
xstatic said:
Normally i would say the Allen Heath, but given your specific requiprements, I would go Mackie on this one. First, the Allen Heath is a little noisier, but that is fairly negligable. However, the Mackie has a bit more of an open and dimensional preamp quality to it, where as the Allen Heath is a bit more "forward" and thicker (heavier?) sounding to me. Given the specific genre's you mentioned, the Mackie would tilt that way a little more in my opinion.

Second, the pre EQ direct outs are exactly what you need if you are doing live sound on the console at the same time. This will save you a TON of mixdown headaches. Be aware though that the Mackie onyx 16 channel console is a 16x2 firewire card, and not a 16x16 so there will be no analog mixing unless an alternative sound card is used for mixdown.

Personally I would say that the Allen Heath Mix wiz and GL series do have better preamps than the Mackie VLZ and VLZ pro series. The Onyx however is a big improvement. Now I would view them more as the same quality, just a different tonality. I feel the same about the EQ as well. Truth be told, if I had to pick one of the two sounds for ALL types of work, I would go with the Mackie as its tonality is more neutral and leaves me the most options later. Once you get to the Allen Heath ML range though, I would once again prefer the A&H:)
Click to expand...
Thanks, that helps a lot. I've noticed that most guys who have used the A&H have been doing rock/alternative/metal kind of music. So, never took that into account.
 
I still think given your situation the Mackie might be a little better suited to your specific needs, but this is not to sya that you could not produce great stuff with and be just as happy (maybe even happier) with the Allen Heath. It just seems that if you look at the pros and cons of each, the Mackie seems to be the obvious choice in this specific set of parameters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top