which of these 3 mixers would you pick (and why)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter westermane
  • Start date Start date
I'm another happy owner of a Mackie (1604-VLZ). I wouldn't call the Mackie pre-amps "excellent", but they're great for what they are. At ~$1000 US for a 1604 it works out to $62.50 per pre-amp-- if the pre-amps were the only cost! It's not a bunch of super-duper high quality preamps... it's a utility piece that has served me very well for a couple of years now. It's also solidly built.

If A&H had something in your price range, I would highly suggest looking into it. The Mixwizard series is undoubtably quality gear. Since they don't, a smaller Mackie should not disappoint.
 
Yup. I'll join the line of very pleased 1604 Vlz Pro users.

I once did a gig with one of those small "affordable" Behringer mixers.. I almost cancelled the gig because everything sounded like shit, and EQing anything just made it sound worse. I won't touch that shit again. It made a SM58 and EV speakers sound like your granma's kitchen radio.
 
Re: Oh please MQQ... let me knock Behringer this time!!!

About Behringer:

Blue Bear Sound said:
Brandon....

3 phrases............ shoddy, substandard workmanship.... very poor-sounding pres...... horrible, nasal & rough-sounding EQ........

If the workmanship holds, it might pass for PA use... but it's not even a contender as a recording board.

Bruce
Click to expand...

They won't, I know a Guy who runs a small live PA rig and started out with a Mackie SR24.4, he ran that board so hard for about 2 yrs that the paint was coming off, near the end of the 2nd yr the LED meters developed an intermittent short and he decided it was time to retire it and upgrade, against my advice he 'upgraded' to a Behringer 32 channel 4 bus board. It lasted 4 months before the main LR bus blew something.
 
Yo vox, your friends' Behringer lasted a WHOLE 4 MONTHS!!!??? Wow!!! He must have had his especially crafted and hand-made! :)
I prev owned the MX2624 brand-spanking new and the entire power supply and both L/R channels blew out after only 2 weeks!!!! (Mind you there was absolutely NOTHING plugged into that piece-o-crap!) :(
 
What bothers me most is how a Company like Behringer could
produce decent and workable compressors and various dsp's,
yet ABSOLUTELY,TOTALLY fail when it comes to making mixers!
I mean, if you are going to copy the competition, at least
use half-way decent components! Sheesh!
 
Ok, if my band doesn't want to spend the extra money to get a Mackie, they'll just have to live with it!! Because the more I hear about Behringer mixers, the more I want to run to a VLZ Pro 1604 and hug it!! :D

Brandon

P.S. No offense to my band if they happen to read this, but we're going to have a talk soon, seriously. (about mixers, though :))
 
I've used the Mackie 32/8 and originally I thought it was good, but after a whie I noticed that it had a weird kind of top end. I became suspicious because the noise floor is extremely low so I suspect there is a compromise in the circuitry that gives low noise but funny highs, anyone else notice this??

cheers
john
 
Hey John, you again!

Another hello to you!

That is exactly the "trash can" sound I referred to earlier.

Did you notice how stale the EQ's are too? Certainly far from the sort of warm, fuzzy, sizzly sound the British designs offer. Sort of like the difference between a early 70's Plexi and a JCM 900. One just sounds cheap.

Good day!
 
I'm sold

I'm going right out and buy a handful of Nuemann mics,a Neve console ( or whatever is hot this week ) and a boatload of top of the line rack effects on my factory wages. Forget the kids schooling and college, I will not ever again use inferior equipment like Mackie. In fact, I just threw my 1604 and my SM57's out the window because I couldn't bear to sell them to anyone else and then they would have to deal with that inferior equipment. All of the music I have recorded to date will be s**tcanned, because it was inferior. I just listened to it and all of the sudden my music sounded like crap. It's a revelation! I'm glad I have my priorities right now.
 
Sounds like you will die of a heart attack sweating this stuff!

You should relax and read.

I gave some decent alternatives to Mackie consoles earlier in the thread.

You did read earlier in the thread when I recommended a couple other brands didn't you?

Don't throw away your 57's though! What a great mic.

Neve's a Nuemann's are not "hot this week" friend, they have been hot for decades now!

Screw sending the kids to school. Start them on golf lessons immediately! Golf is hot right now. :)

Good day!
 
John Sayers said:
I've used the Mackie 32/8 and originally I thought it was good, but after a whie I noticed that it had a weird kind of top end. I became suspicious because the noise floor is extremely low so I suspect there is a compromise in the circuitry that gives low noise but funny highs, anyone else notice this??

cheers
john
Click to expand...

I must admit John, I haven't noticed that effect at all... I've been quite pleased with my console's performance so far... and no SoundCracker, the EQ isn't British-warm, but it wasn't designed to be either! It's hardly "un-usable" though....

Bruce
 
Well,

I would agree that it is not unusable on the scale of the older Tascam consoles, but bearly...:)

For the buck, the Soundcraft stuff is probably the nicest sounding. Allen and Heath is in there. You ever played with an older Studiomaster? Nice eq's, really bad preamps.

John. Were you using that Mackie with digital or analog recorders? It would seem that the Mackie sound is much better suited for analog recording, which is very interesting considering that most people use it with digital recorders, which have a very intense 4-10KHz "brash" usually. That is why I think the warmer circuits work better with digital recorders.

But hey, I will find distaste with Mackies no matter what, and I am pigheaded about it. So that is the way it is. Peace!

westermane, it would seem that possibly you are just looking for a couple preamps?

Good day!
 
all of you looking at the VLZ PRO shouldnt be. the regular VLZs kick ass as well, and they only run yu $500 used. its s serious steal. .serious serious. the only contention is a mixwizard 2, at $1100... but if you can up the ante, you should.
 
Re: Well,

Sound Cracker said:
But hey, I will find distaste with Mackies no matter what, and I am pigheaded about it. So that is the way it is. Peace!
Click to expand...

Sounds like me and Behringer! ;)

Anyways - as always, different opinions are what make this line of work interesting - just don't talk to me about CD's and green markers!!! :D

Cheers.....
Bruce

:)
 
After following this thread since it was first posted by Westermane, I have succumbed to the temptation to add my 2 cents worth.
Sound Cracker, while I agree with some of what you have said, you have used descriptive phraseology to "rubbish" Mackie to the point of seeming obsessive.
I mean....."garbage can sound"......"crap"........."Mackie is a compromise"..........then you drag Marshall into it as an analogy. YES, you are entitled to your opinions, but they are just that, YOUR opinions, so here's the challenge......have the "balls" to qualify your statements in an unbiased and clear manner so that we poor plebs may actually learn from your apparently vast experience.

RockinRobert.....I applaude your posts.
John and Bruce...keep up the great work here.
Westermane.......listen to the majority....:o)

<----gets down off soapbox, folds arms and waits.
 
I hear Mackie consoles sound better if you trim the faders with green marker.........

OOOPS! Sorry... wrong thread!


:D :D
 
one mans garbage can is another man's clarity

Mackies have EQ? ;)
Hell even the Alesis boards EQ is better than the Mackies. But for people doing digital and mixing in software, the Mackies are a good buy. My Mackie 1402 VLZ does me just fine.
Soundcraft will be relasing their new M-series soon. It has the same pre-amps as the Ghost series, I suspect they will be priced similar to the Mackies (maybe just a little more) Look for these boards when they start shipping!

-jhe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top