R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => Budget? Budget? We Don't Got No Steekin' Budjet => Topic started by: blueboy on May 27, 2006, 02:53:14 PM

Title: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: blueboy on May 27, 2006, 02:53:14 PM

I have an old Mackie 1402VLZ mixer that I used to use as a utility mixer for several devices (keyboards, samplers, guitar preamps etc), but since moving to using a software mixer it has been put aside.

After nearly blowing up my nearfield monitors (and my ears) during a software "glitch" I decided to put the mixer back in the chain to act as a master monitor level control. Much to my surprise, I quickly found that it destroyed all the high end in my audio. The best way to describe it is it sounds as if it is converting my audio on the fly into high bit rate MP3 audio. On first listen it sounds ok, but when listening to high frequency content like cymbals, the sound becomes very hollow and grainy. The only sound I can get through this thing that is even close to acceptable (for critical listening) is through the tape input, as there is less in the signal path than the individual channels.

I also have an old Akai MB76 programmable mix bay and tried that out instead and it was much better, but as it is digitally controlled, the level increments where too coarse.

Then I saw a Behringer 1602 line level mixer that was really cheap and I thought how bad can it be? There really isn't much going on so it will probably do what I need it to do, so I picked one up. At first I was quite pleased as it appeared to have good frequency response, but something kept bugging me about it. After doing several A/B comparisons with it in and out of the chain, all I can say is that it appeared to "rubberize" the sound in a really weird way, so back it went.

So my question is....does anyone else with a Mackie 1402VLZ find that it alters the highs, or does it sound like this unit is defective?

If this is just the way they are (and I am just noticing it for the first time), do the newer units also suffer from this problem? Is their a better choice for a relatively inexpensive board that will be used simply as a line level mixer and is fairly "transparent".

Thanks for any feedback.

JL

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: compasspnt on May 27, 2006, 05:20:48 PM

If you are serious and economical, get one of these:

http://www.spl-usa.com/mtc/mtc_E.html

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: blueboy on May 28, 2006, 12:26:46 AM

Thanks for the suggestion Terry, that is a very cool looking unit.

I was hoping to get something that offered mixing flexibility as well as a transparent monitor controlling capability, but I'm thinking that those 2 functions are probably best left to separate devices, and this would fit the bill nicely for a controller.

The price isn't too bad either (apx $1000 Cdn), so it is definitely under consideration for addition to the studio upgrade shopping list.

JL

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: Podgorny on May 28, 2006, 08:34:14 PM

Why not utilize your software mixer with an analog level control, suck as the PreSonus Central Station or the SPL that Terry Mentioned?

It seems to me that it would solve your problem, and allow you to keep working they way you are now used to.

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: Teddy G. on May 28, 2006, 09:06:10 PM

I'm going to try the M-Patch2, from SM-Pro Audio. This is a slight upgrade from the original M-Patch(Still available, I believe?) design, which now includes a headphone jack/amp.

Basically a "patch bay"/attenuator(A box with switches and inputs and outputs), that I'll plug my powered speakers into, my Mackie mixer and my sound card - direct. Monitoring should be unencumbered by any "extra" circuitry(Assuming the M-Patch is rather "Pristine", itself?), at least no more amps/eq, etc. It's not quite "in" the US, yet, so I'm ordering direct from Australia. They say it should be available here in about 4 weeks(8Th. St. Music, in Philadelphia, among others, is a dealer.).

As far as I can see, this is THE gadget that I have been waiting for for several years..? THE place to plug the phones and speakers into AND a neat-o, very convenient little "patch bay". For a price of around $150(US), I'm going to buy one and hear for myself...

Sorry, I can't find my link to the place, now... I'll check and post it in a minute.


TG

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: Teddy G. on May 28, 2006, 09:08:37 PM

http://www.smproaudio.com/MPATCH2.htm


Is it any good? I've got everything crossed(And my debit card in hand!).

I'll let you know...


TG

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: Jack Schitt on May 29, 2006, 01:03:06 PM

blueboy wrote on Sat, 27 May 2006 14:53

I have an old Wackie 1402VLZ mixer that I used to use as a utility mixer for several devices (keyboards, samplers, guitar preamps etc), but since moving to using a software mixer it has been put aside. After nearly blowing up my nearfield monitors (and my ears) during a software "glitch" I decided to put the mixer back in the chain to act as a master monitor level control. Much to my surprise, I quickly found that it destroyed all the high end in my audio. The best way to describe it is it sounds as if it is converting my audio on the fly into high bit rate MP3 audio. On first listen it sounds ok, but when listening to high frequency content like cymbals, the sound becomes very hollow and grainy. The only sound I can get through this thing that is even close to acceptable is through the tape input, as there is less in the signal path than the individual channels. I also have an old Akai MB76 programmable mix bay and tried that out instead and it was much better, but as it is digitally controlled, the level increments where too coarse. Then I saw a Behringer 1602 line level mixer that was really cheap and I thought how bad can it be? There really isn't much going on so it will probably do what I need it to do, so I picked one up. At first I was quite pleased as it appeared to have good frequency response, but something kept bugging me about it. After doing several A/B comparisons with it in and out of the chain, all I can say is that it appeared to "rubberize" the sound in a really weird way, so back it went. So my question is....does anyone else with a Wackie 1402VLZ find that it alters the highs, or does it sound like this unit is defective? If this is just the way they are (and I am just noticing it for the first time), do the newer units also suffer from this problem? Is their a better choice for a relatively inexpensive board that will be used simply as a line level mixer and is fairly "transparent". Thanks for any feedback. JL

I use a 1402 for that purpose and have no complaints. It ain't the greatest device on the planet but it certainly isn't destroying my audio in the blatant way you are describing. I return playback from the DAW into the effect returns.

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: djwayne on May 29, 2006, 01:41:42 PM

Sorry blueboy, but the only one around here that is "wackie" is you. Mackie makes some pretty good mixers for the money. If you want high buck audiophile quality be prepared to spend mucho bucks. As for me I'm very happy with the sound I get from my 24 X 8 bus Mackie, and resent the "wackie" insult.

I needed a decent board for my home studio and the Mackie has been very reliable for me for over 10 years. I didn't want a $50,000 board for a home studio.

Think of it this way, If I bought a Mackie for $3,500 and now it sells for $1,000 I've lost $2,500, If I would have bought a $50,000 board, it now would probably only fetch $25,000 meaning I would have lost $25,000.

And no, I wouldn't sell my Mackie for $1,000, find someone else who beleves the negative hype.

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: blueboy on May 29, 2006, 02:26:31 PM

Hi djwayne...sorry I didn't mean to single you out. I forgot that you take things personally....

Anyway, I have nothing against Mackie or I wouldn't have bought the thing in the first place. I was looking for comments along the line of Denny's (thank you Denny), as I find it strange that I have not noticed the high frequency loss before.

If I was a gear snob (/slut) I probably would not have tried to replace it with a Behringer! As mentioned, the Behringer did far more damage to the audio than the Mackie (I sure hope you don't have any Behringer as I don't want to insult you personally with that comment, and no... I don't have anything against Behringer).

I guess I had never used the board in a critical listening situation before, and had just assumed that the board was relatively transparent. Basically, I'm just trying to decide whether or not it is worth it to get it checked out (and potentially repaired if it has indeed gone "wacky" on me), or look at alternative solutions.

I have changed the thread title to avoid placing any further stress on the minds of other Mackie followers......I mean owners.

JL  

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: djwayne on May 29, 2006, 02:42:09 PM

I'm just sick of hearing the bullsh---t negative hype about a good product that is reasonably priced and works well for most situations. There's people in this world that are so spoiled rotten that nothing pleases them, nothing.

My Mackie is over 10 years old and still working flawlessly, and sounds great. It's nothing personal, it's just been a very good product, that some people diss for some reason. There's lot's of competition between manufactures and board owners, so you can't believe half the cr-p you hear.

I just came from a very long thread about Mackie vrs Soundcraft, Tascam ect....and really tired of the baloney.

Hey Peter Gabriel has one in his "Bunker" studio. If it's good enough for Peter Gabriel, it's sure good enough for my music. There's a whole laundry list of very famous celebrities that also own the Mackie 8 Bus from Aerosmith to Whitney Houston, now if you want to insult all those people's buying decisions, then you're on your own.

Title: Re: Wackie Mixer
Post by: George_ on May 30, 2006, 12:10:07 AM

I've made some demoproductions with only mackie VLZ pres.. works..

but for monitoring "nononono":)

why not buy a DAC-1?

cheers

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: redfro on May 30, 2006, 09:21:15 AM

Sorry, guys, but having been in your position I went with an Allen and Heath.
My problem with all the Mackie stuff is the EQ. In my opinion it's brittle and useless. The pres are OK, but after you start putting tracks together you get this haze over everything. Just not what I'm looking for. And I'm no gear snob. I'm too broke for that. I just buy pieces that to ME are a good balance between price and performance.

And I know of many great albums where Mackies were used, but the lengths the engineers had to go to to make it work is the problem. And almost none of them used the EQ.

Not bashing, just giving my opinion...

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: djwayne on May 30, 2006, 10:28:13 AM

At the time I bought my Mackie(10-12 years ago), the only A & H board on display was a small rack mount job with a cheap looking knobs and layout, I didn't even want to listen to it. The only two other 8 bus boards that were comparable was the Soundcraft and a Tascam. I didn't like the layout of the Tascam, and the Soundcraft had no meter bridge option. The meter bridge was important to me. A friend of mine bought one of the Soundcrafts and he raved about it, as expected. I didn't hear anything special over the Mackie. But he claimed he did. He was just sore I didn't buy a Soundcraft like his, so I've been getting flack since day one, and I'm really tired of hearing this "my board is better than your board" thing.

The Mackie has worked out really good for me. I use it mainly for mixing keyboards and synths, and the EQ's and Pre's are plenty adequate for that. For acoustic guitar and vocal recording, I use a seperate chain I put together and bypass the Mackie. The shear number of inputs and output options makes the Mackie the perfect choice for routing and controlling many various things in my studio, including a DA-88 and a 5.1 system.

For a little extra spice, I'll add a little Sonic Maximizer thru the effects sends.

Just last week, I decided to give it a good cleaning, I mean a really good cleaning, removed all the knobs and cleaned between all the pots with a tooth brush and some rubbing alcohol, soaked all the knobs, brushed them and wiped them off and now the board looks almost like new. Time consuming, but definitely a worthwhile project. So now it's all set for another 10 years.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Frob on May 30, 2006, 05:17:32 PM

before i start i have to say, i am not spoild, my whole studio has been nickle and dimed up to 10K in total cost over the past 5+ years.

that said one of the first things i bought was a used 1604 VLZ pro. it was not a bad purchase. but i am not blinded by the fact that the EQ section is useless. the pres are the best for the monney, but thats it. the pres are good for the monney. dont bline your self with product loyalty.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Fibes on May 30, 2006, 05:40:03 PM

I used a 24 track 8 buss for years as a headphone mixer and center section. hell, we did some great things with that and ADATs but i'm not going back there.

We'll have the 24 channel 8 buss up for sale soon.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: djwayne on May 30, 2006, 07:56:34 PM

I just talked to a guy who bought a mixing board for $85,000 and says it's now worth about $12,000.....I'm keeping the Mackie for a long time.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: redfro on May 30, 2006, 09:03:41 PM

djwayne wrote on Tue, 30 May 2006 18:56

I just talked to a guy who bought a mixing board for $85,000 and says it's now worth about $12,000.....I'm keeping the Mackie for a long time.

What the hell did he buy?!?

A used SSL 4056g goes for about $85k and I guarantee that you can sell it for that much. That was just a bad purchase...

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Podgorny on May 30, 2006, 10:11:09 PM

djwayne wrote on Tue, 30 May 2006 18:56

I just talked to a guy who bought a mixing board for $85,000 and says it's now worth about $12,000.....I'm keeping the Mackie for a long time.

Greg, is that you?
How is the Tapco line coming?

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: floodstage on May 30, 2006, 11:26:26 PM

To answer the original question, no, your 1402 shouldn't screw up the high end.  Get it fixed.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: djwayne on May 30, 2006, 11:32:47 PM

I didn't get any details about the board, he wasn't in a good mood, and I didn't want to press him. I don't think he wants to talk about it.

And no, I'm not Greg, or affiliated with Mackie in any other way, other than being a satisfied customer.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: craig boychuk on May 31, 2006, 01:55:52 PM

I used a 1604VLZ for the same purpose when I was starting out. It definitely crapped up the sound of things, but worse than that was the CR pot dropped the level of the left channel when it was below unity. Yikes.

Another good controller is the Coleman M3PH MkII. It's a passive unit too...very clean. Check out the TB4 MKII if you need talk back capabilities.

http://www.colemanaudio.com/


-craig

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Fibes on May 31, 2006, 02:03:42 PM

If you just need a clean attenuator on a budget this one would be my pick:
http://www.nhtpro.com/products/pvc.html

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: blueboy on May 31, 2006, 03:54:52 PM

Hey thanks Fibes.

That may be just the ticket until I do a major upgrade. Most of the other simple passive volume controls I was looking at seemed to be "audiophile" products and cost about $500 for the same basic functionality.

If this is relatively clean, you can't really go wrong at $100.

JL

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Fibes on May 31, 2006, 05:05:22 PM

BTW i don't use it currently but i have done comparisons and used it at another friends shop.

It beats a Mackie hands down.

A lot of folks just use their Benchmark DAC-1s too.

Do a search on the PVC, i think there's only one unhappy customer that i'm aware of.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Kurt Foster on June 01, 2006, 04:32:08 PM

It's hard to argue with the fact that expensive large format consoles have lost a lot of their monetary value in the past 10 to 15 years. I purchased an older MCI 600 series console a while back and had it for 5 years and ended up selling it for half of what I paid for it. It sure did sound good though but the maintenance and the real estate it required wound up being a deal breaker for me in the end.

I have a Mackie SR24 that I monitor with while I track into DAW but I would neve mix or sum through it. I just makes everything sound grainy (like blueboy said) and very plastic like. I don't fault the board or Mackie for that though. After all what do you expect for an $1100 24 channel console? What is that, about  $45 bucks a channel? It is what it is and there a lots of routing and mixing features to boot. BTW it's great for live sound and it works perfectly to mix latency free phones for the talent but I would never pass a signal through it to the recorder.

If a someone is pleased with the sound  from a Mackie I say, "That's great!", but on the other hand I would never criticize someone for not liking it either. Not everyone hears the same (or as well) as others and some folks are more easily satisfied than others.

"Different strokes, for different folks", as Sly once said.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: djwayne on June 01, 2006, 04:53:54 PM

Although one might find an old used Mackie 24x8 on Flea-bay for $1,100 occassionaly, the new price is between $2,500 and 3,500, depending on where you shop. Meter bridge about an additional $700. so it's not $45 per channel, as you've posted. More like $100-125 per channel.

No, a Mackie 8 bus isn't for everyone, and if I had a pro studio I'd have something larger, but for my HOME STUDIO, it's great, not too big, not too small, and does everything I need it to do. I don't need a large board to sucker, oops I mean impress clients.

As far as mixing goes, lately, I'm doing everything ITB with Audition 2.0, and that's working out great for me.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: floodstage on June 01, 2006, 05:57:12 PM

kurtfoster said the SR24 was 1100, not the 24 x 8.  The SR24 is close to 1100.  The 24 x 8 is 3 or 4k new, but I can't imagine they sell many these days.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Kurt Foster on June 01, 2006, 05:57:29 PM

Actually I was talking about how much my mixer (an SR 24vlz) 4 buss cost new ... it was 1600 but I ground them down to 1100 bucks. I thought it was a good deal at the time.

Of all the Mackies I have used, I personally think the SR 24 vlz's sound the best for some unfathomable reason. I suspect they have the most adequate power supply of the bunch ... but that still doesn't mean I would use it to pass signal to a recorder if I could avoid it. I must admit however that in a couple of instances, I did use the pres to the recorder and one of those recordings (Nik Turners Space Ritual on Cleopatra Records) turned out to be one of the most widely distributed records I've recorded BTW it received positive reviews on the sound quality but it was mixed in LA on a big console. So it just goes to show ... use what you have to the best of your abilities and good things can happen.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: floodstage on June 01, 2006, 06:01:44 PM

24VLZ has better pres than 24 x 8.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: djwayne on June 01, 2006, 06:50:43 PM

Okay, you're forgiven. I have no experience with the SR 24VLZ and have no comment about it.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Albert on June 02, 2006, 12:44:31 PM

Another attenuator to look at would be this one:

http://www.adesignsaudio.com/atty.htm

I use a Presonus Central Station and am pretty happy with it. The CS will do what you need and a lot more, but perhaps you just need a simple level control.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Ryan Massey on June 02, 2006, 10:57:52 PM

We sent our Trident's master section off for some rehab a while back, and being busy, we started mixing a project with a mackie inserted between PT and our Genelecs.  It seemed like we were adding highs to everything, and not in small amounts.  I tried routing the signal through the Mackie in a number of different ways, and they all sounded about the same.  Finally, we tried eliminating the Mackie and went straight from PT to the Genelecs.  Wow, was that ever a bright mix!  The final temporary fix was to use the CR in and out on the Digi Command 8.  I was definitely surprised that the Command 8 worked so much better than the Mackie.  The master section is back, and the mackie has returned to the rehearsal room, where I expect it will continue to work for many years to come.

Title: Re: "Wacky" Mackie Mixer?
Post by: Jack Schitt on June 03, 2006, 09:03:16 AM

How does the Prosonus Central Station stack up?