Mackie vs. the human brain

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I've heard from a handful of people that Mackie is worthless. My church
uses a midrange Mackie (it's a vlz-80, i think) board speakers, and i
think they work fine. So somebody, everybody, tell me, are they good or
bad?

-dano

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I own two of their newer pieces (pair of SRM-350's and an Onyx 1620) and I'm quite happy with both of them.

The venerable 1220 is still a useful little box. Like others I have some bad memories of the larger SR boards.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I bought a Mackie 24x8 for our church back in the mid 90's. It is still
working fine. I agree there are much better 8 bus consoles, but not for
$2500-2800.

Our only issue was rf interference getting into those hot and broad
preamps that the older Mackies had. Maintaining good shield connections
throughout the audio paths, especially through the snake (32x8) controls
this problem.

I also have a 24x8 in a small teleproduction studio. That console is
having trouble with sticky/noisy switches, but I think we have a
humidity and dust problem that is contributing to that situation. I
picked up some cailube mcl that is helping.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<LagMastah2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1103646779.578757.110630@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I've heard from a handful of people that Mackie is worthless. My church
> uses a midrange Mackie (it's a vlz-80, i think) board speakers, and i
> think they work fine. So somebody, everybody, tell me, are they good or
> bad?
>
> -dano


They are OK.

Predrag

 

[erick]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

psychodave.thomas@gmail.com wrote:

> I've heard horror stories about the larger Mackie automated consoles.

Which one's would those be?

> IMHO Mackie is great at marketing....

They are an excellent marketing machine. Now if they could only deliver
their "vapor-ware" in a timely manner.......

--
Eric

www.Raw-Tracks.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <32sbm4F3pr6l3U2@individual.net> eric@Raw-Tracks.com writes:

> psychodave.thomas@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I've heard horror stories about the larger Mackie automated consoles.
>
> Which one's would those be?

He's confused. The only automated console, while large, was the d8b
(and now the dXb) digital console. Mackie made a line of larger 8-bus
consoles intended for live sound, the 32-8, 40-8, and 56-8. Those had
many problems and have been gone from the product line for a long
time. Good intentions + inadequate attention to road rigors = bad
reputation. Ribbon cables were a major problem in some models,
including the d8b and the large format live sound consoles.

> They are an excellent marketing machine. Now if they could only deliver
> their "vapor-ware" in a timely manner.......

Nobody does. That's a marketing principle. You announce a new product
when it's time to slow down the interest in the competitor's products.
The classic example was Alesis' introduction of the ADAT a full year
and a half before it was available. But in that year and a half, a lot
of people put off their purchase of narrow gage analog 8-track
recorders.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Are you doing recording or live?
I have 1642 VLZ PRO. I use it for monitoring.
I have the output of D/A 1&2 going to tape in.
When you don't go through the faders & busses, you can hear the difference
in the imaging and depth big time. For what I use it for, it works fine.

Tom



<LagMastah2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1103646779.578757.110630@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I've heard from a handful of people that Mackie is worthless. My church
> uses a midrange Mackie (it's a vlz-80, i think) board speakers, and i
> think they work fine. So somebody, everybody, tell me, are they good or
> bad?
>
> -dano
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Dale Farmer wrote:
> your application. My biggest beef with them is that they use ribbon
> connectors internally, and they have, um, issues with reliability, and
> service on them is rather expensive, labor-wise.

That's precisely why our church has dropped the use of Mackie. We
suffered poor reliability with the internal ribbon connectors, and
channels would suddenly go dead.

We've switched our main FOH console to an A&H ML4000.

Like others have said, Mackie was good in the budget end of the market,
but when they tried to move up to the next market sector and compete
with the big boys, it all went horriby wrong.

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
but the words of the wise are quiet and few.
--

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Tommy B wrote:
> Are you doing recording or live?
> I have 1642 VLZ PRO. I use it for monitoring.
> I have the output of D/A 1&2 going to tape in.
> When you don't go through the faders & busses, you can hear the difference
> in the imaging and depth big time. For what I use it for, it works fine.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
I would try to avoid them as live sound mixers
they generally sound harsh and the mix busses overload well under unity gain
they should be fine as a recording desk
but mackie is among the worst sounding hardest to use live sound desks
out there
G

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> I would try to avoid them as live sound mixers
> they generally sound harsh and the mix busses overload well under unity
gain
> they should be fine as a recording desk
> but mackie is among the worst sounding hardest to use live sound desks
> out there
> G

Why would a harsh-sounding hard-to-use desk be fine for recording?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

LagMastah2000@hotmail.com wrote:

> I've heard from a handful of people that Mackie is worthless. My church
> uses a midrange Mackie (it's a vlz-80, i think) board speakers, and i
> think they work fine. So somebody, everybody, tell me, are they good or
> bad?

You say you use it in a church. These often have lousy acoustics. In such a
situation any shortcomings in the Mackie will be dwarfed by your acoustics.

Graham

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sugarite wrote:
>>I would try to avoid them as live sound mixers
>>they generally sound harsh and the mix busses overload well under unity
>
> gain
>
>>they should be fine as a recording desk
>>but mackie is among the worst sounding hardest to use live sound desks
>>out there
>>G
>
>
> Why would a harsh-sounding hard-to-use desk be fine for recording?
>
>

I don't know seems recording people think the pre amps are OK
I have read that often
for live Mackie is just plain junk, no I take that back
it is expensive junk
george

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sugarite wrote:

> I don't use plastic speakers so I wouldn't know which ones are less hideous.

You can hear the plastic...

The SRM350's, if of current manufacture which lacks the hum and buzz of
some of the earlier units, are silly good for their size and weight,
nevermind their cost. The horn/tweeter match to the woofer and
smoothness of dispersion are truly outstanding, IMO. Lots of speakers
costing plenty more don't handle that transition as well as the SRM350's
do.

The problem of the automatic loudness compensation remains, but can be
disabled with small wire snips. I just did a small gig using a pair
along with a 2x12 Bag End sub. Plenty of clean SPL for about 300 folks
at a dance showcase, and excellent room coverage.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hey Hank, can you get me up to speed on the issue you are referring to with
the older model 350's and some hum? I have noticed a fair amount of hiss and
some occassional liud hum from ours, which are about 2 years old. You said
in an earlier post that Mackie has replacement parts or even entire drivers
for these units?

-Ben

"hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1gpbijc.6js20x1x7xvsaN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> Sugarite wrote:
>
> > I don't use plastic speakers so I wouldn't know which ones are less
hideous.
>
> You can hear the plastic...
>
> The SRM350's, if of current manufacture which lacks the hum and buzz of
> some of the earlier units, are silly good for their size and weight,
> nevermind their cost. The horn/tweeter match to the woofer and
> smoothness of dispersion are truly outstanding, IMO. Lots of speakers
> costing plenty more don't handle that transition as well as the SRM350's
> do.
>
> The problem of the automatic loudness compensation remains, but can be
> disabled with small wire snips. I just did a small gig using a pair
> along with a 2x12 Bag End sub. Plenty of clean SPL for about 300 folks
> at a dance showcase, and excellent room coverage.
>
> --
> ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

there's no such thing as 2 year old srm350s - - maybe 450s?

"Ben Hanson" <transparency_76@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41cdfc50$1@mustang.speedfactory.net...
> Hey Hank, can you get me up to speed on the issue you are referring to
with
> the older model 350's and some hum? I have noticed a fair amount of hiss
and
> some occassional liud hum from ours, which are about 2 years old. You said
> in an earlier post that Mackie has replacement parts or even entire
drivers
> for these units?
>
> -Ben
>
> "hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
> news:1gpbijc.6js20x1x7xvsaN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> > Sugarite wrote:
> >
> > > I don't use plastic speakers so I wouldn't know which ones are less
> hideous.
> >
> > You can hear the plastic...
> >
> > The SRM350's, if of current manufacture which lacks the hum and buzz of
> > some of the earlier units, are silly good for their size and weight,
> > nevermind their cost. The horn/tweeter match to the woofer and
> > smoothness of dispersion are truly outstanding, IMO. Lots of speakers
> > costing plenty more don't handle that transition as well as the SRM350's
> > do.
> >
> > The problem of the automatic loudness compensation remains, but can be
> > disabled with small wire snips. I just did a small gig using a pair
> > along with a 2x12 Bag End sub. Plenty of clean SPL for about 300 folks
> > at a dance showcase, and excellent room coverage.
> >
> > --
> > ha
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Yep, I meant 450's indeed

"skhoover" <skhoover@charter.net> wrote in message
news:G%fAd.5505$pG6.1270@fe05.lga...
> there's no such thing as 2 year old srm350s - - maybe 450s?
>
> "Ben Hanson" <transparency_76@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:41cdfc50$1@mustang.speedfactory.net...
> > Hey Hank, can you get me up to speed on the issue you are referring to
> with
> > the older model 350's and some hum? I have noticed a fair amount of hiss
> and
> > some occassional liud hum from ours, which are about 2 years old. You
said
> > in an earlier post that Mackie has replacement parts or even entire
> drivers
> > for these units?
> >
> > -Ben
> >
> > "hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
> > news:1gpbijc.6js20x1x7xvsaN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> > > Sugarite wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't use plastic speakers so I wouldn't know which ones are less
> > hideous.
> > >
> > > You can hear the plastic...
> > >
> > > The SRM350's, if of current manufacture which lacks the hum and buzz
of
> > > some of the earlier units, are silly good for their size and weight,
> > > nevermind their cost. The horn/tweeter match to the woofer and
> > > smoothness of dispersion are truly outstanding, IMO. Lots of speakers
> > > costing plenty more don't handle that transition as well as the
SRM350's
> > > do.
> > >
> > > The problem of the automatic loudness compensation remains, but can be
> > > disabled with small wire snips. I just did a small gig using a pair
> > > along with a 2x12 Bag End sub. Plenty of clean SPL for about 300 folks
> > > at a dance showcase, and excellent room coverage.
> > >
> > > --
> > > ha
> >
> >
>
>