Behringer vs. Mackie

Discussion in 'Pro Audio' started by DaveDrummer, Jan 3, 2004.

  1. DaveDrummer

    DaveDrummer Guest

    ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound quality?
    Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps are
    pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    $400..opinions?
     
    DaveDrummer, Jan 3, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. DaveDrummer

    Preben Friis Guest

    "DaveDrummer" <> wrote in message
    news:LboJb.103919$...
    > ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound

    quality?
    > Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps

    are
    > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > $400..opinions?


    Check http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Behringer+Mackie ... 9,330 opinions
    there .. and growing..

    'Nuff said.

    /Preben Friis
     
    Preben Friis, Jan 3, 2004
    #2
  3. "EggHd" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > It's all subjective and then going into these lower price preamps is evern

    more
    > so, The little Mackie 1202 vlz preamps are decent for the price and usable

    for
    > sure but then again a 57 is not what they are going to do best.
    >


    I usually mention this every time this combo gets mentioned (because
    otherwise the 1202 is a good little preamp) but the combo of the 1202 VLZ
    Pro/SM57 was about the worst I've ever heard. So if you're auditioning the
    1202 (or a 57) be sure to try something besides that also.
     
    Ricky W. Hunt, Jan 3, 2004
    #3
  4. DaveDrummer

    Martin Guest

    >... but the combo of the 1202 VLZ
    >Pro/SM57 was about the worst I've ever heard. So if you're auditioning the
    >1202 (or a 57) be sure to try something besides that also.


    Yup, my 57 into my 1202 VLZ XDR is about as bad as it gets, especially on
    acoustic guitar.

    Martin
     
    Martin, Jan 3, 2004
    #4
  5. DaveDrummer

    reddred Guest

    "DaveDrummer" <> wrote in message
    news:LboJb.103919$...
    > ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound

    quality?
    > Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps

    are
    > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > $400..opinions?
    >


    I figured behringer mixers might be a 'value miracle' like kind of mixers
    tascam had always made... but when I finally got my hands on one, the build
    was shit, I've had portastudios that were better made. The sound of the
    pre's isn't all you need to take into account, it's not so much the sound
    but how long it's going to sound like that.

    jb
     
    reddred, Jan 3, 2004
    #5
  6. DaveDrummer

    Raddigan Guest

    Wow, Mr. Controversial Topic is here again...

    I think the main difference between both mixers, is that one is far more
    cheaper than the other in terms of price, even while having more bells and
    whistles than the other...

    Did I just make sense?

    "DaveDrummer" <> wrote in message
    news:LboJb.103919$...
    > ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound

    quality?
    > Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps

    are
    > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > $400..opinions?
    >
    >
     
    Raddigan, Jan 3, 2004
    #6
  7. DaveDrummer

    Mike Rivers Guest

    In article <LboJb.103919$> writes:

    > I think Behringer preamps are
    > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > $400..opinions?


    Depends on what you're going to do with it, and whether you have the
    mistaken thought that this is going to be a lifetime investment. If
    you don't have much money now, you might as well get the cheaper
    of the two. You'll either want to replace it or dump it in a couple of
    years anyway. That's not a put-down, it's the truth. You outgrow this
    stuff pretty rapidly. Few people who are starting from near the bottom
    are willing to make their first investment a $20,000 mixer.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers ()
    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
     
    Mike Rivers, Jan 3, 2004
    #7
  8. DaveDrummer

    Magnus Guest

    DaveDrummer <> wrote:

    > ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound quality?
    > Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps are
    > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > $400..opinions?


    i wouldnt buy any Behringer-product, since roumor has it they´re made
    by Chinese children workers and one cant get a service manual . .

    if you should buy a small mixer, check out the Yamaha MG series instead.
    ..

    i would prefer the Mackie for it's quite pre's and for it built in PSU.
    .. .

    Magnus
     
    Magnus, Jan 3, 2004
    #8
  9. Interesting since Mackie has taken their manufacturing out of the country.
    Hmmm, where do you suppose they might be made now?

    --


    Roger W. Norman
    SirMusic Studio
    RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
    www.recaudiopro.net.
    See how far $20 really goes.





    "Magnus" <> wrote in message
    news:1g6zm0o.12s4v6cj3togN%...
    > DaveDrummer <> wrote:
    >
    > > ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound

    quality?
    > > Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps

    are
    > > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > > $400..opinions?

    >
    > i wouldnt buy any Behringer-product, since roumor has it they´re made
    > by Chinese children workers and one cant get a service manual . .
    >
    > if you should buy a small mixer, check out the Yamaha MG series instead.
    > .
    >
    > i would prefer the Mackie for it's quite pre's and for it built in PSU.
    > . .
    >
    > Magnus
     
    Roger W. Norman, Jan 3, 2004
    #9
  10. DaveDrummer

    Scott Dorsey Guest

    DaveDrummer <> wrote:
    >ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound quality?
    >Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps are
    >pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    >$400..opinions?


    You can't compare brands, you can only compare individual models. I don't
    know about Behringer, but Mackie makes some stuff that is reasonable like
    the 1202, and they make some stuff that is awful, like the CFX, and they
    make stuff in-between.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
     
    Scott Dorsey, Jan 3, 2004
    #10
  11. DaveDrummer

    Studiodude Guest

    I have owned both an MX-9000 and a D8B. The MX-9000 was a good entry
    level multi-track board but I didn't like the eq. I never had any
    problems with the faders or any other part of the board, however, I
    did have to send in the power supply for repair once. The main reason
    that I switched to a D8B was to try to get away from the native PT
    platform that I was currently using. I've heard a lot of mixed right
    off a D8B in the past and was very impressed. I am now working with a
    Mackie.
     
    Studiodude, Jan 3, 2004
    #11
  12. DaveDrummer

    Mike Rivers Guest

    In article <3ff6c518$0$6740$> writes:

    > Interesting since Mackie has taken their manufacturing out of the country.
    > Hmmm, where do you suppose they might be made now?


    Why, of course in China, by toothless old ladies who are forced to
    solder surface-mounted components by hand at the equivalent of 75
    cents a day, working 14 hour shifts in a room with no ventilation and
    poor light, with only two outhouse breaks a day.



    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers ()
    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
     
    Mike Rivers, Jan 3, 2004
    #12
  13. "DaveDrummer" <> wrote in message
    news:LboJb.103919$...
    > ok, Behringer mixers. Not that expensive, cheaper parts, but sound

    quality?
    > Personally, I think you get what you pay for. I think Behringer preamps

    are
    > pretty good. Mackies..definetly a little better, but NOT worth the extra
    > $400..opinions?


    Contrary to popular belief there are basically two basic Pre- amp Circuits
    used in the Majority of the modern Lower cost Mixers (dunno about the High
    end Mixers they don't tend to cross my Bench) of course both can be either
    well implemented or poorly implemented but I have noticed that when
    Manufacturers get one working well they tend to stick to it with only minor
    variations between Mixer models.
    One Pre amp uses 4 discrete Transistors and the circuit can be found at :
    http://sound.westhost.com/project66.htm
    This is the basic circuit topology used in the Mackie I have heard the
    Behringer is the same but since until recently I have recommended customers
    avoid Behringer (due to bad experiences with reliability - I have tried
    Behringer lately and their standard of build has improved out of all sight
    so I now would give Behringer a go) so I have not had any Behringer Mixers
    cross the Bench so I cannot confirm their Mic pre amp topology.

    The other Ciruit uses 2 discrete Transistors and is popular with Soundcraft,
    Yamaha, Allen and Heath etc.
    Properly implemented I really would not expect (and have not noticed myself)
    a significant difference in sound between Mackie or Behringer Mic pre's I
    have found that differences in desk gain structure, bussing, Eq's
    (paricularly EQ) and Noise level ( I find Mackies somewhat Noisy) make more
    of a difference in the sound and performance of a Desk.

    I think in the price range you are after go with the cheaper option ( have
    you looked at what Soundcraft have to offer - they are often in the Mackie
    price range and tend to be a better desk all round) it should do the job.

    Of course if you have the ability try Building the Mic pre in the link above
    (dont bother with his EQs they tend to be pretty bad !) it works pretty
    well.

    Regards
    Richard Freeman
     
    Richard Freeman, Jan 4, 2004
    #13
  14. OK so Behringer comes out with this RX1602 1U line mixer.

    http://www.zzounds.com/item--BEHRX1602

    Pretty much exactly what I need. Does anyone else make anything like this
    topology and size wise? I would pay more, 2-3x easily. If so, please
    point me in that direction. I have been looking for several weeks.
     
    Digital Larry, Jan 4, 2004
    #14
  15. DaveDrummer

    George Guest

    George, Jan 4, 2004
    #15
  16. DaveDrummer

    Geoff Wood Guest

    "Ricky W. Hunt" <> wrote in message

    > I usually mention this every time this combo gets mentioned (because
    > otherwise the 1202 is a good little preamp) but the combo of the 1202 VLZ
    > Pro/SM57 was about the worst I've ever heard.


    I keep hearing this. Presumably there is a reason. I wonder what it is ?
    Loading maybe - how about sarificing a little level and adding a little
    resistance ?

    geoff
     
    Geoff Wood, Jan 4, 2004
    #16
  17. DaveDrummer

    Geoff Wood Guest

    "Mike Rivers" <> wrote in message

    > of the two. You'll either want to replace it or dump it in a couple of
    > years anyway. That's not a put-down, it's the truth. You outgrow this
    > stuff pretty rapidly. Few people who are starting from near the bottom
    > are willing to make their first investment a $20,000 mixer.


    How'd ya feel if you'd bought a 'channel' made by a dude witht he same name
    as a storybook bear, costing the equiv of 20K per channel of a small M or B,
    that goes into terminal oscialation if you switch it on with a modicum of
    gain reduction on the hi EQ ?

    geoff
     
    Geoff Wood, Jan 4, 2004
    #17
  18. DaveDrummer

    Geoff Wood Guest

    "Mike Rivers" <> wrote in message
    news:znr1073143373k@trad...
    >
    > In article <3ff6c518$0$6740$>

    writes:
    >
    > > Interesting since Mackie has taken their manufacturing out of the

    country.
    > > Hmmm, where do you suppose they might be made now?

    >
    > Why, of course in China, by toothless old ladies who are forced to
    > solder surface-mounted components by hand at the equivalent of 75
    > cents a day, working 14 hour shifts in a room with no ventilation and
    > poor light, with only two outhouse breaks a day.



    My Mackies (yes, that's an "s") were made in the good ole USA. I wonder if
    they sound the same, better, or wirse than the current ones ?


    geoff
     
    Geoff Wood, Jan 4, 2004
    #18
  19. DaveDrummer

    Scott Dorsey Guest

    Geoff Wood <-nospam> wrote:
    >"Mike Rivers" <> wrote in message
    >
    >> of the two. You'll either want to replace it or dump it in a couple of
    >> years anyway. That's not a put-down, it's the truth. You outgrow this
    >> stuff pretty rapidly. Few people who are starting from near the bottom
    >> are willing to make their first investment a $20,000 mixer.

    >
    >How'd ya feel if you'd bought a 'channel' made by a dude witht he same name
    >as a storybook bear, costing the equiv of 20K per channel of a small M or B,
    >that goes into terminal oscialation if you switch it on with a modicum of
    >gain reduction on the hi EQ ?


    That's nothing. I have a preamp here from a company trying to break into
    the high end market, which goes into oscillation when you plug a reactive
    load into the output... like a transformer-coupled Ampex....

    But these are examples of crappy design rather than crappy manufacture.
    You see a lot more crappy design work on the higher end of the market,
    because production runs are so small (and the companies are usually small
    too), so the engineering costs don't get amortized across as many units.
    While, on mass-produced gear you're more apt to see careful engineering
    in an attempt to keep manufacturing costs down, and sloppy manufacturing.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
     
    Scott Dorsey, Jan 4, 2004
    #19
  20. DaveDrummer

    Mike Rivers Guest

    In article <Xns9465DB71058BFfaultline1989yahooco@199.45.49.11> writes:

    > OK so Behringer comes out with this RX1602 1U line mixer.


    > Pretty much exactly what I need. Does anyone else make anything like this
    > topology and size wise? I would pay more, 2-3x easily. If so, please
    > point me in that direction. I have been looking for several weeks.


    Many people have been looking for several years. Welcome to the club.

    Line level mixers come and go, and the reason why they go is because
    there just hasn't been the demand to support a low priced unit. They
    were more common when people had a rack or a room full of synthesizers
    or sound modules and wanted to mix them to a single pair of outputs.
    That pretty much went away with multi-timbral synths, and later with
    soft synths, and stereo sound cards with mixing in the computer. Now
    the demand is coming back with the growth of multiple-output sound
    cards.

    I don't want to sound like a Behringer booster here, but they listened
    to what people were asking for and they provided it. I have no idea
    how good or bad it is, but if it has the right gozintas, gozoutas, and
    knobs, maybe it's worth giving it a try when it becomes available.




    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers - ()
    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
     
    Mike Rivers, Jan 4, 2004
    #20

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page