ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by ericn on Nov 21, 2020 17:58:50 GMT -6
You really do need to know how to gain stage and ride the gain of a Mackie. The thing is it’s really easy to knock the Mackie, then you grab a Peavey, Studiomaster, Crate or any other console in the same price range of the same vintage of the original 1604 and complain. Everybody bought Mackie’s for a reason at the time, I can’t name names but I’ll admit to selling quite a few second Gen 1604’s and 1202’s to guys we all regard as legends. The Mackie pre is probably the most common inexpensive pre found on any chart or Award discography. If you can’t make a respectable sounding record with a Mackie, it’s not the gear. You see plenty used as personal headphone cue mixers in high end studios. The real limitation of the Mackies besides the general cheap Peavey inspired build is the mix buss. Any Mackie bigger than a 1604 ( including the 1608 because at mix you have 32 inputs available) it just gets this edgy crusty quality. The big 40 live board was a disaster. The other problem with the big SR was nobody on the design team understood how and why the frames on Yamaha PM series big Ramsa, Midas and Soundcraft were built like they were. If you wanted the big Mackie to Survive on the road you needed a case built with 3/4 in Baltic Birch. It was cheaper to buy a Midas 240XL in a 1/2in road case. Plus the Midas was modular so you could pull a dead channel.
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Nov 21, 2020 18:33:12 GMT -6
As someone who survived by playing cheap clubs and coffeehouse gigs in the mid-90s, I'll say that anyone who doesn't respect what Mackie achieved never played those same venues before they had Mackies in them. Those "other brand" pieces of shit were truly awful. I remember another songwriter friend of mine telling me he always knew the night was going to go fine if the venue had an actual SM-58 vs. a knockoff.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 21, 2020 18:47:35 GMT -6
You see plenty used as personal headphone cue mixers in high end studios. The real limitation of the Mackies besides the general cheap Peavey inspired build is the mix buss. Any Mackie bigger than a 1604 ( including the 1608 because at mix you have 32 inputs available) it just gets this edgy crusty quality. The big 40 live board was a disaster. The other problem with the big SR was nobody on the design team understood how and why the frames on Yamaha PM series big Ramsa, Midas and Soundcraft were built like they were. If you wanted the big Mackie to Survive on the road you needed a case built with 3/4 in Baltic Birch. It was cheaper to buy a Midas 240XL in a 1/2in road case. Plus the Midas was modular so you could pull a dead channel. The non switchable EQ and subsequent signal path took what I felt was a fairly neutral, clean preamp stage and added some fizz and headroom bottlenecks. The preamp from the direct outs provided a much better experience than the signal going through the entire board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2020 18:49:01 GMT -6
My monthly most streamed track was mixed on a Mackie to DAT about 25 years ago, still strangely sounds good..
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 21, 2020 18:50:30 GMT -6
...and the 8 Bus series hi mid EQ with bandwidth control sounded noticably worse than the low mid that lacked it, at the same setting.
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on Nov 21, 2020 20:46:51 GMT -6
2 pages of Mackie posts on a Neve thread.....LOL!
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 21, 2020 21:29:36 GMT -6
2 pages of Mackie posts on a Neve thread.....LOL! Behringer anyone?
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 21, 2020 22:40:09 GMT -6
The first console I ever rented for a live gig was a Peavy with rotary faders.....1985 instead of 1995....
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on Nov 21, 2020 22:57:54 GMT -6
I have an educational Mackie experience: When I first started out doing live sound, we had setup inside a gymnasium (first mistake) and a friend's hastily thrown together band opened for a headliner. I was mixing on a small Mackie board. The balance and sound was absolutely horrible and there was nothing I could do to make it sound any better. I was mortified and doubting myself and the Mackie board/pres etc. I wanted to crawl into a hole. After that opener, the headliner, who had been touring regionally for a few months stepped up and didn't even want a sound check. I was quite nervous and ready for more punishment but to my surprise, it sounded AMAZING (even in the gym) and the mixing was very, very easy. Back-to-back acts and I hadn't really touched a thing. It was the most powerful lesson to me to-date and it taught me that it wasn't the gear, it wasn't necessarily me or my skills, but the actual band itself. In the opener's newness, they hadn't learned to balance and arrange themselves and play off of each other where as the touring band had been dialing themselves and their songs in for months.
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Nov 22, 2020 9:33:14 GMT -6
I've been tracking my vocals with a Wunder CM7 > BAE 1073D > Retro STA Level. I'm happy with the results, but I have a fairly bright tenor vocal and lately I've been thinking I should try swopping out the BAE 1073 for something like an Mercury M72 or Coil CA-70 (with that feedback control for rolling off the highs) But reading you post above I'm wondering if a tube pre is just adding distortion and saturation where it's not needed. I hate that GAS feeling where you think you're missing out on some "magic bullet" so to speak. Have you used any tube pres you really rated? A Gates SA-70 has a definite presence edge from the distortion profile, the CA-70 should have it too. If you haven’t, take a hard look at any edge the Sta might be adding. Everything has a distortion profile you’re hearing, unconsciously or obviously. For the record I have almost never used tube preamps for obvious distortion, in fact many people comment on how much cleaner and smoother they seem to be. ‘Lifelike’ and ‘natural’ are used a lot. We know nothing actually is, it’s appearances. The distortion ‘benefit’ I mainly like with rock band work is that if something accidentally overloads, it’s non-apparent to passable with the tube pre’s I’m using. If that happened with many other preamps, it’s a ruined take. Sure, I have a Millennia tube pre that is cleaner than some of my solid state pres! Tubes definitely don’t mean distortion in all settings. I was really thinking about how I keep reading a Mercury M72 or CA-70 do a nice job of rolling off the highs in a musical way. (Presence is a lower part of the spectrum for me, more in the high mids) I guess I’ll have to book a demo and AB against the BAE.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 22, 2020 10:03:34 GMT -6
Let's start a Mackie Pre thread... In order to talk more about Neve's! Chris
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 22, 2020 12:38:32 GMT -6
Let's start a Mackie Pre thread... In order to talk more about Neve's! Chris nope, Tapco!
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 22, 2020 13:02:23 GMT -6
Anyone tried the new Heritage Audio HA73EQ ELITE or HA81A Preamp & EQ yet? I wonder how it compares to previous models and the original.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Nov 22, 2020 16:06:20 GMT -6
A Midas Venice 240 has LESS headroom.... ....but goes soft and gooey non-obnoxious when it fuzzes a little. The Mackie goes straight to squarewave. You really do need to know how to gain stage and ride the gain of a Mackie. The thing is it’s really easy to knock the Mackie, then you grab a Peavey, Studiomaster, Crate or any other console in the same price range of the same vintage of the original 1604 and complain. Everybody bought Mackie’s for a reason at the time, I can’t name names but I’ll admit to selling quite a few second Gen 1604’s and 1202’s to guys we all regard as legends. The Mackie pre is probably the most common inexpensive pre found on any chart or Award discography. If you can’t make a respectable sounding record with a Mackie, it’s not the gear. The Peavey MKIII and MK IV mixers were pretty good. They were definitely a LOT more reliable than the Mackies, too - the Mackies had bad fader relaibility problems and were really difficult to work on. The earlier Peavey mixers sucked.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Nov 22, 2020 16:16:53 GMT -6
As someone who survived by playing cheap clubs and coffeehouse gigs in the mid-90s, I'll say that anyone who doesn't respect what Mackie achieved never played those same venues before they had Mackies in them. Those "other brand" pieces of shit were truly awful. I remember another songwriter friend of mine telling me he always knew the night was going to go fine if the venue had an actual SM-58 vs. a knockoff. Mackies were fine for about the first couple of years, but their flimsy constrtucftion and lack of headroom pretty much doomed them when other companies brought out tougher competition. And IIRC the Peavey MKIII preceded the Mackie. I used to have a MKIII - it was a real tank. Sounded decent, too! OTOH the Mackie did have a smaller footprint. I still have a Mackie, too, btw. Havent looked at it in years - many faders are shot and IIRC some other stuff doesn't work, either.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Nov 22, 2020 16:21:50 GMT -6
The first console I ever rented for a live gig was a Peavy with rotary faders.....1985 instead of 1995.... I remember those - ugh! That board would have been around 10 years old at that point, BTW. 1975, shortly after I moved to CA.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by ericn on Nov 22, 2020 16:47:07 GMT -6
You really do need to know how to gain stage and ride the gain of a Mackie. The thing is it’s really easy to knock the Mackie, then you grab a Peavey, Studiomaster, Crate or any other console in the same price range of the same vintage of the original 1604 and complain. Everybody bought Mackie’s for a reason at the time, I can’t name names but I’ll admit to selling quite a few second Gen 1604’s and 1202’s to guys we all regard as legends. The Mackie pre is probably the most common inexpensive pre found on any chart or Award discography. If you can’t make a respectable sounding record with a Mackie, it’s not the gear. The Peavey MKIII and MK IV mixers were pretty good. They were definitely a LOT more reliable than the Mackies, too - the Mackies had bad fader relaibility problems and were really difficult to work on. The earlier Peavey mixers sucked. I started mixing live on Mark III’s and IV’s, no headroom overly crisp pre’s and EQ’s that seamed to add compression. There was always something strange going on in the output gain stage of the mains and auxes. So strange that it became standard practice to use the Gain on Rain 30 band EQ’s instead of the output master as the gain stage.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by ericn on Nov 22, 2020 16:48:42 GMT -6
The first console I ever rented for a live gig was a Peavy with rotary faders.....1985 instead of 1995.... I remember those - ugh! That board would have been around 10 years old at that point, BTW. 1975, shortly after I moved to CA. There was a Peavy rack mount up till the mid 90’s that used rotary faders.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 22, 2020 17:47:53 GMT -6
So, I’ve had the AMS-Neve 1073DPX here for a few months now and have been recording all of our duets for the Christmas album with it. It sounds great, but I do have some questions. I find the unit distorts really easily, so I have to keep the gain and output gain down, because Emily and I are loud. I generally have to keep the operatic stuff at 30db of gain and the output know at 10 o’clock or you can see on the digital meter that we hit the red easily and get that Neve distortion that is nice on some things, but not the kind of vocals we go for. This means the signal in the DAW is lower than I’m used to. Now, I obviously make up for the gain with a compressor emulation, etc. Perhaps it is just that I have been recording too hot for many years, which is totally probable. That’s probably my only complaint with the unit. I’ve been meaning to post about it and get some thoughts, but I just haven’t had a minute, but since we’re discussing Neve preamps I thought it might be a good time. I don’t get that kind of crunchy distortion on my Dan Alexander unless I really push it. I can usually keep the gain at 40db and adjust the output so as not to peak the converter and have no issues. Of course, the Dan Alexander is a 1272, not a 1073. Anyway, just curious if this is typical or just something with this unit.
|
|
|
Post by plinker on Nov 22, 2020 17:59:33 GMT -6
Anyone tried the new Heritage Audio HA73EQ ELITE or HA81A Preamp & EQ yet? I wonder how it compares to previous models and the original. That HA81A is a LOT of power for that price! I'm very curious to hear more.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 22, 2020 18:20:56 GMT -6
Last NAMM 2020/Jan.... Got to sing/try the GAP version of the Sony C800G, through the Heritage Elite 1073. Like that combo a lot. Seemed to make the typical C800G type of sound-smooother. Even sounded cool for Crooners! Chris
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 22, 2020 18:47:21 GMT -6
So, I’ve had the AMS-Neve 1073DPX here for a few months now and have been recording all of our duets for the Christmas album with it. It sounds great, but I do have some questions. I find the unit distorts really easily, so I have to keep the gain and output gain down, because Emily and I are loud. I generally have to keep the operatic stuff at 30db of gain and the output knob at 10 o’clock This is ringing some bells; some other threads about different Neve repro modules, and my own console experience. Should the output not be full up for max headroom? Then gain slightly lower if need be? There's a console at a studio near here that is that way, if you take direct channel outs to the DAW it's gonna be crunchy and low unless you push the faders all the way up, and back the input trim down.
|
|
|
Post by tkaitkai on Nov 22, 2020 18:48:49 GMT -6
So, I’ve had the AMS-Neve 1073DPX here for a few months now and have been recording all of our duets for the Christmas album with it. It sounds great, but I do have some questions. I find the unit distorts really easily, so I have to keep the gain and output gain down, because Emily and I are loud. I generally have to keep the operatic stuff at 30db of gain and the output know at 10 o’clock or you can see on the digital meter that we hit the red easily and get that Neve distortion that is nice on some things, but not the kind of vocals we go for. This means the signal in the DAW is lower than I’m used to. Now, I obviously make up for the gain with a compressor emulation, etc. Perhaps it is just that I have been recording too hot for many years, which is totally probable. That’s probably my only complaint with the unit. I’ve been meaning to post about it and get some thoughts, but I just haven’t had a minute, but since we’re discussing Neve preamps I thought it might be a good time. I don’t get that kind of crunchy distortion on my Dan Alexander unless I really push it. I can usually keep the gain at 40db and adjust the output so as not to peak the converter and have no issues. Of course, the Dan Alexander is a 1272, not a 1073. Anyway, just curious if this is typical or just something with this unit. This seems to be pretty typical of most 1073s when used with high output mics and loud singers (both of which apply to me). When I had my friend's Vintech, I couldn't push the input past 25 without getting distortion. Even then, it was still audibly saturated. I would definitely need an inline pad to use my M149 with it (to be fair, I use one with my Wunder for a very similar reason).
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 22, 2020 18:56:40 GMT -6
So, I’ve had the AMS-Neve 1073DPX here for a few months now and have been recording all of our duets for the Christmas album with it. It sounds great, but I do have some questions. I find the unit distorts really easily, so I have to keep the gain and output gain down, because Emily and I are loud. I generally have to keep the operatic stuff at 30db of gain and the output knob at 10 o’clock This is ringing some bells; some other threads about different Neve repro modules, and my own console experience. Should the output not be full up for max headroom? Then gain slightly lower if need be? There's a console at a studio near here that is that way, if you take direct channel outs to the DAW it's gonna be crunchy and low unless you push the faders all the way up, and back the input trim down. Beat me to it. I would turn the output gain to maximum and bring down the input and see if that cleans things up.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 22, 2020 19:13:27 GMT -6
Maybe a bit of a rhetorical question but... I've considered getting one of the cheaper GAP 1073's before-to mess around with, How concerned would you guys be with build "reliability"? Thanks, Chris
|
|