Members Mr Blues Posted April 30, 2014 Members Share Posted April 30, 2014 Whats your thoughts on the new Mackie range of compact mixers?I had a chance to test out the 802 VLZ 4 today.I was not overly impressed reason being they claim to now have the Onyx mic pre's. I have an older Mackie onyx 1220 which is big and bulky but sounds awesome, I did a A & B test with the 802 VLZ 4 and the VLZ 4 mic pre's sound nothing like onyx pre's on the 1220.The 1220 is much more deeper and dynamic, obviously the Perkins EQ helps where as the 802 VLZ 4 does nt have the Perkins EQ.. Comparing the VLZ 4 with the VLZ 3 . I prefer the VLZ 3 with the XDR mic pre's . The VLZ 4 did nt quite have that punch.Its such a shame Mackie are going downhill big time, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted April 30, 2014 Members Share Posted April 30, 2014 Maybe it's just me but the arguments over the onyx preamps being better than X have been beat to death on this forum. To compare my mackie pro fx vs my zed 10fx, I can't tell a bloody difference between the two except the zed seems to have cleaner.better effects and definately more options.adjustements on the effects. It is too bad about Mackie, I still prefer the pro fx over the zed cause of mutes on the channels and insert jack for a comp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted April 30, 2014 Members Share Posted April 30, 2014 Nobody here could tell the difference between one preamp and another in this class if it hit them square between the eyes. Period. There are a hundred more significant aspects to designing a mixing console these days, but they are all harder for the marketing folks to explain and none of the marketing folks would understand it anyway... not that they understand about anything they say anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted May 1, 2014 Members Share Posted May 1, 2014 Nobody here could tell the difference between one preamp and another in this class if it hit them square between the eyes. Period. There are a hundred more significant aspects to designing a mixing console these days, but they are all harder for the marketing folks to explain and none of the marketing folks would understand it anyway... not that they understand about anything they say anyway. Hard to get people to believe it. There are just so many other things inside the mixer that get lumped into "the preamps". The rub is that there really are mixers that are easier to get a good sound out of than others ..... but rarely is it because of the preamp circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted May 1, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted May 1, 2014 Pretty much everything the OP experienced is much more likely due to a difference in headroom than in any actual tonal variations caused by the preamp circuitry. That plus the fact that people tend to assume that "0dB" on the control label means the level is exactly the same as "0dB" on every other product. So the one that's "louder" at 0dB tends to be thought to sound "better". Perception: it's why eyewitnesses can never be counted upon to accurately recount an event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted May 1, 2014 Members Share Posted May 1, 2014 Perception: it's why eyewitnesses can never be counted upon to accurately recount an event. Except for mine, of course. Whatever I say I saw/heard/remember is EXACTLY how it happened..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.