and I see you cut out what you said you morron.

"Do you always speak out of your arse like this or does your mouth ever get
a
look-in?"




Phildo wrote in message
...

"Troy" wrote in message
...
You're a ****ing morron.Go play with behringer looser.

Such eloquence, such scathing wit reminiscent of Wilde himself, such
mastery
of the English language. Oh how can I ever expect to triumph against such
a
stunning intellect?

Troy's answer only shows his ignorance. Point made I think.

Phildo

When a company builds their reputation on ****,then no thanks I don't want
it.They started buiding and selling **** and as far as I'm concerned I don't
trust them and won't buy it because they build ****.You buy it because you
can't afford a good mixer just like eveyone else that buys ****.There are
alot of better mixers out there other than Mackie that I would buy over a
behringer.Hell I would buy a Peavey over a behringer at least I know when I
push the power button it's going to work.

Any company with such a bad track record in the past,I woulden't buy ****
from them.




Phildo wrote in message
...

"Troy" wrote in message
. ca...
I woulden't trust behringer based on the crap they were selling 3 to 4
years
ago.

Do you like living in the past?

Any company with such a poor reputation should be out of business ,but
people like you keep buying there **** not because it's good,but because
it's cheap.

If you'd bothered to look at the product which is selling now you would
have
found it is a huge improvement over what they were selling before. It is
in
fact damn good AND cheap. If you are happy to waste your money buying junk
just because you don't like Behringer based on their product several years
ago then all well and good but if you post outdated bull**** on here and
misinform people who would spend their money based on your dubious
experience then I will pull you up on it and show them the truth every
time.
You are living in the past, have an irrational grudge against Behringer,
are
grossly misinformed as to the quality of the gear they are now producing
and
downright ignorant to boot.

You get what you pay for.

And in the case of Behringer you get damned good value for money. Come on
Troy, this is the 21st Century. Come join the rest of us in it and stop
being such a luddite.

Phildo

"Troy" wrote in message
. ca...
and I see you cut out what you said you morron.

"Do you always speak out of your arse like this or does your mouth ever
get
a
look-in?"

Yes, well I really didn't want to show you up too badly as the humourless,
clueless ignoramus you so clearly are. Luckily for me you do such a good job
of that all by yourself so save me the trouble.

By the way, you forgot to address the crux of the matter here which is your
outdated and outmoded views on the current quality of Behringer mixers. Nice
diversionary tactic but it does not change the fact one bit that you are way
behind the times and know very little of what you speak. While you may feel
a desperate need for that macho chest-beating to display your delusions of
superiority, the sheer fact that you are clearly years behind the rest of us
in your views speaks volumes all by itself. I suggest you take a look at the
Behringer mixers available today and educate yourself instead of appearing
such a fool in front of the rest of the group.

Phildo

According to the US SalesTrak statistics, Behringer leads the market
in almost every mixer category. On small mixers they own up to 91% of
the market. Can't be that bad, ey or are you saying all people who buy
behringer are stupid and ignorant? Mackie went basically out of
business and Soundcraft, Soundtracs are gone too. People simply
realized that behringer offers better bang for the buck. Happens in
every industry just look how Michael Dell kicked ass and took over
IBM's and Compaq's market. Food for thoughts!


"Troy" wrote in message .ca...
I woulden't trust behringer based on the crap they were selling 3 to 4 years
ago.Any company with such a poor reputation should be out of business ,but
people like you keep buying there **** not because it's good,but because
it's cheap.You get what you pay for.


Phildo wrote in message
...

"Troy" wrote in message
...
Don't throw your money away.Buy a good mixer.

Alot of the stuff they ship dosen't even work new ,out of the box.

While that would have been true 3 or 4 years ago, the situation has much
improved and that is not the case now.

I would
buy a Mackie over a Behringer any day.

Fool.

I have a Mackie 24/8 that has been in
use for 7 or 8 yrs with no problems.If you want cheap.....buy a good
used
mixer.

I've had mackies die on me right out of the box. There is no better bang
for
the buck than Behringer.

Phildo

In article ,
"Troy" wrote:

When a company builds their reputation on ****,then no thanks I don't want
it.They started buiding and selling **** and as far as I'm concerned I don't
trust them and won't buy it because they build ****.You buy it because you
can't afford a good mixer just like eveyone else that buys ****.There are
alot of better mixers out there other than Mackie that I would buy over a
behringer.Hell I would buy a Peavey over a behringer at least I know when I
push the power button it's going to work.

Any company with such a bad track record in the past,I woulden't buy ****
from them.


So you would never buy a Honda, Toyota, Ford, C hevy,Chysler,
Dodge,Plymout,Nisssan,Fiat, or just about any other aotomobile?
They all made real **** product
some got better some didn't
but they all made real garbage for quite q while
And to spout off that people buy behringer cause they"can't afford"
another desk

Rotflmfao

Perhaps you live in some crappy world where one only buys one desk and
is forced by the lack of money to use it forever
I earn enough to buy the right desk for each applicationright now I own
14 or 15 mixers

(or what I percieve as the right desk) I bought into Mackies overhyped
ad bull**** and bought a arm full of 1402's they all died within 2 years
I needed lots of small mixers and had such horrible experiances with
the mackies(not just dying , but farting and ****ing thier way to the
grave as well, mackie is noisy junk

i did not want to repeat my mistake(of trusting a mackie) so i bought
the 802 behringer
it proved so durible and clean sounding that I bought a arm full of them
along with a trio of 3242s they work daily as do my 840 Sm4 and
soundcraft desks

for large format desks my 840 and sm4 rule for mid desks my soundcrafts
are working out well
and for the small desks the behringers are the cream of the crop of bic
mixers these days
never had a fail or crackle from the behringer they have proved
themselves IMO in a test by fire to be better desks than anything mackie
ever made and thier less costly as well
no down side to owninfg a great desk thhat does what it says it will do
and at 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of the noisy unreliable junk mackie has sold
idiots like you on
**** away your money on proven garbage I could'nt give a rats ass but
when you spout off on something you know nothing about you will be taken
to task for it
George

your views then I will correct your misinformation every time.

You buy it because you
can't afford a good mixer

Oh I wish I had enough money to buy such a prestigious desk as a mackie
your clients must be so proud that you were able to buy such exclusive
gear
If I ever earn 400$ I hope to be able to apply for membership to the
Mackie owners club as well some day

oh wait I already owned 6 Mackies does that mean I can afford a good
mixer ? Am I required to make all my choices based on over hyped ad
budgets or am I allowed(now that I am rich like you) to buy the desks
that work
If i am allowed to evaluate desks on my own and need a desk with the
features of my small mackies(god rest thier young souls) I will buy
behringer beacuse it is better than the mackie, the fact it costs less
is just icing on the cake, not the deciding factor, asshole


What a strune you sound like

George

"Gary Morrison" wrote in message
...
Behringer touts their mixers as being very-low-noise, but that's a load of
hooey when it comes to their headphone outputs at least. Curiously, I've
really only used their mixers for headphone applications, so I don't know
what their line-level outputs sound like.

Short version: Buy Mackie instead.

While that may have been true several years ago it certainly doesn't hold
true now. Behringer use 4580 opamps whereas Mackie goes for 4560 and 2068
which do not deliver the same noise performance. Let someone in the group
measure the noise specs of the mixers and you'll see for yourself. Faders
and pots on Behringer are either Alps or Panasonic. In mediocre mixers
you'll find Taiwan Alpha.

Phildo

In article writes:

According to the US SalesTrak statistics, Behringer leads the market
in almost every mixer category. On small mixers they own up to 91% of
the market. Can't be that bad, ey or are you saying all people who buy
behringer are stupid and ignorant?

I would say that most are. But I would also say that most people who
think they're going into "professional recording" today really aren't,
and for this reason, they're ignorant about the TOTAL set of
requirements for setting up a smooth working studio and operating it
efficiently. I think that a Behringer mixer can be an excellent
learning tool for anyone getting started, and it won't immediately be
the stumbling block that's keeping their work from sounding
"professional." It won't simply because they don't know enough to know
what they need to improve - be it equipment, production technique, room
acoustics, or musical talent.

Mackie went basically out of business

Better to say that the low end market for mixers that Mackie formerly
owned has been taken over by lower end mixers because that's what the
(new) market demands. I'll bet that the average 5-year Mackie owner
who is still using his Mackie mixer is doing better work than someone
who's getting into this for the first time and buys an 'equivalent'
Behringer for half the price. The difference won't be because the
Mackie is better than the Behringer, it's because the user is better.

But a good point of discussion is that there ARE 5-year Mackie users,
and most Behringer users (because they're newer to the game and are
more inclined to instant gratification than those who have been in the
business for a while) will either drop the whole thing or want to
upgrade their gear (probably to no mixer at all) within a very short
time. So it's hard to compare these two varieties of apples.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1064146100k@trad...

In article
writes:

According to the US SalesTrak statistics, Behringer leads the market
in almost every mixer category. On small mixers they own up to 91% of
the market. Can't be that bad, ey or are you saying all people who buy
behringer are stupid and ignorant?

I would say that most are. But I would also say that most people who
think they're going into "professional recording" today really aren't,
and for this reason, they're ignorant about the TOTAL set of
requirements for setting up a smooth working studio and operating it
efficiently.

You seem to be under the impression that the main client are people setting
up professional studios. That is simply not true. The majority of people who
buy Behringer boards are hobbyists for use in their home studios.

Phildo

"Phildo" wrote in message
...

"Gary Morrison" wrote in message
...
Behringer touts their mixers as being very-low-noise, but that's a load
of
hooey when it comes to their headphone outputs at least. Curiously,
I've
really only used their mixers for headphone applications, so I don't
know
what their line-level outputs sound like.

Short version: Buy Mackie instead.

While that may have been true several years ago it certainly doesn't hold
true now. Behringer use 4580 opamps whereas Mackie goes for 4560 and 2068
which do not deliver the same noise performance. Let someone in the group
measure the noise specs of the mixers and you'll see for yourself. Faders
and pots on Behringer are either Alps or Panasonic. In mediocre mixers
you'll find Taiwan Alpha.

Phildo

FINALLY someone talking components. I've been saying for years that the mic
preamps in Mackie's haven't improved in the last decade, even though they
keep changing the name, exaggerating performance, and raising prices more
and more. There is plenty of mark-up on Mackie mixers for a more
modestly-marketed company to provide products made with similar or better
components at a better price. That's exactly what Behringer is doing. The
performance difference is marginal, but the savings are substantial. And as
long as there are saps like Troy around it will continue to be that way.

"Sugarite" wrote in message
...
And as
long as there are saps like Troy around it will continue to be that way.

Saps like Troy tend to fall by the wayside, superseded by those with their
finger on the pulse of what is going on. Who is going to employ people who
live in the past and don't have a clue about the market today? Dinosaurs die
out and poor Troyanosaurus doesn't have long left.

Phildo

What ever you cocky asshole.....my trusty 24/8 has outlasted many behringers
in the last 7 or 8 years and will probably outlast your new behringer crap
also.As long as there are saps like you to buy from a company that based
there business on selling crap from the start and knowing it was crap.As I
have stated already there are alot of great mixers out there other than
behringer but they do cost more,and they cost more for a reason.Most people
that buy behringers are basing their desision on price and thats the market
behringer is after.


Phildo wrote in message
...

"Sugarite" wrote in message
...
And as
long as there are saps like Troy around it will continue to be that way.

Saps like Troy tend to fall by the wayside, superseded by those with their
finger on the pulse of what is going on. Who is going to employ people who
live in the past and don't have a clue about the market today? Dinosaurs
die
out and poor Troyanosaurus doesn't have long left.

Phildo

In article writes:

You seem to be under the impression that the main client are people setting
up professional studios. That is simply not true. The majority of people who
buy Behringer boards are hobbyists for use in their home studios.

That was exactly my point - not only that, but they're beginners who
don't know a Behringer from an API, much less a Mackie. So for them,
there's no reason not to start out with the lowest cost mixer they can
reasonably get away with, and Behringer (as well as others today) fits
that description. When they realize that they need a better mixer,
that's when they can buy the API. But a lot of them will drop out of
the game before then.

I wouldn't trust a professonal studio that had a Behringer as their
primary console. I don't mean that it isn't possible to do GOOD work
on one, but that it doesn't present a professional image, and it
suggests that they're still into the "disposable gear" phase. How many
pro studios do you know with Behringer mixers that have someone around
to fix it if something essential breaks mid-session?




--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

I wouldn't trust a professonal studio that had a Behringer as their
primary console.

I can't speak for recording studios but any live sr company that can only
offer behringer or mackie are very suspect operations
these just are not pro quality gear( save the 3216 behringer)
but no reason to pay 3 times as much money for the same functionality with
the mackie
for your disposable mixers mackie Vs Behringer
behringer is the much stronger value
behringer has equal if not better specs equal if not better construction,
equal if not better reliability and costs much less
George

In article writes:

FINALLY someone talking components. I've been saying for years that the mic
preamps in Mackie's haven't improved in the last decade, even though they
keep changing the name, exaggerating performance, and raising prices more
and more.

Mackie preamps HAVE changed in a decade, and they have improved RF
susceptibility, distortion, gain range, noise, and protection from
shorting the inputs with phantom power turned on.

There have been three "series" of preamps on the compact mixers. There
were the original ones from the CR1604 days, the VLZ, and the XDR (on
the current VLZ-Pro) series. Each one has been an improvement over the
previous one.

They do have some other preamps. The ones on the CFX and DFX series
and the powered mixers are differnt and not as good. Mackie freely
admits this (though of course not in their ad copy). While these are
indeed Mackie mixers, they aren't in the same class as the XDR. As far
as I can remember, the only console in which they upgraded the preamp
during production is the SR series. This was the sort of upgrade as
the VZZ to VLZ-Pro mixer in the compact series. The 8-bus really
should be upgraded but it hasn't, and it's sort of at the VLZ level.
The d8b is closer to the XDR but not quite. And nobody wants to talk
about the 8-bus large PA mixers.

There is plenty of mark-up on Mackie mixers for a more
modestly-marketed company to provide products made with similar or better
components at a better price. That's exactly what Behringer is doing.

You forgot about the cost of labor, but yeah, that's the idea. There
are few things that someone can't make a little cheaper and sell for
less. Mackie was always proud that they built their mixers in house in
America, but they've finally caught up with the rest of the industry
and moved manufacturing to where it costs them less. You may even see
a price drop in the compact series. I don't know.

performance difference is marginal, but the savings are substantial.

As long as the reliability is there, at this rung of the ladder, you
can accept a little lower performance. But most people in this little
corner of the world claim that the performance of the Beheringer is
better anyway. This may be true in the service to which they're
putting these mixers. I'm not one to argue that just because it's
Mackie it must be better.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

Phildo wrote:

I suggest you take a look at the Behringer mixers available today
and educate yourself instead of appearing
such a fool in front of the rest of the group.

Interesting. In fact, yesterday I was over at GC wandering around
and just for grins I went in to look at the mixers. In a long display
they had Behringer and Mackie mixers displayed starting with the
small ones proceeding to the huge. I didn't actually listen to any
of them, but did give them a close eyeball inspection. Looking at the
quality of construction, feeling the controls etc. I was surprised
at how close the two companies were! Both seemed very strong and
well made to me. At the low end, Behringer wins hands down. The
price is just hard to beat if you just want a couple of channels
mixed in a hurry. As you went to big boards I started to favor
the Mackies which weren't THAT much more expensive than the
Behringers. I guess my point is that if you go look at what
is coming out of the factories RIGHT NOW, it's really pretty
nice stuff. What used to be made really only matters if you
want to buy something used. Personally, From what I saw,
I'd have no problem going in and buying either one provided
I actually listened to them and let my ears decide which one
I liked best. But construction-wise I liked them both. Prices
were very good.

Benj

--
SPAM-Guard! Remove .users (if present) to email me!

Looking at the
quality of construction, feeling the controls etc. I was surprised
at how close the two companies were! Both seemed very strong and
well made to me.

That is a very important point. Those of us old-timers, know that what you are
getting today for you money is totally incredible. Common features you take
for granted, even in very cheap mixers, simply did not exist in the 1960's and
70s. It did not matter how much money you had, you couldn't get this stuff at
any price. Even the cheapest products today are often far better than what was
considered "state of the art" touring equipment back in 1970. Likewise, some
very revered studio gear really wasn't all that hot, and it certainly cost more
than most mere mortals could pay.

You live in amazing times.

Chuck

"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message
...
But then again, you wouldn't see me here singing it's praises other than
the
exact same thing George has been talking about. Reliability and cost. I
certainly wouldn't be touting my studio nor my location recording
capabilities by listing a Behringer as my console of choice. It's just
two
different ways to look at doing one's work. Or, in some of these
misguided
posts, confusing the ability to get one's work done with some other thing
that somehow seems to have some ego involved. When I've got 5 days of 12
and 13 hours worth of shows to do I can't be making a purchase decision
based on ego.

While the desks are not up there with the SSL/MIDAS etc, the new DCX and
DEQ2496 have got the big boys very worried in that they pretty much blow
away every comparable unit on the market, mostly in terms of price but they
also sound as good if not better than anything KT/BSS/XTA produce.

Phildo

And there's good reason to look at a CXR differently than a CR, primarily
because the compact portable mixers are powered, so costs reflect a
reasonable price range whilst including a power amplifier. But it's true,
the mic pres are no where near the quality of the 1604 VLZ Pro. The
original 1604s could and would have tremendous RF problems in certain
environments, particularly when someone using one didn't understand about
proper grounding schemes, etc. But then you can't really use any piece of
equipment outside of it's specifications without something becoming
problematic. That's why people who know make choices that reflect their
knowledge, not the dollars in their pockets, as you are well aware.

--


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




"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1064196084k@trad...

In article
writes:

FINALLY someone talking components. I've been saying for years that the
mic
preamps in Mackie's haven't improved in the last decade, even though
they
keep changing the name, exaggerating performance, and raising prices
more
and more.

Mackie preamps HAVE changed in a decade, and they have improved RF
susceptibility, distortion, gain range, noise, and protection from
shorting the inputs with phantom power turned on.

There have been three "series" of preamps on the compact mixers. There
were the original ones from the CR1604 days, the VLZ, and the XDR (on
the current VLZ-Pro) series. Each one has been an improvement over the
previous one.

They do have some other preamps. The ones on the CFX and DFX series
and the powered mixers are differnt and not as good. Mackie freely
admits this (though of course not in their ad copy). While these are
indeed Mackie mixers, they aren't in the same class as the XDR. As far
as I can remember, the only console in which they upgraded the preamp
during production is the SR series. This was the sort of upgrade as
the VZZ to VLZ-Pro mixer in the compact series. The 8-bus really
should be upgraded but it hasn't, and it's sort of at the VLZ level.
The d8b is closer to the XDR but not quite. And nobody wants to talk
about the 8-bus large PA mixers.

There is plenty of mark-up on Mackie mixers for a more
modestly-marketed company to provide products made with similar or
better
components at a better price. That's exactly what Behringer is doing.

You forgot about the cost of labor, but yeah, that's the idea. There
are few things that someone can't make a little cheaper and sell for
less. Mackie was always proud that they built their mixers in house in
America, but they've finally caught up with the rest of the industry
and moved manufacturing to where it costs them less. You may even see
a price drop in the compact series. I don't know.

performance difference is marginal, but the savings are substantial.

As long as the reliability is there, at this rung of the ladder, you
can accept a little lower performance. But most people in this little
corner of the world claim that the performance of the Beheringer is
better anyway. This may be true in the service to which they're
putting these mixers. I'm not one to argue that just because it's
Mackie it must be better.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

In article writes:

(Also I disagree that the mackies have improved! I think the original
1202 was better than the later one)

I can't imagine why. Would you like to explain?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

Oh BTW I will be mixing and live recording on my A&H Icon dp1000K
George

I can't be making a purchase decision
based on ego.

--

I "almost" bought a venice 320 to massage my ego but the damn thinking
side of me kicked in and bought another LX/7
I wanted to be the Midas guy in the clubs but the aux busses were to
limited in uses and the reports of early death by pot failures
just prevented me from spending so much for so little
but they do sound wonderful if you can accept the limitations
george

The concerns helped make my decision on the Crest. To date, not one problem
and I don't expect any. Certainly a pain to set up, but I can get to a date
15 minutes earlier to accomodate the hassles. Since you don't mind making
up multi-pin harnesses you might want to give one a look. Personally it
will take a lot of 15 minute extra setups to make the cost of a 131 pin
snake worth the cost. In your situation I'd probably have done it before it
ever went out for the first night's work. But JnyVee and I are still coming
up with different ways to use the flexibility, whether it be in location
recording or other aspects of live work. I don't think I made a mistake
bypassing the Midas and I don't believe there's a damned thing cheaper that
could do the jobs the Crest does. Color me a believer! g

--


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




"George" wrote in message
...
I can't be making a purchase decision
based on ego.

--

I "almost" bought a venice 320 to massage my ego but the damn thinking
side of me kicked in and bought another LX/7
I wanted to be the Midas guy in the clubs but the aux busses were to
limited in uses and the reports of early death by pot failures
just prevented me from spending so much for so little
but they do sound wonderful if you can accept the limitations
george

I'll undoubtedly be looking at the SLS again but Scott was mentioning
another company with ribbon tweets, although I've forgotten what they were
called. Something starting with an A.

Audio Alcons Tom Gallagher(formally with sls) is with them so I expect
great things
they have redesigned and reissued the Aura 18 inch driver along with
some very unique speaker on a stick line arrays


my self I would rather do 10 speaker on stick gigs than deploy stage
truss roof and pa for 10,000
I would earn much more /manhour If I coulf find a way to get out of my
CDL truck I would, and that is one goal for the future, to downsize
while earning at least the same income
who knows I might add location recording to my skill set

george

When coming into competition with better known products, my dollars might
well be spent simply because I know that I can get my dollars out of them in
their term of service. There are things like small little shows/gigs that
don't make a lot of sense to bring a $2k mixer to the fray and I'm not
adverse to seeing something like a Behringer put into play, but when it's
someone else's dollars doing the real hire in, for me to come with something
I KNOW the client won't like, then it's not feasible regardless of my
justifications. Again, it's just all part of business and it has nothing to
do with my personal satisfaction or ego or anything. Were I to bring the
Crest to a bar gig, for example, would anyone there but me know the quality
of the product that went into producing the sound? I think not, and
consequently I wouldn't make such a move. But if a local or national talent
in my field of jazz work calls, I don't care if it's 100 people or 1000, I
will still bring the best equipment that gets the job done, even if it's not
possible to take my 15% return on the equipment to fulfill the contract.

****, to be perfectly honest, if Buster Williams had a DC gig and asked me
to come do sound/record or just sound, and it was just for $300 for the
night, I'd be bringing top dollar equipment because I know he presents top
quality musicians and top quality music. Does he deserve anything less?

There's something to be said about the ability to put the names of the
clients with the quality of their work and the requirements of their sound
that simply doesn't come down to price of the equipment. Again, it's about
doing the job. I go do a little club up the road every once in a while and
even JnyVee's 1604 is actually overkill, but often it's the mixer because
it's simple and quick. Depends on who's doing the mixing. Mackie 1604 or
Spirit F1, it's the same number of inputs being used and roughly the same
quality on output. Not one drinker at the bar will notice, but I have had a
couple of CD projects come out of that bar. Not because of the equipment,
but because I/we got the job done.

And, Phildo, I don't know of any "big boys" that are worried about a
particular piece of equipment. It's simply another tool. A good soundman
uses what he has to it's best advantage and gets the job done. When one has
to purchase the equipment themselves and do a $150 a night gig with maybe
$3k worth of equipment, it simply means that there's still some $25k or more
worth of equipment sitting somewhere not making any money. After all, I'm
the one doing the job, not the equipment. When it breaks I fix it. When I
break, it just sits there.

--


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




"Phildo" wrote in message
...

"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message
...
But then again, you wouldn't see me here singing it's praises other than
the
exact same thing George has been talking about. Reliability and cost.
I
certainly wouldn't be touting my studio nor my location recording
capabilities by listing a Behringer as my console of choice. It's just
two
different ways to look at doing one's work. Or, in some of these
misguided
posts, confusing the ability to get one's work done with some other
thing
that somehow seems to have some ego involved. When I've got 5 days of
12
and 13 hours worth of shows to do I can't be making a purchase decision
based on ego.

While the desks are not up there with the SSL/MIDAS etc, the new DCX and
DEQ2496 have got the big boys very worried in that they pretty much blow
away every comparable unit on the market, mostly in terms of price but
they
also sound as good if not better than anything KT/BSS/XTA produce.

Phildo

"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message
...
And, Phildo, I don't know of any "big boys" that are worried about a
particular piece of equipment. It's simply another tool. A good soundman
uses what he has to it's best advantage and gets the job done. When one
has
to purchase the equipment themselves and do a $150 a night gig with maybe
$3k worth of equipment, it simply means that there's still some $25k or
more
worth of equipment sitting somewhere not making any money. After all, I'm
the one doing the job, not the equipment. When it breaks I fix it. When
I
break, it just sits there.

You miss the point. I was referring to the other companies that make similar
products like KT, DBX, XTA etc not sound engineers.

Phildo

In article znr1064256855k@trad, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:

(Also I disagree that the mackies have improved! I think the original
1202 was better than the later one)

I can't imagine why. Would you like to explain?

I personally thought it was much more solid and had a better headphone
amp (what I wanted from a small mixer) and the pre´s etc sounded the
same to me, but I was only recording demos...Maybe my mic matched these
better, just what I heard. I personally thought the VLZ stuff was more
marketing than technicall reality.

In article writes:

(Also I disagree that the mackies have improved! I think the original
1202 was better than the later one)

I personally thought it was much more solid and had a better headphone
amp (what I wanted from a small mixer) and the pre´s etc sounded the
same to me, but I was only recording demos...Maybe my mic matched these
better, just what I heard. I personally thought the VLZ stuff was more
marketing than technicall reality.

I haven't heard any complaints about the headphone amplifier. The case
construction is essentially the same, so I don't know what makes the
older model seem more solid.

There are quite a few technical differences between the original
preamps and the XDR, but your point about the input being a better
match for your mics might be valid (as it is with any preamp).




--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )