Re: Behringer mixers

[Steven Sena]

Low end... Cheap...Better than nothing, I guess...

--
Steven Sena
XS Sound
www.xssound.com


"Jerry" > wrote in message
news:0kR6b.388224$uu5.72433@sccrnsc04...
> Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
>
> Jerry
>
>

[Paul van der Heu]

"Steven Sena" > wrote :

> Low end... Cheap...Better than nothing, I guess...

Based on what? your (recent) experience with them or hearsay.. BEhringer
has come a LONG way over the last 2 years..

Having used my DDX 3216 quite intensive over the last three months (on the
road). I can it is a stable, well built and great sounding piece of
equipment. It's flexible, intuitive and the bands I work with notice it
sounds much better then my previous mixer (A&H GL3300)..

32in/22out and 2 ADAT lightpipes I/O for under 2200 euros.. and it works
great!

One of the bands I work with bought a Midas (Venice) recently, for almost
three times what I paid for my setup, and after two monts parts are coming
loose and I heard strange squicky noises when I open the case..

Low end? nope

cheap? yes (as in mucho bang for your bucks)

Better then nothing? what isn't!


--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Steven Sena]

yeah...whatever...

--
Steven Sena
XS Sound
www.xssound.com


"Paul van der Heu" > wrote in message
...
> "Steven Sena" > wrote :
>
> > Low end... Cheap...Better than nothing, I guess...
>
> Based on what? your (recent) experience with them or hearsay.. BEhringer
> has come a LONG way over the last 2 years..
>
> Having used my DDX 3216 quite intensive over the last three months (on the
> road). I can it is a stable, well built and great sounding piece of
> equipment. It's flexible, intuitive and the bands I work with notice it
> sounds much better then my previous mixer (A&H GL3300)..
>
> 32in/22out and 2 ADAT lightpipes I/O for under 2200 euros.. and it works
> great!
>
> One of the bands I work with bought a Midas (Venice) recently, for almost
> three times what I paid for my setup, and after two monts parts are coming
> loose and I heard strange squicky noises when I open the case..
>
> Low end? nope
>
> cheap? yes (as in mucho bang for your bucks)
>
> Better then nothing? what isn't!
>
>
> --
> Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
> how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
> --John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Andrew M.]

Jerry wrote:

> Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
>
> Jerry
>
>
YES...they all SUCK! Buy the products that Behringer copies. They ALL
sound way better.

[Gary Morrison]

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.

Nevertheless, there is one Behringer product that I am overall pretty
impressed with: Their noise-reducer. It appears to be an original design
rather than yet another one of their cheap knock-offs of the corresponding
Mackie product. (I don't know of any equivalent Mackie product, but if I
did, I'd buy the Mackie instead.) In short, it's the confluence of a
downward expander with a quickly-sweeping lowpass filter. The downward
expander of course is to knock out noise (noise of any sort) while the
source is effectively silent, and the sweeping lowpass filter to knock out
electronic hiss when the expander is ... "open" for lack of a better word.
It seems to work quite well from what I've seen, even doing a reasonably
unobtrusive job when the source is extremely noisy. By the way, I don't
recommend using its "automatic" setting; you'll get much better results
when you fine-tune it to the particular source.

Obviously of course, any example of this sort of electronic fakery must be
treated as a last resort, and if you do have to resort ot using them,
they'll do a vastly better job when the source is only slightly noisy.
That is, first and foremost, you have to do everything possible to simply
get the noise out of the source before applying noise reducers.

[George Gleason]

"Jerry" > wrote in message
news:0kR6b.388224$uu5.72433@sccrnsc04...
> Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
>
equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost
George

[George Gleason]

"Paul van der Heu" > wrote in message
...
> "Steven Sena" > wrote :
>
> > Low end... Cheap...Better than nothing, I guess...
>
> Based on what? your (recent) experience with them or hearsay.. BEhringer
> has come a LONG way over the last 2 years..
>
> Having used my DDX 3216 quite intensive over the last three months (on the
> road). I can it is a stable, well built and great sounding piece of
> equipment. It's flexible, intuitive and the bands I work with notice it
> sounds much better then my previous mixer (A&H GL3300)..
>
> 32in/22out and 2 ADAT lightpipes I/O for under 2200 euros.. and it works
> great!
>
> One of the bands I work with bought a Midas (Venice) recently, for almost
> three times what I paid for my setup, and after two monts parts are coming
> loose and I heard strange squicky noises when I open the case..
>
> Low end? nope
>
> cheap? yes (as in mucho bang for your bucks)
>
> Better then nothing? what isn't!
>
>
I have mixed on several of the venice consloe and loved mixing on them the
headroom and eq have no equal
BUT nearly every owner I have talked to have reported the same ****-ant
failures that they never expected buying a "Midas"
IMO the midas was rushed to market and not thought out very well(in areas
such as the aux buss pre/post setup, the phantom power switches, the vent
holes that bleed sun light into the LEDs)
thank god I saw this before I bought one!!!
George

[Troy]

"equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"

This is NOT true at all.They are garbage.Mackie is WAY better.




George Gleason > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jerry" > wrote in message
> news:0kR6b.388224$uu5.72433@sccrnsc04...
> > Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
> >
> equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost
> George
>
>

[Troy]

I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some money and
buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought into
these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
unreliable.

So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.


George Gleason > wrote in message
...
>
> "Troy" > wrote in message
> . ca...
> > "equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"
> >
> > This is NOT true at all.They are garbage.Mackie is WAY better.
> >
> >
> My experiances with both find your conclusion to be full of ****
> George
>
>

[George]

In article >,
"Troy" > wrote:

> I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some money and
> buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
> worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought into
> these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
> unreliable.
>
> So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.
>
>
so you had a "friend" who had a questionable mixer
my experiance comes from personally owning at least 6 mackies and 5
behringer so far
no "heard it from a friend" bull****
my 1402's were the second worst product I ever owned
my 802s
are making me more money than thier cost every time they go out
i have 3 802s in service a 3216 in servide and one 802"missing" at
this time
never had a fail
I had 3 1402 go down at one show(over 4 days) one of them was
recording the installation of the poet laurete for the USA
ruined a NPR recording
my personal
Failure score card
mackie 6
behringer 0

George

[Paul van der Heu]

"Mike Faithfull" > wrote :

> I don't knowingly have personal experience of the best Mackie ever
> made, but I have used a small Mackie console (CFX12?) beside my
> Behringer UB2442 on small gigs - one for the monitors and the other
> for FOH. To my untrained ears and inexperienced hands, the Behringer
> is the better unit.

I have four mixers at hand:

Behringer DDX3216
Spirit LX7-24
Mackie 16.8
A&H GL3300

I did a head to head with a multitrack recording and here's the results:

1. DDX 3216.. Cleanest sound, best definition
2. GL3300 .. almost as good, but too much boom
3. 16.8 .. problems with definition, dull sounding overall
4. LX7-24 .. sounds like recording through a mudpool..

I am selling all but the Behringer and getting another one.. Hell from the
sale of just the A&H I should be able to get two..;^)

--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Troy]

I didn't "hear it from a friend",I saw and I heard it and watched it die a
horrible death.It was the biggest piece of **** mixer I had ever seen.My
mackie is still running,years after his board is dead and gone.


George > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Troy" > wrote:
>
> > I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some money
and
> > buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
> > worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought
into
> > these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
> > unreliable.
> >
> > So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.
> >
> >
> so you had a "friend" who had a questionable mixer
> my experiance comes from personally owning at least 6 mackies and 5
> behringer so far
> no "heard it from a friend" bull****
> my 1402's were the second worst product I ever owned
> my 802s
> are making me more money than thier cost every time they go out
> i have 3 802s in service a 3216 in servide and one 802"missing" at
> this time
> never had a fail
> I had 3 1402 go down at one show(over 4 days) one of them was
> recording the installation of the poet laurete for the USA
> ruined a NPR recording
> my personal
> Failure score card
> mackie 6
> behringer 0
>
> George

[Troy]

You say "equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"

If I had 6 mackies die on me I woulden't have said this.I would have said
"much better than mackies", not equal to.

I find it hard to beleive that 3 1402's all died at the same time unless
they were abused or rained on or something to do with poor conditions that
would have killed any mixer,including your behringers.

People buy them because they are cheap and easily replaced.If it breaks,you
throw it away and buy another.I'm sure cost had alot to do with you buying
them as it does for many others.




George > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Troy" > wrote:
>
> > I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some money
and
> > buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
> > worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought
into
> > these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
> > unreliable.
> >
> > So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.
> >
> >
> so you had a "friend" who had a questionable mixer
> my experiance comes from personally owning at least 6 mackies and 5
> behringer so far
> no "heard it from a friend" bull****
> my 1402's were the second worst product I ever owned
> my 802s
> are making me more money than thier cost every time they go out
> i have 3 802s in service a 3216 in servide and one 802"missing" at
> this time
> never had a fail
> I had 3 1402 go down at one show(over 4 days) one of them was
> recording the installation of the poet laurete for the USA
> ruined a NPR recording
> my personal
> Failure score card
> mackie 6
> behringer 0
>
> George

[George Gleason]

"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> "my 802s
> are making me more money than thier cost every time they go out"
>
> I hope the above statement is true as they are only worth about $50.00
> new.If not you work for cheap.
>
> I was refering to the "higher end" mixers not some $50.00 toy mixers.
>
It was all that was required to process the feed from WHCA when doing a
17,500$ presidential speech
so yes I guess they do earn me more than they cost
I would not trust a mackie to work as they had already failed over and over
on me
due to thier poor design or thier power supply
on the 1402
it is not properly heat sinked and cooks the capacitors

the 802 do not have that problem as they have external power supplies

you should know a few facts before you spout off
there are people here that understand the gear they use and have greater
real world experiance than you or me


I had one of the best mixes I ever did on a maryland sound supplied mackie
24.4 when I was on tour
but given the choice I would have choosen most likey a soundcraft

but this thread is not about soundcrafts, midas,crest,allen-heaths or any
other "better" mixers it is about wether behringers do what they say they
do and how they compare to others targeted at the same market
and for that
the behringer is as good as the best mackie but only costs 1/3 as much
george

[George Gleason]

"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> I didn't "hear it from a friend",>

Troy writes:

..A friend of mine thought he would save some money and
buy the 24/8 knock off

I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought into
these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.

but of course in his mind this does not qualify as "Hearing it from a
friend"

your own words BUDDY
george

[Troy]

No I don't consider this hearing it from a friend as I used the damn thing.



George Gleason > wrote in message
...
>
> "Troy" > wrote in message
> . ca...
> > I didn't "hear it from a friend",>
>
> Troy writes:
>
> .A friend of mine thought he would save some money and
> buy the 24/8 knock off
>
> I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought into
> these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.
>
> but of course in his mind this does not qualify as "Hearing it from a
> friend"
>
> your own words BUDDY
> george
>
>

[jazzman]

"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> Do a google search on behringer and see for yourself all the problems they
> have.

When searching, also weigh the following:

Age of these posts/experiences - some guys are still ****ed over the Mackie
lawsuit from years ago;
Size of the installed base relative to any negative posts (Do you know how
many of each model are sold per month? How many "problems" does it take to
equal 1% of that? What is their No Problem Found percentage?), and;
Any obvious BS you see. There's plenty of that!

For example, Troy has posted 9 times in two behringer threads today alone.
That would be 9 separate Google posts, all on the negative side based on
"his" experience with a friend's mixer. How much weight do you give that?

There are plenty of stores where you can try the mixers. Go find out for
yourself!

Jim

[spl dan]

Berhrinnger Mackie it's all the same crap!! The only difference is a
Mackie can take more abuse and still run, and it has a better name.
If you want a good mixer for your money buy a Allen & Heath they are
the by far the best compact mixer I have used. I have used just about
every compact mixer you dare show up to a show with execpt the Midas
Venice and I tell you that I will always choose a A&H mixer hands
down. About the Midas Venice I have not used one but have heard
things about it let us just remember it may have the Midas name on it
but it is a low rent Midas, even the rep does not recomened it.


On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:55:08 GMT, "Jerry" >
wrote:

>Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
>
>Jerry
>

[tojo]

I have used Mackies for years, and after we switched to A&H, Mackies
sounds like crap: sounds edgy, missing details, and eq sucks. The
more I use A&H, the more I am impressed with it's pre-amp and eq. I
have been testing Behringer from time to time and I agree that they
have been improving their products over the past few years. I am now
considering their DDX3216. No, I haven't A/B compare the Mackie and
Behringer, but seriously, I'd take Behringer over Mackie any day. I
htink Mackie is more like a marketing firm than a audio quipment maker
(like most US companies). And for like 1/2 the price, Behringer will
beat Mackie on value, and at least I don't remember Behringer ever
sound harsh like the Mackie. Mackie may had better service in the
past, but I can't be sure of their current state.

Paul, have you used the DDX3216 as control surface with Cubase SX or
any software? I am very interested in this mixer but I also worried
about their future support especially with 3rd party softwares. Any
pointer to user forum?




On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 01:06:56 GMT, "Troy" >
wrote:

>Do a google search on behringer and see for yourself all the problems they
>have.
>
>
>Jerry > wrote in message
>news:0kR6b.388224$uu5.72433@sccrnsc04...
>> Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>

[Tony Pearce]

"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
> > the 802 do not have that problem as they have external power supplies
>
> Internal power supply is fantastic. If I leave my power "supply" at the
> gig, it costs me $5 at Rat Shack to replace the 4' IEC cable. How much
does
> behringer/soundcraft/etc... Charge for a new adaptor that takes up far
too
> much space in a case/power strip?
> And pretty much everyone agrees that wall warts and line lumps are
annoying
> at best, and hindering and expensive at worst.

So buy a UB series Behringer with internal supply then.

2 Behringers for less than one Mackie means you always have a backup. And
the chance of needing it is about the same for both!

TonyP.

[George]

In article >,
spl dan > wrote:

> Berhrinnger Mackie it's all the same crap!!

I agree only meaningful diffrence is the behringer is 1/3 the money


The only difference is a
> Mackie can take more abuse and still run,
NIMO


and it has a better name.
NIMO

> If you want a good mixer for your money buy a Allen & Heath they are
> the by far the best compact mixer I have used. I have used just about
> every compact mixer you dare show up to a show with execpt the Midas
> Venice and I tell you that I will always choose a A&H mixer hands
> down. About the Midas Venice I have not used one but have heard
> things about it let us just remember it may have the Midas name on it
> but it is a low rent Midas, even the rep does not recomened it.
>
>The Midas sounds terrific but is starting to build up a bad rep from
the poor build quality Vs cost
I would buy the soundcraft k1 over the venice if I wanted to spend that
much and get so little
george

[Roger W. Norman]

The 3216 was just lowered in price to $999 USD as I recall seeing. That
makes it an interesting piece to look at, and it has gotten some pretty good
reviews. This doesn't, however, speak one way or the other about such
things as support, manuals, ease of use in design, etc.

--


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.




"Paul van der Heu" > wrote in message
...
> "Steven Sena" > wrote :
>
> > Low end... Cheap...Better than nothing, I guess...
>
> Based on what? your (recent) experience with them or hearsay.. BEhringer
> has come a LONG way over the last 2 years..
>
> Having used my DDX 3216 quite intensive over the last three months (on the
> road). I can it is a stable, well built and great sounding piece of
> equipment. It's flexible, intuitive and the bands I work with notice it
> sounds much better then my previous mixer (A&H GL3300)..
>
> 32in/22out and 2 ADAT lightpipes I/O for under 2200 euros.. and it works
> great!
>
> One of the bands I work with bought a Midas (Venice) recently, for almost
> three times what I paid for my setup, and after two monts parts are coming
> loose and I heard strange squicky noises when I open the case..
>
> Low end? nope
>
> cheap? yes (as in mucho bang for your bucks)
>
> Better then nothing? what isn't!
>
>
> --
> Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
> how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
> --John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Roger W. Norman]

Which was one of my reasons for going with the Crest, although why this
thing is even suggested for anything BUT an installation I don't know.
Phantom power is not only recessed but on the back panel and a bear to
reach. It works fine in my gig rig for a weeks worth of festival events,
but it's really a pain otherwise, so I have two different rack units to
carry it in, depending on the type of gig. For some reason I simply don't
like mixing in the vertical (which is necessary if you want access to the
backplane. Seems too strange.

But then the product itself is excellent in sound quality and routing
flexibility if one ignores the less than stellar ease of setup. Overall I'm
still glad I didn't get the Venice.

However, George, I don't know how this relates to a Behringer thread! <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 Gleason" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul van der Heu" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Steven Sena" > wrote :
> >
> > > Low end... Cheap...Better than nothing, I guess...
> >
> > Based on what? your (recent) experience with them or hearsay.. BEhringer
> > has come a LONG way over the last 2 years..
> >
> > Having used my DDX 3216 quite intensive over the last three months (on
the
> > road). I can it is a stable, well built and great sounding piece of
> > equipment. It's flexible, intuitive and the bands I work with notice it
> > sounds much better then my previous mixer (A&H GL3300)..
> >
> > 32in/22out and 2 ADAT lightpipes I/O for under 2200 euros.. and it works
> > great!
> >
> > One of the bands I work with bought a Midas (Venice) recently, for
almost
> > three times what I paid for my setup, and after two monts parts are
coming
> > loose and I heard strange squicky noises when I open the case..
> >
> > Low end? nope
> >
> > cheap? yes (as in mucho bang for your bucks)
> >
> > Better then nothing? what isn't!
> >
> >
> I have mixed on several of the venice consloe and loved mixing on them
the
> headroom and eq have no equal
> BUT nearly every owner I have talked to have reported the same ****-ant
> failures that they never expected buying a "Midas"
> IMO the midas was rushed to market and not thought out very well(in areas
> such as the aux buss pre/post setup, the phantom power switches, the vent
> holes that bleed sun light into the LEDs)
> thank god I saw this before I bought one!!!
> George
>
>

[Roger W. Norman]

Mr. Gleason is a professional working in a demanding professional
environment where right has to be right each and every time, and it has to
be right right now. If he thinks the Behringer equals the Mackie in sound
quality and build, then you might want to ADD his statements to your
experience, rather than denigrate his experience of day after day console
work and substituting your friends and reports and the minimal experience
you possibly have with a wide variety of consoles. Not saying he's right
and you're wrong. I'm saying he usually only talks about things he knows
well and therefore deserves a listen to.

--


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.




"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some money
and
> buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
> worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought
into
> these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
> unreliable.
>
> So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.
>
>
> George Gleason > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Troy" > wrote in message
> > . ca...
> > > "equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"
> > >
> > > This is NOT true at all.They are garbage.Mackie is WAY better.
> > >
> > >
> > My experiances with both find your conclusion to be full of ****
> > George
> >
> >
>
>

[Roger W. Norman]

Cool. It's always nice to have an operating piece of equipment. And the
good thing about a Mackie is that, if it does go down, you can probably get
it repaired a little easier in the states than one could a Behringer. But
again, a man offers you day after day use of product in a pretty rugged
environment with a tally and yet you don't wish to believe him. Yours
doesn't do that. Ah, but does yours get thrown in a truck 4 times a week,
successfully run shows and return home still working? Or is yours just
turned on during the weekend?

--


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.




"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> I didn't "hear it from a friend",I saw and I heard it and watched it die a
> horrible death.It was the biggest piece of **** mixer I had ever seen.My
> mackie is still running,years after his board is dead and gone.
>
>
> George > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "Troy" > wrote:
> >
> > > I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some
money
> and
> > > buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
> > > worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought
> into
> > > these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
> > > unreliable.
> > >
> > > So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.
> > >
> > >
> > so you had a "friend" who had a questionable mixer
> > my experiance comes from personally owning at least 6 mackies and 5
> > behringer so far
> > no "heard it from a friend" bull****
> > my 1402's were the second worst product I ever owned
> > my 802s
> > are making me more money than thier cost every time they go out
> > i have 3 802s in service a 3216 in servide and one 802"missing" at
> > this time
> > never had a fail
> > I had 3 1402 go down at one show(over 4 days) one of them was
> > recording the installation of the poet laurete for the USA
> > ruined a NPR recording
> > my personal
> > Failure score card
> > mackie 6
> > behringer 0
> >
> > George
>
>

[Roger W. Norman]

Different George. George Gleason made the statement, George gave you a
tally of broken to not broken. Two different people.

--


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.




"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> You say "equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"
>
> If I had 6 mackies die on me I woulden't have said this.I would have said
> "much better than mackies", not equal to.
>
> I find it hard to beleive that 3 1402's all died at the same time unless
> they were abused or rained on or something to do with poor conditions that
> would have killed any mixer,including your behringers.
>
> People buy them because they are cheap and easily replaced.If it
breaks,you
> throw it away and buy another.I'm sure cost had alot to do with you buying
> them as it does for many others.
>
>
>
>
> George > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "Troy" > wrote:
> >
> > > I have used both also.A friend of mine thought he would save some
money
> and
> > > buy the 24/8 knock off and it was a piece of **** (and thats when it
> > > worked).I have also talked to many very dissapointed people who bought
> into
> > > these knock off mixers being just as good a mackies.They are noisy and
> > > unreliable.
> > >
> > > So I find your conclusion to be full of ****.
> > >
> > >
> > so you had a "friend" who had a questionable mixer
> > my experiance comes from personally owning at least 6 mackies and 5
> > behringer so far
> > no "heard it from a friend" bull****
> > my 1402's were the second worst product I ever owned
> > my 802s
> > are making me more money than thier cost every time they go out
> > i have 3 802s in service a 3216 in servide and one 802"missing" at
> > this time
> > never had a fail
> > I had 3 1402 go down at one show(over 4 days) one of them was
> > recording the installation of the poet laurete for the USA
> > ruined a NPR recording
> > my personal
> > Failure score card
> > mackie 6
> > behringer 0
> >
> > George
>
>

[Paul van der Heu]

spl dan > wrote :

> If you want a good mixer for your money buy a Allen & Heath they are
> the by far the best compact mixer I have used. I have used just about
> every compact mixer you dare show up to a show with execpt the Midas
> Venice and I tell you that I will always choose a A&H mixer hands
> down.

I have used both the VEnice and the mixwizard series and while the Venice
sound better, the mixwizzard is much more ruggid and roadproof IMO.. It's
also way less expensive..

But I'd still take my Behringer DDX 3216 over the Mixwizzard. It has not
failed me once since I started using it and sound much better then the
A&H.. It's a digital mixer and has better features at a slightly lower
price..

--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Paul van der Heu]

tojo > wrote :

> Paul, have you used the DDX3216 as control surface with Cubase SX or
> any software? I am very interested in this mixer but I also worried
> about their future support especially with 3rd party softwares. Any
> pointer to user forum?

I am planning on trying that soon.. there is a mixermap for logic. but it's
a quickly thrown together thingie.. I plan on sitting down with a friend I
hope somewhere next month to do a proper map..

I wish there was a DDX 3216 forum and have asked Behringer about it. They
replied they are considering it. This is one versatile beast and a
dedicated forum would be real useful IMO..

And Behringer is real good at listening I have sent them a number of Emails
with remarks and suggestions and the respond promptly and with a good
positive attitude..

--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Michael Drainer]

Mackie and Behringer... All the same really. Both made in China and both
noisy. The simple fact is, you get what you pay for. If you want a good
console with low noise, fork up the bucks. Soundcraft MH-3, Midas XL-4,
Crest VX. All of these manufactures make small frame sizes for their good
consoles.


"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.
>
> Nevertheless, there is one Behringer product that I am overall pretty
> impressed with: Their noise-reducer. It appears to be an original design
> rather than yet another one of their cheap knock-offs of the corresponding
> Mackie product. (I don't know of any equivalent Mackie product, but if I
> did, I'd buy the Mackie instead.) In short, it's the confluence of a
> downward expander with a quickly-sweeping lowpass filter. The downward
> expander of course is to knock out noise (noise of any sort) while the
> source is effectively silent, and the sweeping lowpass filter to knock out
> electronic hiss when the expander is ... "open" for lack of a better word.
> It seems to work quite well from what I've seen, even doing a reasonably
> unobtrusive job when the source is extremely noisy. By the way, I don't
> recommend using its "automatic" setting; you'll get much better results
> when you fine-tune it to the particular source.
>
> Obviously of course, any example of this sort of electronic fakery must be
> treated as a last resort, and if you do have to resort ot using them,
> they'll do a vastly better job when the source is only slightly noisy.
> That is, first and foremost, you have to do everything possible to simply
> get the noise out of the source before applying noise reducers.
>
>

[tojo]

yeah, the new lowered price on the DDX3216 is amazing, even with a
ADAT card is like $1180 on many on-line stores and tha'ts 32ch (16 of
them digital) with 16 assignable bus and 4 multi-fx. And all inputs
channel have 3band para eq and dynamic, how can you beat this!
But it's been out for a couple of years and yet I don't see much on
the mixer map, it looks easy to setup but couldn't find any user
sharing their preset on the internet. Anyway, if B setup a forum for
this mixer and for people to exchange presets, it will ensure buyers
that it is still in their interests to suppor this product.


On 09 Sep 2003 15:02:27 GMT, Paul van der Heu > wrote:

>spl dan > wrote :
>
>> If you want a good mixer for your money buy a Allen & Heath they are
>> the by far the best compact mixer I have used. I have used just about
>> every compact mixer you dare show up to a show with execpt the Midas
>> Venice and I tell you that I will always choose a A&H mixer hands
>> down.
>
>I have used both the VEnice and the mixwizard series and while the Venice
>sound better, the mixwizzard is much more ruggid and roadproof IMO.. It's
>also way less expensive..
>
>But I'd still take my Behringer DDX 3216 over the Mixwizzard. It has not
>failed me once since I started using it and sound much better then the
>A&H.. It's a digital mixer and has better features at a slightly lower
>price..

[ScotFraser]

<< I have mixed on several of the venice consloe and loved mixing on them the
headroom and eq have no equal
BUT nearly every owner I have talked to have reported the same ****-ant
failures that they never expected buying a "Midas"
IMO the midas was rushed to market and not thought out very well(in areas
such as the aux buss pre/post setup, the phantom power switches, the vent
holes that bleed sun light into the LEDs)
thank god I saw this before I bought one!!!
George
>>

I was pretty underwhelmed by the Venice. The short faders are what I'd expect
on a Mackie, the aux pre/post arrangement is just dumb, the lack of matrices is
a problem for me. Overall, I don't think it's really a Midas design. It looks &
feels like one the lower end DDA's, rebadged.


Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< Nevertheless, there is one Behringer product that I am overall pretty
impressed with: Their noise-reducer. It appears to be an original design
rather than yet another one of their cheap knock-offs of the corresponding
Mackie product. (I don't know of any equivalent Mackie product, but if I
did, I'd buy the Mackie instead.) In short, it's the confluence of a
downward expander with a quickly-sweeping lowpass filter. >>

Don't know how original the design can be because downward expanders & program
dependent lowpass filters have been implemented as noise reduction units by
many manufactures for at least 30 years.

Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< It was the biggest piece of **** mixer I had ever seen. >>

You haven't had the pleasure of mixing on an ART, I take it.


Scott Fraser

[George Gleason]

"Roger W. Norman" > wrote in message
...
> Which was one of my reasons for going with the Crest, although why this
> thing is even suggested for anything BUT an installation I don't know.
> Phantom power is not only recessed but on the back panel and a bear to
> reach. It works fine in my gig rig for a weeks worth of festival events,
> but it's really a pain otherwise, so I have two different rack units to
> carry it in, depending on the type of gig. For some reason I simply don't
> like mixing in the vertical (which is necessary if you want access to the
> backplane. Seems too strange.
>
> But then the product itself is excellent in sound quality and routing
> flexibility if one ignores the less than stellar ease of setup. Overall
I'm
> still glad I didn't get the Venice.
>
> However, George, I don't know how this relates to a Behringer thread! <g>
>

My GL2's were set up like your crest
I ended up making a duplicate back panel and a slant rack with patches to
the gl2's inputs so I could get easy access
while i was at it I added a parellel mult for the snake
George

[George Gleason]

"ScotFraser" > wrote in message
...
> << It was the biggest piece of **** mixer I had ever seen. >>
>
> You haven't had the pleasure of mixing on an ART, I take it.
>
or a Samson, phonic,kelsey

man there is some scary **** out there
George

[George Gleason]

"Roger W. Norman" > wrote in message
...
> Different George. George Gleason made the statement, George gave you a
> tally of broken to not broken. Two different people.
>
> --
>
>Rodger I think they were both me
I post from two diffrent puters
My PC I am George Gleason on my mac I have 3 news readers and not sure who
I am on each of them
peace
george

[George Gleason]

"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
>
> > I would not trust a mackie to work as they had already failed over and
over
> > on me
> > due to thier poor design or thier power supply
> > on the 1402
> > it is not properly heat sinked and cooks the capacitors
>
> Really? I've had my 1402 for oh about 5 years, and it was used when I got
> it. I often have it up and running all day almost every day since then,
and
> It's still working as good as the day I got it. Low noise, no scratchy
pots
> or connectors, no problems whatsoever.

most likely in a nice clean air condition humidity controlled room some
where.
take it live and watch it die you could heat coffee on the power supply
it is right over the LEDS touch it some time then think about the failure I
have mentioned

George>

[George Gleason]

"Roger W. Norman" > wrote in message
...
> Mr. Gleason is a professional working in a demanding professional
> environment where right has to be right each and every time, and it has to
> be right right now. If he thinks the Behringer equals the Mackie in sound
> quality and build, then you might want to ADD his statements to your
> experience, rather than denigrate his experience of day after day console
> work and substituting your friends and reports and the minimal experience
> you possibly have with a wide variety of consoles. Not saying he's right
> and you're wrong. I'm saying he usually only talks about things he knows
> well and therefore deserves a listen to.
>
Thanks Roger after a while on the groups you get to know who is who and
what experiance they carry
like yourself there are many i respect yet differ with
and then there are those who post a isolated experiance as a universial
fact

but back to what I know best
BEER!!!!
lol
George
Roger will you be at AES?
I hope to meet Ty there and if your around a few minutes would be welcomed

[P Stamler]

>Don't know how original the design can be because downward expanders &
>program
>dependent lowpass filters have been implemented as noise reduction units by
>many manufactures for at least 30 years.

Perhaps it was lifted from a National Semiconductor application note.

Peace,
Paul

[Josh Snider]

in article , Michael Drainer at
wrote on 9/9/03 11.20:

> Mackie and Behringer... All the same really. Both made in China and both
> noisy. The simple fact is, you get what you pay for. If you want a good
> console with low noise, fork up the bucks. Soundcraft MH-3, Midas XL-4,
> Crest VX. All of these manufactures make small frame sizes for their good
> consoles.
>

Last I checked my Mackie desk said "Made in the USA", and having visited the
Mackie plant in Woodinville, it seems unlikely they'd pay millions to expand
that site if they could source out cheaper to China... In fact I think one
of mackie's biggest selling points was that they were all American made.

J

--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[George Gleason]

"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
> in article , Michael Drainer
at
> wrote on 9/9/03 11.20:
>
> > Mackie and Behringer... All the same really. Both made in China and
both
> > noisy. The simple fact is, you get what you pay for. If you want a
good
> > console with low noise, fork up the bucks. Soundcraft MH-3, Midas XL-4,
> > Crest VX. All of these manufactures make small frame sizes for their
good
> > consoles.
> >
>
> Last I checked my Mackie desk said "Made in the USA", and having visited
the
> Mackie plant in Woodinville, it seems unlikely they'd pay millions to
expand
> that site if they could source out cheaper to China... In fact I think
one
> of mackie's biggest selling points was that they were all American made.
>
unless you found NOS (new old stock) mackie is being made in china
very likely on the same machines and by the same people making the behringer
George

[Josh Snider]

>> Mr. Gleason is a professional working in a demanding professional
>> environment where right has to be right each and every time, and it has to
>> be right right now.

And none of the rest of us are? Gee I'd forgotten that those of us with
differing opinions actually aren't real working professionals with
experience.

>> If he thinks the Behringer equals the Mackie in sound
>> quality and build, then you might want to ADD his statements to your
>> experience, rather than denigrate his experience of day after day console
>> work and substituting your friends and reports and the minimal experience
>> you possibly have with a wide variety of consoles.

Granted the poster in question does seem to be discounting his opinions
right off, however, I think there's a bit of that going around on both
sides.
But again we're going on about this minimal experience thing. Unless you
know the poster in question personally (please correct me if you do) then
you'd only have a limited knowledge of his experience with any and all
consoles. Perhaps he's speaking from more then just one isolated desk.
However, once bitten twice shy as they say...

>> Not saying he's right
>> and you're wrong. I'm saying he usually only talks about things he knows
>> well and therefore deserves a listen to.

Fully agreed. So does the poster in question, however, and like I said
there seems to be a bit of stonewalling going on on both sides.

<Snip>

> Thanks Roger after a while on the groups you get to know who is who and
> what experiance they carry
> like yourself there are many i respect yet differ with
> and then there are those who post a isolated experiance as a universial
> fact

I'm not entirely sure if it was isolated. He did say there had been a few
Behringer mixers that he had had problems with, he also said he had mixed on
some of them and not just heard from a friend.
Besides which, word of mouth is often a reliable means of communication in
our industry. How many times have you gotten gigs due to word of mouth? I
know I have several. How many bad deals have been avoided because a friend
or colleague had gotten burned? I've avoided several.

I love Mackie for what they are. Mine has never given me problems. If you
love Behringer and they've never given you problems, then great. You say
tomato, I say tomato lets call the whole thing off...
As long as we both get the job done well, fantastic... Let's just not start
questioning each other's experience and knowledge, based on a gear choice...

J


--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[George Gleason]

"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
> With all due respect, you need to stop making assumptions about people's
> experience and personal usage. Really, I mean last I checked you haven't
> followed my console around for its 8 years of life... Or have you and I
just
> didn't notice?
>
> Some of the time it's in an air conditioned room. Often its not. In
fact,
> often its in old stuffy rooms with no air conditioning, and little
> circulation, during 36C days with better then 50% humidity. I've even had
> it out on a film shoot as a production mixer in a pinch in the middle of
> summer. It's sat in full sun during outdoor concerts as a sub-mixer.
It's
> been in and out of trucks and cars to venues of questionable repute.
>
> And it's still works same as the day I bought it. I have no complaints.
> Sure it gets a bit warm, but it's never caused me a problem.
>
> Granted, had I the cash then no, I'd buy myself a nice A&H or high end
> Soundcraft, but really for value for money there isn't another compact
mixer
> I'd want to use. Certainly not one I'd feel comfortable chucking in the
> back of a truck day after day.
>
> J
My experiance is with MANY mackie and MANY behringer product
The behringers worked where the Mackies failed
George

[George Gleason]

"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
>
> >> Mr. Gleason is a professional working in a demanding professional
> >> environment where right has to be right each and every time, and it has
to
> >> be right right now.
>
> And none of the rest of us are? Gee I'd forgotten that those of us with
> differing opinions actually aren't real working professionals with
> experience.
>
> >> If he thinks the Behringer equals the Mackie in sound
> >> quality and build, then you might want to ADD his statements to your
> >> experience, rather than denigrate his experience of day after day
console
> >> work and substituting your friends and reports and the minimal
experience
> >> you possibly have with a wide variety of consoles.
>
> Granted the poster in question does seem to be discounting his opinions
> right off, however, I think there's a bit of that going around on both
> sides.
> But again we're going on about this minimal experience thing. Unless you
> know the poster in question personally (please correct me if you do) then
> you'd only have a limited knowledge of his experience with any and all
> consoles. Perhaps he's speaking from more then just one isolated desk.
> However, once bitten twice shy as they say...

I bought 6 1402's all at once all of them were in the trash can within two
years
I have been using a half a doxen of the behringers in approx the same
application for over two years with NO failures
>
> >> Not saying he's right
> >> and you're wrong. I'm saying he usually only talks about things he
knows
> >> well and therefore deserves a listen to.
>
> Fully agreed. So does the poster in question, however, and like I said
> there seems to be a bit of stonewalling going on on both sides.

so far the poster I am at odds with has not established a experiance base
on which he formed his assumptions
he has a isolate experiance with one or two mixers
that does not give him enough real world experiance to judge product on
I on the other hand have owned about 40 mixers
so far
ranging from the lowly behringer 802 to Harrison hm4


>
> I love Mackie for what they are. Mine has never given me problems. If
you
> love Behringer and they've never given you problems, then great.

Please I do not love my behringers

I love my Ramsa 840 I really loved my soundcraft K2(its now gone) I hate
my harrision ( impossible to get any one to learn its signal flow and VCA
assignments and it redefines the word HEAVY))

But they are at least equal to any mackie ever made and at a much more
reasonable cost

I am only pointing out that there is some MISTAKEN idea that behringer is
not as good as mackie
It is IMO it is better
and costs less to boot
you want to pay way too much for a noisy piece of crap , be my guest
I perfer to spend less when buying bic mixers
George

[Paul van der Heu]

tojo > wrote :

> yeah, the new lowered price on the DDX3216 is amazing, even with a
> ADAT card is like $1180 on many on-line stores and tha'ts 32ch (16 of
> them digital) with 16 assignable bus and 4 multi-fx. And all inputs
> channel have 3band para eq and dynamic, how can you beat this!

It's under $2000 for a full 28 channel mic/ and 4 channel line setup..

And it has 4band parametric eq..

--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Paul van der Heu > wrote:
>tojo > wrote :
>
>> yeah, the new lowered price on the DDX3216 is amazing, even with a
>> ADAT card is like $1180 on many on-line stores and tha'ts 32ch (16 of
>> them digital) with 16 assignable bus and 4 multi-fx. And all inputs
>> channel have 3band para eq and dynamic, how can you beat this!
>
>It's under $2000 for a full 28 channel mic/ and 4 channel line setup..
>
>And it has 4band parametric eq..

Adjustable Q on all four bands? Are the top end bottom shelving?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Josh Snider]

> I bought 6 1402's all at once all of them were in the trash can within two
> years
> I have been using a half a doxen of the behringers in approx the same
> application for over two years with NO failures

Fair enough. My experience with Mackie has been good so far. Like I said,
as long as we both get the job done.

>> Fully agreed. So does the poster in question, however, and like I said
>> there seems to be a bit of stonewalling going on on both sides.
>
> so far the poster I am at odds with has not established a experiance base
> on which he formed his assumptions
> he has a isolate experiance with one or two mixers
> that does not give him enough real world experiance to judge product on
> I on the other hand have owned about 40 mixers
> so far
> ranging from the lowly behringer 802 to Harrison hm4

My apologies, I misunderstood over the course of his thread that he had
worked on others. Upon re-reading I was mistaken. You are quite correct his
expeirience with these mixers is limited.


> Please I do not love my behringers
>
> I love my Ramsa 840 I really loved my soundcraft K2(its now gone) I hate
> my harrision ( impossible to get any one to learn its signal flow and VCA
> assignments and it redefines the word HEAVY))
>
> But they are at least equal to any mackie ever made and at a much more
> reasonable cost

Perhaps 'love' was far to strong a word ;-)

> I am only pointing out that there is some MISTAKEN idea that behringer is
> not as good as mackie
> It is IMO it is better
> and costs less to boot
> you want to pay way too much for a noisy piece of crap , be my guest
> I perfer to spend less when buying bic mixers

I find my 1402's to be fairly quiet. However as you stated before, I've got
an older 1402, from the first VLZ series. This may be why I haven't
experienced the problems you have. Perhaps Mackie's standard of quality has
gone down over the past few years, with the expansion of their product line.
As far as Behringer goes, I'm still a little wary of them because of the
lawsuits and the fact that virtually every piece of gear they release looks
startlingly like something else that's been around longer. (Ie. The Truth
monitors. They're almost identical in appearance and design to Genelec...
It's probably more blatant then the mixers that resemble Mackie's)
The products may indeed be good sounding products with a better price point,
but really, for me, it's the principle of the thing. Do I really want to
support a company that seems to be ripping off everyone else's designs?

Anyway, it's a personal opinion thing for me. We all make different
choices. For that application, mine is Mackie. Yours is Behringer.
I like SSL, you probably have another preference. At the end of the day,
really, we're just trying to get to the same goal using different tools...

J

--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[Paul van der Heu]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote :

> Adjustable Q on all four bands? Are the top end bottom shelving?
> --scott

Each band is selectable Q, HSH or LSH

--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[George Gleason]

"Josh Snider" >

Josh I do not think behringer was a option 8 years ago
I know i felt the mackie 1402 at 430$ ea was a excellent value when I bought
mine
so as times change so do options
one can buy for 50$ today the same features I paid almost 800$ for in a
VCR
Peace
george

[George Gleason]

Do I really want to
> support a company that seems to be ripping off everyone else's designs?

for me that is a issue between the makers and the courts if a manufacture
does not care to prosacute copying why should it be my obligation to do it
for them
if they go to court the lawsuit most likely will be settled with a payment
from one party to another and the blessing (inherent in the payoff) to
allow continued production
or there will be a cease order and the product will be pulled from the
market
it still does not fall on me to make this judgement
At the end of the day,
> really, we're just trying to get to the same goal using different tools...

yes indeed and that is a big part of marketing my company, my ability and my
inventory
sink or swim by my choices
Peace
george

[ScotFraser]

<< In fact I think one
of mackie's biggest selling points was that they were all American made.
>>

WERE is correct. Look at the new ones with the TAPCO badge.


Scott Fraser

[tojo]

their new low price is $1299, and many place are selling them brand
new $999. The ADAT cards are like $180 each for 16channels.


On 09 Sep 2003 20:58:21 GMT, Paul van der Heu > wrote:

>tojo > wrote :
>
>> yeah, the new lowered price on the DDX3216 is amazing, even with a
>> ADAT card is like $1180 on many on-line stores and tha'ts 32ch (16 of
>> them digital) with 16 assignable bus and 4 multi-fx. And all inputs
>> channel have 3band para eq and dynamic, how can you beat this!
>
>It's under $2000 for a full 28 channel mic/ and 4 channel line setup..
>
>And it has 4band parametric eq..

[reddred]

"Paul van der Heu" > wrote in message
...

> It's under $2000 for a full 28 channel mic/ and 4 channel line setup..
>
> And it has 4band parametric eq..

Why I don't understand is why all these companies are making 32 channel
mixers when all the hdr's are 24 tracks. Seems like a bitch.

jb

[reddred]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> reddred > wrote:
> >
> >"Paul van der Heu" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> It's under $2000 for a full 28 channel mic/ and 4 channel line setup..
> >>
> >> And it has 4band parametric eq..
> >
> >Why I don't understand is why all these companies are making 32 channel
> >mixers when all the hdr's are 24 tracks. Seems like a bitch.
>
> Think of it as having eight effects returns plus your 24 sends from the
> recorder.
> --scott

So can I use it like a console with inline monitoring? What if I want to
switch back and forth quickly between the signal going into the pre's and
the return from the hdr?

I think I'm a little behind the curve on these, but it looks to me like you
either have to buy two or use outboard for the 24 ins of the hdr. Or there
is something simple I just don't get.

jb

[Roger W. Norman]

Do I have to answer your post now (sorry, been busy)? <g>

It was, in fact, the expressed experience of one owned product and one
friend's product that made me point out that George, in fact, has numerous
setups, does touring systems, and generally lives with the stuff every day.
Now I live with my Soundtracs Solo everyday, but I wouldn't want to take it
on the road. I also live with my Crest somewhat less of the time, and I'm
not afraid to take it on the road at all. I also live with a dinky little
F1 Spirit, and I'd put it up against the best of Mackie and Behringer
products on a day in/day out basis for the same types of jobs without fear.

The concept was to apply the right product to the right job, and if George
says Behringers are as good as Mackies for 1/3 the price, then A) I'm amazed
that George actually had either Mackies or Behringers, and B) that his
assessment should not be dismissed out of hand. I've worked on a few mixers
myself, minus my three, and George was one of the first guys I asked when I
was shooting for the Crest or a Venice. The Crest won (obviously) due to
the build factor. But the idea is that George is a go to person when the
right subject comes up. He isn't a recording studio guy, so we are actually
lucky to have him participate. I'd like to keep him around a little longer,
so I simply state things as I see them.

--


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.




"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> > Josh I do not think behringer was a option 8 years ago
> > I know i felt the mackie 1402 at 430$ ea was a excellent value when I
bought
> > mine
> > so as times change so do options
> > one can buy for 50$ today the same features I paid almost 800$ for in
a
> > VCR
> > Peace
> > george
>
> Verily I agree. I must admit I have a soft spot for Mackie as most of the
> gigs I did when I was working in theatre had Mackie's of some sort doing
> some sort of job, and I have a certain nostalgia for that time. But I
> digress. They all functioned great and all the engineers I came into
> contact with loved them. These days my 1402 is basically just a monitor
> routing console for my personal studio. It doesn't get out too much
> anymore.
> Maybe I should take it out and introduce it to a nice little Yamaha unit.
> Or maybe an O2R/96, big dark and handsome...
>
> J
>
> --
> josh.snider
> cave.productions
> 416.524.6927
>
>
>

[Roger W. Norman]

Caught that, but I can't say I've noticed it before.

--


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 Gleason" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Roger W. Norman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Different George. George Gleason made the statement, George gave you a
> > tally of broken to not broken. Two different people.
> >
> > --
> >
> >Rodger I think they were both me
> I post from two diffrent puters
> My PC I am George Gleason on my mac I have 3 news readers and not sure
who
> I am on each of them
> peace
> george
>
>

[Josh Snider]

in article , Roger W. Norman at
wrote on 9/10/03 15.33:

> Do I have to answer your post now (sorry, been busy)? <g>
>
> It was, in fact, the expressed experience of one owned product and one
> friend's product that made me point out that George, in fact, has numerous
> setups, does touring systems, and generally lives with the stuff every day.

I misread the OP's first few posts, and was a bit confused as to his
experience. I don¹t' question or attack anyone's experience without first
hand (or reasonably trustworthy second hand) knowledge of it. Granted he'd
only ever worked on the one behringer... My bad there.

>I also live with a dinky little
> F1 Spirit, and I'd put it up against the best of Mackie and Behringer
> products on a day in/day out basis for the same types of jobs without fear.

Now at the risk of starting another war of words, I'd NEVER take any of the
low end spirit compact mixers anywhere. Unless the newest versions are any
different, the thin guage chassis, flimsy plastic patchbays, snap in power
connectors, and knobs that feel like I'm going to break them when I move
them, have turned me off spirit forever regardless of how they sound!
(Though I must admit I like the EQ, and the meters)


> The concept was to apply the right product to the right job, and if George
> says Behringers are as good as Mackies for 1/3 the price, then A) I'm amazed
> that George actually had either Mackies or Behringers, and B) that his
> assessment should not be dismissed out of hand.

Agreed. Fully and completely. I don¹t doubt for a second that he's had all
those Mackie's fail on him. I just wanted to state my experience with
Mackie (which has so far all been positive) as a counterpoint. The OP
however, didn't seem to be as diplomatic. (Forgive me as well if I ever
came off that way)

> He isn't a recording studio guy, so we are actually
> lucky to have him participate. I'd like to keep him around a little longer,
> so I simply state things as I see them.

I wasn't a studio guy when I first came here either. I started off on the
road and in the theatre. I always get nostalgic for my old live sound days.
I still jump at the opportunity when a chance for a live gig comes up.

Do forgive me if I came off as antagonistic or disrespectful. I meant none
at the least.

J


--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[George Gleason]

> Do forgive me if I came off as antagonistic or disrespectful. I meant
none
> at the least.
>
No problem I have before and will again shot my own feet
no apology needed
lets get on with sound
George

[Roger W. Norman]

That was the idea of my "do I have to answer..." thing, but yeah, I caught
it. I don't think you did anything wrong, by any means. If there's anyone
here that has the ability to put their foot into their mouth and munch, it's
me.

And no flame war is necessary. I use the F1 all the time because when I go
out, mostly it's to do a number of setups that sometimes require most of my
assets. The F1 has been doing a number of live gigs a year and is still in
perfect working order, and sounds as good as I could want. Not as good as
the Crest. Don't get me wrong. It's not the best in the world, but for
something less than $400 with 8 good mic pres it's done the job. Just as I
can use the Crest for a sidecar to my Soundtracs, I could effectively use my
Soundcraft as a sidecar to the Crest and not worry. I can trust it because
it's proven in about 400 shows that it can do the job. Not a big job, mind
you, but it never breaks. What more could one want?

As far as Mackies not failing, a lot of us have worked with ones that didn't
fail, but often you'll find that they do fail. I work with on gentleman
that uses a 1604 VLZ and makes it sing. I hire him because he can do that,
not because he has the Mackie.

And to show you that I don't have a bias against Mackie, I have a pair of
SR1530s in my live room for playback and they go out with me when the need
calls. I also have several pairs of JBLs, so it's just something that I
notice.

I need not forgive you at all. Respect for my words only get earned, but
respect for those of us that actually do the job all the time should be paid
heed to. George is one of those. I'm simply an asshole with some
equipment.

--


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.




"Josh Snider" > wrote in message
...
> in article , Roger W. Norman at
> wrote on 9/10/03 15.33:
>
> > Do I have to answer your post now (sorry, been busy)? <g>
> >
> > It was, in fact, the expressed experience of one owned product and one
> > friend's product that made me point out that George, in fact, has
numerous
> > setups, does touring systems, and generally lives with the stuff every
day.
>
> I misread the OP's first few posts, and was a bit confused as to his
> experience. I don¹t' question or attack anyone's experience without first
> hand (or reasonably trustworthy second hand) knowledge of it. Granted
he'd
> only ever worked on the one behringer... My bad there.
>
> >I also live with a dinky little
> > F1 Spirit, and I'd put it up against the best of Mackie and Behringer
> > products on a day in/day out basis for the same types of jobs without
fear.
>
> Now at the risk of starting another war of words, I'd NEVER take any of
the
> low end spirit compact mixers anywhere. Unless the newest versions are
any
> different, the thin guage chassis, flimsy plastic patchbays, snap in power
> connectors, and knobs that feel like I'm going to break them when I move
> them, have turned me off spirit forever regardless of how they sound!
> (Though I must admit I like the EQ, and the meters)
>
>
> > The concept was to apply the right product to the right job, and if
George
> > says Behringers are as good as Mackies for 1/3 the price, then A) I'm
amazed
> > that George actually had either Mackies or Behringers, and B) that his
> > assessment should not be dismissed out of hand.
>
> Agreed. Fully and completely. I don¹t doubt for a second that he's had
all
> those Mackie's fail on him. I just wanted to state my experience with
> Mackie (which has so far all been positive) as a counterpoint. The OP
> however, didn't seem to be as diplomatic. (Forgive me as well if I ever
> came off that way)
>
> > He isn't a recording studio guy, so we are actually
> > lucky to have him participate. I'd like to keep him around a little
longer,
> > so I simply state things as I see them.
>
> I wasn't a studio guy when I first came here either. I started off on the
> road and in the theatre. I always get nostalgic for my old live sound
days.
> I still jump at the opportunity when a chance for a live gig comes up.
>
> Do forgive me if I came off as antagonistic or disrespectful. I meant
none
> at the least.
>
> J
>
>
> --
> josh.snider
> cave.productions
> 416.524.6927
>
>
>

[news.verizon.net]

Can someone please send me some finished CDs that were mixed on any of the
following Mixers: Behringer, Mackie Analog - D8b, SSL, Ghost, Crest, Amek,
Yahama, Tascam, Samson etc.? I would like to play a game of figuring-out
which exact mixer mixed which exact CD...

Thanks very much!

"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> Do a google search on behringer and see for yourself all the problems they
> have.
>
>
> Jerry > wrote in message
> news:0kR6b.388224$uu5.72433@sccrnsc04...
> > Does anyone have any feedback to share regarding Behringer mixers?
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
>
>

[Scott Dorsey]

news.verizon.net > wrote:
>Can someone please send me some finished CDs that were mixed on any of the
>following Mixers: Behringer, Mackie Analog - D8b, SSL, Ghost, Crest, Amek,
>Yahama, Tascam, Samson etc.? I would like to play a game of figuring-out
>which exact mixer mixed which exact CD...

Get the RAP CD set. It is LOTS of fun to listen to the music, then go back
to the liner notes and see what it was recorded with. Sometimes it really
surprises you... sometimes it doesn't.

Get the LP also. I need to get them out of my living room. They sound good
and have a great sampling of different music.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Scott Dorsey > wrote:

> Get the LP also. I need to get them out of my living room. They sound good
> and have a great sampling of different music.

But what's their sampling ratio?

--
ha

[Josh Snider]

in article , news.verizon.net at
wrote on 9/10/03 22.28:

> Can someone please send me some finished CDs that were mixed on any of the
> following Mixers: Behringer, Mackie Analog - D8b, SSL, Ghost, Crest, Amek,
> Yahama, Tascam, Samson etc.? I would like to play a game of figuring-out
> which exact mixer mixed which exact CD...
>
> Thanks very much!


Of course the other side to my post is that engineers will often make
equipment choices that are quite shocking, and turn out remarkable work on
them.. Interesting experiment... Let me know what you discover...

J

--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
LeBaron & Alrich > wrote:
>Scott Dorsey > wrote:
>
>> Get the LP also. I need to get them out of my living room. They sound good
>> and have a great sampling of different music.
>
>But what's their sampling ratio?

About 60/30/10 rock/jazz/classical.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hev]

I did some stuff on a Behringer mixer... turned out ok (especially on a $0
budget).

check it out:

http://www.michaelspringer.com/Ono_Soul/

-hev

[George Gleason]

"Gary Morrison" > wrote in message
...
> > Don't know how original the design can be because downward expanders &
program
> > dependent lowpass filters have been implemented as noise reduction units
by
> > many manufactures for at least 30 years.
>
> Sure, these underlying concepts have been around for a while. My point
though is
> that many Behringer mixers have been near-identical knock-offs,
> feature-for-feature of corresponding Mackie products, sometimes down to
the panel
> layouts being nearly identical. I don't know of any products by Mackie
(or
> whomever) that are virtually identical with this Behringer product.
>

assuming you would eat in a fast food joint would you shun Burger King
beacuse thier burgers resemble McDonalds
what about Tires last I check they were all some sort of rubber and round
seems to be alot of copying going on there

having sifted through thousands of posts on this subject the closest that
has ever been shown of a "copy" was the aphex unit more than a decade ago
\
time to let go of the Behringer just steals and copies mentality cause It
just isn't true
been proven not true in the courts

george


>

[Scott Dorsey]

George Gleason > wrote:
>
>having sifted through thousands of posts on this subject the closest that
>has ever been shown of a "copy" was the aphex unit more than a decade ago

Right. Uli did this a decade ago. This shows him to be somewhat below
the moral standards I would expect. He hasn't really done any blatant
copying since then, but he's still in charge and he's still the same person.

If you forgive him, that's fine. Buy his products. But a lot of people
have not forgiven him.

>time to let go of the Behringer just steals and copies mentality cause It
>just isn't true
>been proven not true in the courts

They have expanded beyond needing to do that, but the same fellow who did
that is still in charge.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[George Gleason]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> George Gleason > wrote:
> >
> >having sifted through thousands of posts on this subject the closest that
> >has ever been shown of a "copy" was the aphex unit more than a decade ago
>
> Right. Uli did this a decade ago. This shows him to be somewhat below
> the moral standards I would expect. He hasn't really done any blatant
> copying since then, but he's still in charge and he's still the same
person.
>
> If you forgive him, that's fine. Buy his products. But a lot of people
> have not forgiven him.
>
> >time to let go of the Behringer just steals and copies mentality cause It
> >just isn't true
> >been proven not true in the courts
>
> They have expanded beyond needing to do that, but the same fellow who did
> that is still in charge.
> --scott
>

I hope you live a life so perfect as to never need forgivness


George.

[George Perfect]

In this place, George Gleason was recorded as saying ...
>
> "Roger W. Norman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Different George. George Gleason made the statement, George gave you a
> > tally of broken to not broken. Two different people.
> >
> > --
> >
> >Rodger I think they were both me
> I post from two diffrent puters
> My PC I am George Gleason on my mac I have 3 news readers and not sure who
> I am on each of them
> peace
> george
>
>
>

Hey George - At least none of you are me!

--
George >{ò¿ó}<

Newcastle, England
(please remove leading 'x' from email address to reply, thanks)

Problems worthy of attack
Prove their worth, by hitting back - Piet Hein

[Phildo]

"Steven Sena" > wrote in message
...
> yeah...whatever...
>
Your ignorance is your loss.

Phildo

[Phildo]

"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

[Phildo]

"George Gleason" > wrote in message
...
> > Last I checked my Mackie desk said "Made in the USA", and having visited
> the
> > Mackie plant in Woodinville, it seems unlikely they'd pay millions to
> expand
> > that site if they could source out cheaper to China... In fact I think
> one
> > of mackie's biggest selling points was that they were all American made.
> >
> unless you found NOS (new old stock) mackie is being made in china
> very likely on the same machines and by the same people making the
behringer

Not true George. Mackie are using an ex-Behringer OEM manufacturer.
Behringer now have their own plant which only makes Behringer gear. They
gave up using OEM because of the poor quality of product.

I am amazed by the level of ignorance and how far behind the times most of
the people on here are. Why is it that the live-sound people are so much
more up to date?

Phildo

[Phildo]

"Troy" > wrote in message
. ca...
> "equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"
>
> This is NOT true at all.They are garbage.Mackie is WAY better.
>
Do you always speak out of your arse like this or does your mouth ever get a
look-in?

Phildo

[Phildo]

"Roger W. Norman" > wrote in message
...
> Cool. It's always nice to have an operating piece of equipment. And the
> good thing about a Mackie is that, if it does go down, you can probably
get
> it repaired a little easier in the states than one could a Behringer.

Have you ever tried getting a mackie repaired? Good luck.

Phildo

[Chip Borton]

> Have you ever tried getting a mackie repaired? Good luck.
> Phildo

Hmm, I accidentally dropped my Mackie 16 channel off the back of the
truck at a show and it went bouncing down the street and got fairly mangled.
I called Mackie and told them I dropped it, they said send it in anyways.
Not too long later I got it back completely rebuilt with new PCB and knobs.
No charge. ( I even told them it was out of warranty)

I lost the manual to my 32 channel 8 buss and called to see if I could BUY
another manual from them. Four days later a new manual showed up at my
door.
Once again , no charge.

[Phildo]

"Chip Borton" > wrote in message
...
> > Have you ever tried getting a mackie repaired? Good luck.
> > Phildo
>
> Hmm, I accidentally dropped my Mackie 16 channel off the back of the
> truck at a show and it went bouncing down the street and got fairly
mangled.
> I called Mackie and told them I dropped it, they said send it in anyways.
> Not too long later I got it back completely rebuilt with new PCB and
knobs.
> No charge. ( I even told them it was out of warranty)
>
> I lost the manual to my 32 channel 8 buss and called to see if I could BUY
> another manual from them. Four days later a new manual showed up at my
> door.
> Once again , no charge.
>
Seems you were lucky. I've had similar good service from quite a few
companies. There have been some real horror stories about getting mackies
repaired over on alt.audio.pro.live-sound. Only time I ever had to get one
repaired the faders were no longer available, even though the board had been
bought new just a few months before.

Phildo

[Paul van der Heu]

"Phildo" > wrote :

> I am amazed by the level of ignorance and how far behind the times
> most of the people on here are. Why is it that the live-sound people
> are so much more up to date?

Because we do not get a second chance nor can we wait a day for the new
mixer to come in.. ;)

--
Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows,
how are you gonna guarantee my safety..
--John Crichton - Farscape pilot

[Troy]

You're a ****ing morron.Go play with behringer looser.


Phildo > wrote in message
...
>
> "Troy" > wrote in message
> . ca...
> > "equal to the best mackie ever made but at 1/3 the cost"
> >
> > This is NOT true at all.They are garbage.Mackie is WAY better.
> >
> Do you always speak out of your arse like this or does your mouth ever get
a
> look-in?
>
> Phildo
>
>

[Troy]

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
>
>

[Phildo]

"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]

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
>
>

[Troy]

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
>
>

[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

[Jim Brady]

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 >...
> 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
> >
> >

[George]

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

[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

[Phildo]

"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

[Mike Rivers]

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 - )

[Phildo]

"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

[Sugarite]

"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.

[Phildo]

"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

[Troy]

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
>
>

[Mike Rivers]

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 - )

[George Gleason]

>
> 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

[Mike Rivers]

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 - )

[[email protected]]

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!

[ChuxGarage]

>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

[Phildo]

"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]

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 - )

[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 - )

[George Gleason]

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

[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

[Roger W. Norman]

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

[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

[Roger W. Norman]

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
>
>

[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

[David Morley]

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.

[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 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 - )