Behringer vs. Peavey mixers

[Jerry]

Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A and/or
the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.

Jerry

[George Gleason]

"Jerry" > wrote in message
news:M1%6b.290487$Oz4.79700@rwcrnsc54...
> Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A and/or
> the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
> prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
>
> Jerry
>
for what application?
george

[Jerry]

Live audio and studio with recording.

"George Gleason" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jerry" > wrote in message
> news:M1%6b.290487$Oz4.79700@rwcrnsc54...
> > Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A
and/or
> > the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
> > prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> for what application?
> george
>
>

[George Gleason]

"Jerry" > wrote in message
news:Bc%6b.290533$Oz4.79701@rwcrnsc54...
> Live audio and studio with recording.
>
IMO these are such diffrent needs that one should have seperate desks for
each use
G

[Troy]

I woulden't buy either for your applications.But if I had to choose I would
probably buy the Peavey ,just because of reliablity.I have used peavey
equipment for live sound years ago......it's was damn heavy but very
reliable.We never had any problems.


Jerry > wrote in message
news:M1%6b.290487$Oz4.79700@rwcrnsc54...
> Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A and/or
> the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
> prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
>
> Jerry
>
>

[area242]

"Jerry" > wrote in message
news:Bc%6b.290533$Oz4.79701@rwcrnsc54...
> Live audio and studio with recording.

Man, I would hate to see you use either one for recording. You could use
the Peavey for years for live stuff though. But, it's a noisy little
guy...and wouldn't be what you need for recording. You should try to find a
nice, used litte Mackie. You could use those for live sound...and they're
clean enough to do some recording as well.

Good luck

[Troy]

I agree....try and find a used Mackie 1604 VLZ


area242 > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "Jerry" > wrote in message
> news:Bc%6b.290533$Oz4.79701@rwcrnsc54...
> > Live audio and studio with recording.
>
> Man, I would hate to see you use either one for recording. You could use
> the Peavey for years for live stuff though. But, it's a noisy little
> guy...and wouldn't be what you need for recording. You should try to find
a
> nice, used litte Mackie. You could use those for live sound...and they're
> clean enough to do some recording as well.
>
> Good luck
>
>

[spl dan]

Do not use any of those mixers!! For live and recording purposes my
money is on the Allen & Heath GL Series mixers. These consoles are
the cleanest console i have ever heard. The added feture to these
consoles is that they have direct outs on every channel. Bang for
your buck this would be my choice.

On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 12:58:20 GMT, "Jerry" >
wrote:

>Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A and/or
>the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
>prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
>
>Jerry
>

[tojo]

Peavey!? Their main market is church sound reinforcement or similar
application. We have a Peavey for the past 20 years, and it's funny
how this was designed. Anyway, look for other stuff before you get a
Peavey, or unless you are buying it for a church or religious setup,
then see if you can get a special discount.

On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:21:51 GMT, "Troy" >
wrote:

>I woulden't buy either for your applications.But if I had to choose I would
>probably buy the Peavey ,just because of reliablity.I have used peavey
>equipment for live sound years ago......it's was damn heavy but very
>reliable.We never had any problems.
>
>
>Jerry > wrote in message
>news:M1%6b.290487$Oz4.79700@rwcrnsc54...
>> Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A and/or
>> the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
>> prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>

[Roger W. Norman]

Don't buy for one application and expect it to do the other application
well, IMHE. I've got two live mixers and one studio console. The Crest
works fine in live work and can pass for a sidecar to my Soundtracs if
needed, but the Crest is not a recording console. It's not built that way.
You can get some damned fine recordings out of it, but you're not going to
get to monitor the playback without some patch panel changes, which is a no
no if you're working with a group in a studio that wants to continue with
their work rather than wait for you to re-patch everything.

So look at the type of work you do most and buy according to THAT
requirement. Hopefully it will earn you the money to buy that console for
the studio.

--


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.




"Jerry" > wrote in message
news:Bc%6b.290533$Oz4.79701@rwcrnsc54...
> Live audio and studio with recording.
>
> "George Gleason" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Jerry" > wrote in message
> > news:M1%6b.290487$Oz4.79700@rwcrnsc54...
> > > Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A
> and/or
> > > the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would
you
> > > prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > >
> > for what application?
> > george
> >
> >
>
>

[Roger W. Norman]

Well, try isn't the right word. There's almost always 5 to 10 on ebay any
given day.

--


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 agree....try and find a used Mackie 1604 VLZ
>
>
> area242 > wrote in message
> .. .
> >
> > "Jerry" > wrote in message
> > news:Bc%6b.290533$Oz4.79701@rwcrnsc54...
> > > Live audio and studio with recording.
> >
> > Man, I would hate to see you use either one for recording. You could
use
> > the Peavey for years for live stuff though. But, it's a noisy little
> > guy...and wouldn't be what you need for recording. You should try to
find
> a
> > nice, used litte Mackie. You could use those for live sound...and
they're
> > clean enough to do some recording as well.
> >
> > Good luck
> >
> >
>
>

[tojo]

no, I am not dissing out the churches, in fact, I know a lot of church
are using first rate stuff with experienced people handling the gig.
what I am saying is that Peavey are so good, in fact, they have to
rely on the religious marketing to keep survive.

On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 15:13:25 GMT, "Michael Drainer"
> wrote:

>Hey now dont diss the churches. Not all of us drop to the Peavy standard.
>We are using a Soundcraft Series 2 with the DBX DriveRack 260 and Community
>SLS 960s with SBS 45s on the floor. Needless to say, our house system beats
>the snot out of every club in the area. Extremly clean!
>
>
>
>"tojo" > wrote in message
...
>> Peavey!? Their main market is church sound reinforcement or similar
>> application. We have a Peavey for the past 20 years, and it's funny
>> how this was designed. Anyway, look for other stuff before you get a
>> Peavey, or unless you are buying it for a church or religious setup,
>> then see if you can get a special discount.
>>
>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:21:51 GMT, "Troy" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I woulden't buy either for your applications.But if I had to choose I
>would
>> >probably buy the Peavey ,just because of reliablity.I have used peavey
>> >equipment for live sound years ago......it's was damn heavy but very
>> >reliable.We never had any problems.
>> >
>> >
>> >Jerry > wrote in message
>> >news:M1%6b.290487$Oz4.79700@rwcrnsc54...
>> >> Does anyone have any experience with the Behringer Eurorack MX2642A
>and/or
>> >> the Peavey Unity 2002-12RQ mixers? Basically which of the two would you
>> >> prefer and why? Any input greatly appreciated.
>> >>
>> >> Jerry
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

[Scott Dorsey]

tojo > wrote:
>no, I am not dissing out the churches, in fact, I know a lot of church
>are using first rate stuff with experienced people handling the gig.
>what I am saying is that Peavey are so good, in fact, they have to
>rely on the religious marketing to keep survive.

Peavey really doesn't... they do sell into that market, but they sell mostly
into the MI market. They aren't like TOA, that pretty much only markets to
churches, or Crown, which started out marketing only to churches.

Peavey is a funny company. They make some really top-notch gear and they
make some total crap, and they try to sell it all the same way through the
same channels.
--scott

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

[Pooh Bear]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> tojo > wrote:
> >no, I am not dissing out the churches, in fact, I know a lot of church
> >are using first rate stuff with experienced people handling the gig.
> >what I am saying is that Peavey are so good, in fact, they have to
> >rely on the religious marketing to keep survive.
>
> Peavey really doesn't... they do sell into that market, but they sell mostly
> into the MI market. They aren't like TOA, that pretty much only markets to
> churches, or Crown, which started out marketing only to churches.
>
> Peavey is a funny company. They make some really top-notch gear and they
> make some total crap, and they try to sell it all the same way through the
> same channels.

Yeah, I'd agree Peavey is indeed a funny company.

MI roots with aspirations ? might be a good description.

Just been to PLASA and kinda forgot that Crest is now in their domain. Now that
is high end stuff !

In comparison, Peavey's own gear is more pedestrian - yet they have nevertheless
done some interesting work on horn flares for example.

Never can work them out.

Yours, puzzled,


Graham

[Altasrecrd]

(Scott Dorsey)

>Don't forget the old AMR consoles, which were great pieces of gear in their
>day and would probably have sold a lot better if they didn't have that Peavey
>label on the top.

I have a 32x16 for sale in Chicago. $1000, pick-up only.

































"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the
pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
- Hermann Goering

[xy]

i sometimes cross paths with these little budget mixers.

the behringers are noisey, despite their invisible silent words they
congratulate themselves with.

mackie has a budget line out to compete with the behringer stuff on
price. it's not nearly as good as the "real mackie" stuff.

the "real mackie" stuff...the stuff that carries the vlz badge of
honor, blah blah blah. they are actually legitimately quiet enough to
be called "professional". the preamps are useable-enough, especially
in an "i'm not trying to win a grammy, i just need to get something
done" situation. plus everybody on the planet is familiar with these
things (except my mailman, he seems kind of stoned out and not really
with it).

i would guess that the peavey stuff is behringer quality or even
below. that will just frustrate you. if you can pony up the extra
dough, go for the real mackie. to save money, you could get the 8 or
10 channel mackie for about $299 or $399 (i forget). and then buy a
little berhinger mixer for about $69. so when you need a few extra
channels, just put the unimportant stuff into the behringer and then
feed the berhinger into the mackie. and then bury that garbage deep
down in the mix. but at least you can tell the bongo player that all
six of his auxilliary percussion pieces are actually miked and going
through the mixing system.

"in fact, your finger cymbals and plastic blocks are so important,
that i've dedicated an *entire mixer* just to your instruments..."

[Phildo]

"xy" > wrote in message
om...
> i sometimes cross paths with these little budget mixers.
>
> the behringers are noisey, despite their invisible silent words they
> congratulate themselves with.
>
> mackie has a budget line out to compete with the behringer stuff on
> price. it's not nearly as good as the "real mackie" stuff.
>
> the "real mackie" stuff...the stuff that carries the vlz badge of
> honor, blah blah blah. they are actually legitimately quiet enough to
> be called "professional". the preamps are useable-enough, especially
> in an "i'm not trying to win a grammy, i just need to get something
> done" situation. plus everybody on the planet is familiar with these
> things (except my mailman, he seems kind of stoned out and not really
> with it).
>
> i would guess that the peavey stuff is behringer quality or even
> below. that will just frustrate you. if you can pony up the extra
> dough, go for the real mackie. to save money, you could get the 8 or
> 10 channel mackie for about $299 or $399 (i forget). and then buy a
> little berhinger mixer for about $69. so when you need a few extra
> channels, just put the unimportant stuff into the behringer and then
> feed the berhinger into the mackie. and then bury that garbage deep
> down in the mix. but at least you can tell the bongo player that all
> six of his auxilliary percussion pieces are actually miked and going
> through the mixing system.
>
Hmmmmmm, all I can say is BULL****.

Try measuring the noise specs of the current Behringer mixers against their
mackie equivalents. When you have you will see for yourself that you are
completely wrong. Behringer exceeded mackie in terms of sound and build
quality quite a while ago. I suggest you get yourself more up to date.

Phildo