Mackie 1402 VLZ Headroom Issue

[mcp6453[_2_]]

It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix bus.
(When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips internally at
about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?

The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you can
easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to purchase another Mackie, but
if they have corrected the problem, I'm not totally opposed to considering them,
unlike M-Audio.

If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen & Heath or a Soundcraft.
Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd love
to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.

[ChrisCoaster]

On Nov 6, 11:51*am, mcp6453 > wrote:
> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix bus.
> (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips internally at
> about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?
>
> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you can
> easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
> forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to purchase another Mackie, but
> if they have corrected the problem, I'm not totally opposed to considering them,
> unlike M-Audio.
>
> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen & Heath or a Soundcraft.
> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd love
> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.
______________________
In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do with
perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL solo your
gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less trim/don't go
as high on the LED meters on the board.

-CC

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 11/6/2010 3:43 PM, ChrisCoaster wrote:
> On Nov 6, 11:51 am, mcp6453 > wrote:
>> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
>> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix bus.
>> (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips internally at
>> about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?
>>
>> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you can
>> easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
>> forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to purchase another Mackie, but
>> if they have corrected the problem, I'm not totally opposed to considering them,
>> unlike M-Audio.
>>
>> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen & Heath or a Soundcraft.
>> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd love
>> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.
> ______________________
> In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
> the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
> progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
> gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do with
> perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL solo your
> gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less trim/don't go
> as high on the LED meters on the board.

Yeah, I know how to solve the problem. What I would prefer is a properly
designed piece of equipment. I built consoles back in the seventies, and none of
them had any headroom problems. They just looked like crap.

[[email protected]]

On 2010-11-06 said:
>> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the
>fire? I' d love
>> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.
>______________________
>In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
>the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
>progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
>gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do
>with perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL
>solo your gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less
>trim/don't go as high on the LED meters on the board.
wOuld agree, just when you pfl remember that yellow is red.
THat's how I used to deal with a 1202vlz if I was doing
anything with the mix buses. Just set levels conservatively
and you're good.





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Bill Graham]

> wrote in message
...
>
> On 2010-11-06 said:
> >> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the
> >fire? I' d love
> >> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.
> >______________________
> >In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
> >the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
> >progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
> >gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do
> >with perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL
> >solo your gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less
> >trim/don't go as high on the LED meters on the board.
> wOuld agree, just when you pfl remember that yellow is red.
> THat's how I used to deal with a 1202vlz if I was doing
> anything with the mix buses. Just set levels conservatively
> and you're good.
>
>
>
Pots that vary the gain throughout their range, are said to have an, "audio
taper". It is very handy for volume controls, because it allows finer
adjustment at lower volumes at the expense of courser gain at the very high
volumes. (Where you don't need fine control anyway)

[Sean Conolly]

"mcp6453" > wrote in message
...
> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix
> bus.
> (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips
> internally at
> about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?
>
> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you
> can
> easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
> forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to purchase another
> Mackie, but
> if they have corrected the problem, I'm not totally opposed to considering
> them,
> unlike M-Audio.
>
> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen & Heath or a
> Soundcraft.
> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd
> love
> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.

Hmm, I run my drums through an old 1202 VLZ with all channels panned hard to
one side, and I never run into headroom problems. On any Yamaha MG series,
yes, but not on the Mackies. I don't think you're going to find much
difference with an A&H or Soundcraft.

Remember that LED meters aren't that good at showing transient peaks, and
keep your trims at a moderate level. You may may be pushing your channels
harder than you realize.

Sean

[Ian Bell[_2_]]

ChrisCoaster wrote:
> On Nov 6, 11:51 am, > wrote:
>> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
>> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix bus.
>> (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips internally at
>> about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?
>>
>> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you can
>> easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
>> forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to purchase another Mackie, but
>> if they have corrected the problem, I'm not totally opposed to considering them,
>> unlike M-Audio.
>>
>> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen& Heath or a Soundcraft.
>> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd love
>> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.
> ______________________
> In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
> the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
> progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
> gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do with
> perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL solo your
> gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less trim/don't go
> as high on the LED meters on the board.
>
> -CC


Duh, ALL pan pots do that.

Cheers

Ian

[Mike Rivers]

On 11/6/2010 11:51 AM, mcp6453 wrote:
> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem.

No, YOU have a headroom problem. Learn to manage it.

> Based on
> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix bus.
> (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips internally at
> about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?

Your statement of the problem doesn't make any sense, but I understand
your concern. When all the channels are running near their peak level
simultaneously, they sum to a voltage higher than the mix bus can
handle. However, if you follow the Level Setting Procedure and run the
channels so that their peaks are around 0 (mid scale) on the meter, you
won't overdrive the bus. The reason for the problem is that, because the
mix level is lower, people tend to think that's a bad thing and push up
the cahnnels rather than pushing up the master. There's plenty of
headroom in a 1402 VLZ Pro as long as you set it up correctly.

The VLZ3 has somewhat mitigated this operator problem by running a lower
internal level in the console. They were able to do this without
compromising the noise output because they can get quieter ICs now than
when the original VLZ was designed.

> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you can
> easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
> forgiving.

And what might that be? And will you test it before you make your
prucasase, or just listen to Net stories?

> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen& Heath or a Soundcraft.
> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd love
> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.

I don't know what Soundcraft is doing these days, but I had an A&H
ZED=R16 in for a review and I found no problems like that. But then I
didn't try to overdrive it because I knew that I could, and since I
didn't have any problems in normal usage, I didn't see any reason to
complain. If you want a mixer that will let you run all the channels at
full output, all up fully in the mix, and it wtill won't clip, get a
PreSonus SudioLive. Because it's digital and there are plenty of bits
inside to handle the large sum, all you need to do is drop the master
fader to get the output of the final D/A converter down to what the
analog output stage can handle and you have a clean output.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Mike Rivers]

On 11/6/2010 5:31 PM, mcp6453 wrote:

> Yeah, I know how to solve the problem. What I would prefer is a properly
> designed piece of equipment. I built consoles back in the seventies, and none of
> them had any headroom problems. They just looked like crap.

How much are you willing to spend?

Back in the 70s, operating levels were lower and consoles were smaller.
Your grandfather's Ampex started distorting noticeably when it was hit
with an input level of about +14 dBu. That's 10 dB less than you can
squeeze out of a Mackie. To confound the problem, because the next LED
down from the CLIP light is a full 10 dB lower, any time the meter is
reading above +10 or so, you really don't know how close the mix bus is
to clipping. .

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 21:17:54 -0500, wrote
(in article >):

> when you pfl remember that yellow is red

Excellent!

Regards,

Ty Ford

--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Sean Conolly]

"Ian Bell" > wrote in message
...
>> In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
>> the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
>> progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
>> gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do with
>> perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL solo your
>> gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less trim/don't go
>> as high on the LED meters on the board.
>>
>> -CC
>
>
> Duh, ALL pan pots do that.

Actually, like any pot, a pan pot is a passive element and can only reduce
the signal. They are designed so that when the pan is centered, each signal
is attenuated by 3 db so the sum of the two (i.e. summed to mono) is the
same volume as when the pot is panned hard in either direction.

Yes, they can add another gain stage downstream from the pot to give a net
gain of +3 db, but it doesn't change the nature of how the pot itself works.

Just nit-picking, no offense intended.

Sean

[[email protected]]

On 2010-11-07 said:
>> when you pfl remember that yellow is red
>Excellent!
Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. LIstened to somebody
whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.

Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
system anymore?


Regards,




Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Ian Bell[_2_]]

Sean Conolly wrote:
> "Ian > wrote in message
> ...
>>> In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
>>> the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
>>> progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
>>> gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do with
>>> perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL solo your
>>> gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less trim/don't go
>>> as high on the LED meters on the board.
>>>
>>> -CC
>>
>>
>> Duh, ALL pan pots do that.
>
> Actually, like any pot, a pan pot is a passive element and can only reduce
> the signal. They are designed so that when the pan is centered, each signal
> is attenuated by 3 db so the sum of the two (i.e. summed to mono) is the
> same volume as when the pot is panned hard in either direction.
>
> Yes, they can add another gain stage downstream from the pot to give a net
> gain of +3 db, but it doesn't change the nature of how the pot itself works.
>
> Just nit-picking, no offense intended.
>
> Sean
>
>

No problem. None taken. That is indeed how they work. Interestingly, two 100%
correlated signal when added together will be 6dB louder not 3dB and for this
reason some pan pots are 4 to 4.5dB down at the centre point.

Just nit-picking, no offense intended ;-)

Cheers

Ian

[RD Jones]

On Nov 7, 10:51*am, wrote:
> On 2010-11-07 said:
> * *>> when you pfl remember that yellow is red
> * *>Excellent!
> Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. *LIstened to somebody
> whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
> that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
> they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.
>
> Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
> system anymore?
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard webb,
>
> replace anything before at with elspider
> ON site audio in the southland: seewww.gatasound.com

The FOH guy was not gainstaging for the recorder.

He probably could have, but it's not really his signal path once it
leaves the back of the desk.
If the recorder has no input attenuation,(like the HD24) the only
other options are asking
FOH nicely to back off a bit, which he may not be inclined to do,
whether or not he wants
to be nice about it, or inline passive attenuators.

rd

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 11/7/2010 9:23 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 11/6/2010 11:51 AM, mcp6453 wrote:
>> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem.
>
> No, YOU have a headroom problem. Learn to manage it.
>
>> Based on
>> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix bus.
>> (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips internally at
>> about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer models?
>
> Your statement of the problem doesn't make any sense, but I understand your
> concern. When all the channels are running near their peak level simultaneously,
> they sum to a voltage higher than the mix bus can handle. However, if you follow
> the Level Setting Procedure and run the channels so that their peaks are around
> 0 (mid scale) on the meter, you won't overdrive the bus. The reason for the
> problem is that, because the mix level is lower, people tend to think that's a
> bad thing and push up the cahnnels rather than pushing up the master. There's
> plenty of headroom in a 1402 VLZ Pro as long as you set it up correctly.
>
> The VLZ3 has somewhat mitigated this operator problem by running a lower
> internal level in the console. They were able to do this without compromising
> the noise output because they can get quieter ICs now than when the original VLZ
> was designed.
>
>> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you can
>> easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little more
>> forgiving.
>
> And what might that be? And will you test it before you make your prucasase, or
> just listen to Net stories?
>
>> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen& Heath or a Soundcraft.
>> Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? I'd love
>> to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite minimal.
>
> I don't know what Soundcraft is doing these days, but I had an A&H ZED=R16 in
> for a review and I found no problems like that. But then I didn't try to
> overdrive it because I knew that I could, and since I didn't have any problems
> in normal usage, I didn't see any reason to complain. If you want a mixer that
> will let you run all the channels at full output, all up fully in the mix, and
> it wtill won't clip, get a PreSonus SudioLive. Because it's digital and there
> are plenty of bits inside to handle the large sum, all you need to do is drop
> the master fader to get the output of the final D/A converter down to what the
> analog output stage can handle and you have a clean output.

Mike, I usually respect your opinion and even enjoy reading your non-RAP
materials when I see them. When I read posts like this one, my opinion changes.
I'm just asking for help, not personal criticism ("YOU have a headroom problem.
Learn to manage it.") You've replied to me in this manner several times before.
Other times, you've been helpful. Maybe your life would be better if you would
just avoid my threads. If anyone has reason to be annoyed by my questions, it's
Scott Dorsey, and he has never once responded in a condescending fashion.

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

RD Jones writes:

>> Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. LIstened to somebody
>> whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
>> that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
>> they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.
>> Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
>> system anymore?

> The FOH guy was not gainstaging for the recorder.
> He probably could have, but it's not really his signal path once it
> leaves the back of the desk.
> If the recorder has no input attenuation,(like the HD24) the only
> other options are asking
> FOH nicely to back off a bit, which he may not be inclined to do,
> whether or not he wants
> to be nice about it, or inline passive attenuators.

RIght, this was the hd24xr, which is +4 iirc. Which means,
at least in my way of thinking, if you're clipping a +4
input
then you're probably too hot for stages downstream as well.
But then, I'm a little conservative with channel trims
anyway, preferring to do the makeup gain downstream. ONce
the show's jumping if I feel I've got a little more room I
might creep up with the trims a bit, but until I know what's happening I'm inclined to be a bit conservative there.

Regards,
Richard
.... Remote audio in the southland: See www.gatasound.com
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet<->Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 19:15:18 -0500, mcp6453 wrote
(in article >):

("YOU have a
> headroom problem. Learn to manage it.") You've replied to me in this manner
> several times before. Other times, you've been helpful. Maybe your life would

> be better if you would just avoid my threads. If anyone has reason to be
> annoyed by my questions, it's Scott Dorsey, and he has never once responded
> in a condescending fashion.

Hey mcp6453,

We're real people with real names. You lose points for hiding behind a bunch
of numbers and letters.

You came to a public forum and asked a question. If you post in public, stop
whining. That's what you get.

I've known Mike for enough years to make a solid guess that you're making
more out of this than he did. I don't read it as condescending. I read it as
him letting you know where the problem is.

It's not like you were dating and he actually told you, "Yes, your ass looks
big in that dress." On second thought, maybe it is like that. Get over it.

Gain staging is important. Mackie got real creative when they first came out,
but it's pretty much in the manual.

Sincerely, and with a smile. :)


Ty Ford




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Mike Rivers]

On 11/7/2010 7:15 PM, mcp6453 wrote:

> Mike, I usually respect your opinion and even enjoy reading your non-RAP
> materials when I see them. When I read posts like this one, my opinion changes.
> I'm just asking for help, not personal criticism ("YOU have a headroom problem.

The "you" is rhetorical. The person who told you that the mixer has a
headroom problem is the one who has the problem. Since you don't have
the mixer, then you don't really have a problem. But if you get a VLZ
and are aware of how to use it properly, then you won't have a problem.

> Learn to manage it.") You've replied to me in this manner several times before.
> Other times, you've been helpful.

And you don't think that it's helpful to point out that the problem is
in the use, not in the mixer? If you would like to buy a mixer that you
can't abuse in this manner, I can recommend one. In fact, I think I did.

> Maybe your life would be better if you would just avoid my threads.

My life is just fine. If I hurt your feelings, perhaps you should just
ignore my answers and not criticize me. I tried to explain to you what
the issue was about, but I guess all you saw was that I was attacking
you personally. That's another problem you have, and it's a real problem. .


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Mike Rivers]

On 11/7/2010 9:25 AM, ChrisCoaster wrote:

>>> In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
>>> the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
>>> progressively as you pan further away from center detent.

> Then why did Mackie make such a point of it in their print
> literature?

They're bragging that their pan pots are designed so that when multiple
sources are panned to the center, the level in the center doesn't build
up abnormally. "Constant power" panning, as it's called, is quite
common. Mackie's manuals in that period tended to be tutorial as well as
telling you how to operate the mixer, and this is just an explanation of
something that you might observe and wonder about.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Mr Soul]

I understood what Mike was saying about headroom - it wasn't meant as
a personal attack. I think the fact that the topic was called
"headroom" lead to the flaired emotions.

I've used 1402 VLZ for both live applications and studio recording for
quite some time, and I have nothing but great things to say about the
mixer. I used this mixer for my entire rock 'n' roll band and it
sounded as good (or better) than bands with these monterous mixing
boards and stacks of amps & processors.

I've never had a "headroom" issue with it if you follow what the
manual says about using the Gain. Having said that, I just got a VLZ3
and can't wait to use it in the studio.

Mike C

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 11/8/2010 10:34 AM, Mr Soul wrote:
> I understood what Mike was saying about headroom - it wasn't meant as
> a personal attack. I think the fact that the topic was called
> "headroom" lead to the flaired emotions.
>
> I've used 1402 VLZ for both live applications and studio recording for
> quite some time, and I have nothing but great things to say about the
> mixer. I used this mixer for my entire rock 'n' roll band and it
> sounded as good (or better) than bands with these monterous mixing
> boards and stacks of amps & processors.
>
> I've never had a "headroom" issue with it if you follow what the
> manual says about using the Gain. Having said that, I just got a VLZ3
> and can't wait to use it in the studio.

I seriously doubt that there are any flared emotions on Usenet.

Here is an article I read that seems to admit the problem (emphasis added). The
only time I've experienced the problem is when hard panning a channel.

"The other significant change with the VLZ3 electronics is that the internal
gain structure has been modified. *One of the problems with the earlier
generations was that with a lot of hot inputs, the sum of the channels was a
greater level than the mix bus could handle, resulting in clipping the whole
mix.* Perceptive operators eventually learned to run the master fader high and
keep the channel levels lower, providing more mix bus headroom for when things
get louder (as they tend to do in a live show). This raised the noise floor a
bit but it was hardly noticeable in a typical show, and a tad more noise is
preferable to distortion.

"In the VLZ3, Mackie has essentially implemented this master fader *trick*
internally by reducing the output level of the channels and adding make-up gain
just ahead of the master fader. Newer generation op amps and quieter resistors
has allowed the additional gain at the output without compromising the mixer’s
noise performance."

So the answer to my original question is that Mackie recognized the design flaw
and took steps to correct it. I'm going to get rid of my 1402 VLZ Pro and
probably get an Allen & Heath. I need to see one first.

http://www.allen-heath.co.uk/us/wz31442.asp

[Richard Kuschel]

On Nov 7, 9:59*pm,
(Richard Webb) wrote:
> RD Jones writes:
> >> Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. LIstened to somebody
> >> whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
> >> that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
> >> they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.
> >> Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
> >> system anymore?
> > The FOH guy was not gainstaging for the recorder.
> > He probably could have, but it's not really his signal path once it
> > leaves the back of the desk.
> > If the recorder has no input attenuation,(like the HD24) the only
> > other options are asking
> > FOH nicely to back off a bit, which he may not be inclined to do,
> > whether or not he wants
> > to be nice about it, or inline passive attenuators.
>
> RIght, this was the hd24xr, which is +4 iirc. *Which means,
> at least in my way of thinking, if you're clipping a +4
> input
> then you're probably too hot for stages downstream as well.
> But then, I'm a little conservative with channel trims
> anyway, preferring to do the makeup gain downstream. *ONce
> the show's jumping if I feel I've got a little more room I
> might creep up with the trims a bit, but until I know what's happening I'm inclined to be a bit conservative there.
>
> Regards,
> * * * * * *Richard
> ... * Remote audio in the southland: *Seewww.gatasound.com
> --
> | Remove .my.foot for email
> | via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet<->Internet Gateway Site
> | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

If the max output of the Mackie is +24dBu, (I'm not positive on this,
so correct me if incorrect) and the max input allowed on the HD24 is
+19dBu (I know this) then the recorder can be heavily distorted while
the Mackie is showing headroom.

I've run into this problem on inserts from Soundcraft Mixers and my
HD24. If I can't get the cooperation of the FOH engineer, then I use
attenuation on the cables. It isn't his problem that my recorder can't
handle the levels.

I don't consider that a headroom problem, though I believe that most
FOH guys run their levels too hot. i'm not going to create ripples
when the FOH guy is basically doing me a favor.

[Mr Soul]

> So the answer to my original question is that Mackie recognized the design flaw
> and took steps to correct it. I'm going to get rid of my 1402 VLZ Pro and
> probably get an Allen & Heath. I need to see one first.
I never had any problem with headroom on my 1402 VLZ Pro so I am at a
loss to understand. Perhaps others here understood your original
problem, but I wasn't sure about it.

Mike C

[Mr Soul]

PS - I went back to your original post and I re-read what you are
saying. I never mixed in stereo with it, so I very rarely panned
anything to either the left or the right.

Mike C

[Ian Bell[_2_]]

mcp6453 wrote:
> On 11/8/2010 10:34 AM, Mr Soul wrote:
>> I understood what Mike was saying about headroom - it wasn't meant as
>> a personal attack. I think the fact that the topic was called
>> "headroom" lead to the flaired emotions.
>>
>> I've used 1402 VLZ for both live applications and studio recording for
>> quite some time, and I have nothing but great things to say about the
>> mixer. I used this mixer for my entire rock 'n' roll band and it
>> sounded as good (or better) than bands with these monterous mixing
>> boards and stacks of amps& processors.
>>
>> I've never had a "headroom" issue with it if you follow what the
>> manual says about using the Gain. Having said that, I just got a VLZ3
>> and can't wait to use it in the studio.
>
> I seriously doubt that there are any flared emotions on Usenet.
>
> Here is an article I read that seems to admit the problem (emphasis added). The
> only time I've experienced the problem is when hard panning a channel.
>
> "The other significant change with the VLZ3 electronics is that the internal
> gain structure has been modified. *One of the problems with the earlier
> generations was that with a lot of hot inputs, the sum of the channels was a
> greater level than the mix bus could handle, resulting in clipping the whole
> mix.* Perceptive operators eventually learned to run the master fader high and
> keep the channel levels lower, providing more mix bus headroom for when things
> get louder (as they tend to do in a live show). This raised the noise floor a
> bit but it was hardly noticeable in a typical show, and a tad more noise is
> preferable to distortion.
>

It is arguable that this is little more than operator error. If you have a while
load of 'hot' inputs (with their faders up) then they are bound to overload
something when they are mixed.

"run the master fader high (0dB) and keep the channel levels lower" ((by
reducing channel input gain) should be standard operating practice and the
change in noise floor in most applications will be negligible,

> "In the VLZ3, Mackie has essentially implemented this master fader *trick*
> internally by reducing the output level of the channels and adding make-up gain
> just ahead of the master fader.

That makes no sense at all. If there is a problem with clipping the mixed signal
this will not cure it. If the gain make up is equal to the channel level
reduction, all that will happen is the gain make up amp will clip instead.

Newer generation op amps and quieter resistors
> has allowed the additional gain at the output without compromising the mixer’s
> noise performance."
>

Can you provide a reference to this article??


Cheers

Ian
> So the answer to my original question is that Mackie recognized the design flaw
> and took steps to correct it. I'm going to get rid of my 1402 VLZ Pro and
> probably get an Allen& Heath. I need to see one first.
>
> http://www.allen-heath.co.uk/us/wz31442.asp

[Scott Dorsey]

mcp6453 > wrote:
>Yeah, I know how to solve the problem. What I would prefer is a properly
>designed piece of equipment. I built consoles back in the seventies, and none of
>them had any headroom problems. They just looked like crap.

The problem is that one of the fader modules alone on one of those consoles
cost more to make than the whole Mackie retails for.

You can still get a real mixing console from guys like API and Cadac, and
they'll even sell you a little shortloaded one. But one of the API fader
modules will STILL cost more than the whole Mackie retails for.

Many of the headroom issues on the Mackie have to do with their multi level
mixing buss. They chose to make it quieter rather than to make it harder
to overload, because that makes the numbers on the datasheet look better.
--scott

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

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, > wrote:
>On 2010-11-07 said:
> >> when you pfl remember that yellow is red
> >Excellent!
>Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. LIstened to somebody
>whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
>that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
>they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.

It's more than just simple gainstaging.

If you bring channel 1 and channel 9 up, the buss won't clip... but if
you bring channel 1 and channel 2 up to the same levels, the buss will
clip. The buss is not just one buss, but several busses that chain into
other busses in a summing pyramid. So it's not always obvious what is
going to go wrong because you can't readily visualize the levels at each
stage in the pyramid.

>Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
>system anymore?

With the Mackie, just keep it from ever going into the yellow and it will
be just fine. ALWAYS mute unused channels. Try and avoid using the EQ.
--scott

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

[Scott Dorsey]

Richard Kuschel > wrote:
>If the max output of the Mackie is +24dBu, (I'm not positive on this,
>so correct me if incorrect) and the max input allowed on the HD24 is
>+19dBu (I know this) then the recorder can be heavily distorted while
>the Mackie is showing headroom.

The Mackie meters aren't trustworthy anyway, and they aren't measuring
the same thing that the HD24 peak-reading meters are measuring. So in
this situation, ALWAYS use the tape machine meters to set the trims and
ignore the console meters. Because, the levels to tape are more critical
than the console levels.

The exception of course is if you manage to clip the console, then turn
it down. But the levels to tape are much better being too low than too
high, and you can always live with a little more headroom to tape.

>I don't consider that a headroom problem, though I believe that most
>FOH guys run their levels too hot. i'm not going to create ripples
>when the FOH guy is basically doing me a favor.

The real solution is to use a splitter and external preamps and then the
FOH guys can clip the hell out of whatever they want and it won't affect
your tape sends.
--scott

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

[[email protected]]

On 2010-11-08 (ScottDorsey) said:
>>Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. LIstened to somebody
>>whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
>>that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
>>they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.
>It's more than just simple gainstaging.
>If you bring channel 1 and channel 9 up, the buss won't clip... but
>if you bring channel 1 and channel 2 up to the same levels, the
>buss will clip. The buss is not just one buss, but several busses
>that chain into other busses in a summing pyramid. So it's not
>always obvious what is going to go wrong because you can't readily
>visualize the levels at each stage in the pyramid.
True, but still, there's a reason they call it headroom, and
if you leave a little at each stage then you should be good
<grin>.

>>Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
>>system anymore?
>With the Mackie, just keep it from ever going into the yellow and
>it will be just fine. ALWAYS mute unused channels. Try and avoid
>using the EQ. --scott
WAs always my m.o. when being forced to used a Mackie. I
liked my little 1202 vlz but never really cared for the old
eight bus. But, in any case, I always avoided the eq with a
Mackie when possible, and left myself plenty of headroom.



Regards,




Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[[email protected]]

On 2010-11-08 said:
>> > He probably could have, but it's not really his signal path
>>once it > leaves the back of the desk.
>> > If the recorder has no input attenuation,(like the HD24) the
>>only > other options are asking
>> > FOH nicely to back off a bit, which he may not be inclined to
>>do, > whether or not he wants
>> > to be nice about it, or inline passive attenuators.
>> RIght, this was the hd24xr, which is +4 iirc. ÿWhich means,
>> at least in my way of thinking, if you're clipping a +4
>> input
>> then you're probably too hot for stages downstream as well.
>> But then, I'm a little conservative with channel trims
>> anyway, preferring to do the makeup gain downstream. ÿONce
>> the show's jumping if I feel I've got a little more room I
>> might creep up with the trims a bit, but until I know what's
>happening I' m inclined to be a bit conservative there.
>> Regards,
>If the max output of the Mackie is +24dBu, (I'm not positive on
>this, so correct me if incorrect) and the max input allowed on the
>HD24 is +19dBu (I know this) then the recorder can be heavily
>distorted while the Mackie is showing headroom.
>I've run into this problem on inserts from Soundcraft Mixers and my
>HD24. If I can't get the cooperation of the FOH engineer, then I use
>attenuation on the cables. It isn't his problem that my recorder
>can't handle the levels.
YEp, understood, and think you're right on the numbers. I
always understood my xr to be regular +4 levels input.
But then, I avoid the inserts trick if at all possible
<grin>.

>I don't consider that a headroom problem, though I believe that most
>FOH guys run their levels too hot. i'm not going to create ripples
>when the FOH guy is basically doing me a favor.

That's true too, but as I commented, haven't run into that
one as usually I"ll run my own mixer and splits <grin>.




Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Mike Rivers]

On 11/8/2010 11:01 AM, mcp6453 wrote:

> So the answer to my original question is that Mackie recognized the design flaw
> and took steps to correct it. I'm going to get rid of my 1402 VLZ Pro and
> probably get an Allen& Heath. I need to see one first.

Did you check the by-line on that article you quoted? It sounds just
like what I wrote in a review of the 1604-VLZ3 in Pro Audio Review.

The so-called "temper flairing" is because you keep calling this
Mackie's design flaw. What they recognized was that customers didn't
know enough to use the mixer properly so they made it a bit more
goof-resistant. That's not fixing a flaw, it's keeping ignorant or
careless people happy.

I have not tested an Allen & Heath in this way. I would suggeest that
you do so yourelf if you want a mixer that you can't screw up. Maybe
it's the one, maybe it isn't.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Mike Rivers]

On 11/8/2010 1:39 PM, Ian Bell wrote:

> That makes no sense at all. If there is a problem with clipping the
> mixed signal this will not cure it. If the gain make up is equal to the
> channel level reduction, all that will happen is the gain make up amp
> will clip instead.

The problem isn't with clipping the output stage, it's with clipping the
mixing stage. By reducing the internal level, you give that mix stage
more headroom. The gain you apply to the mix is only limited by the
output stage, which will go up to at least +20 dBu (I don't remember the
exact value) which should be enough for anybody.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Ian Bell[_2_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 11/8/2010 1:39 PM, Ian Bell wrote:
>
>> That makes no sense at all. If there is a problem with clipping the
>> mixed signal this will not cure it. If the gain make up is equal to the
>> channel level reduction, all that will happen is the gain make up amp
>> will clip instead.
>
> The problem isn't with clipping the output stage, it's with clipping the
> mixing stage. By reducing the internal level, you give that mix stage
> more headroom. The gain you apply to the mix is only limited by the
> output stage, which will go up to at least +20 dBu (I don't remember the
> exact value) which should be enough for anybody.
>
>

I did not say there was a problem with clipping in the output stage. IIRC the OP
said the gain make up was pre the master fader i.e. pre the output stage.

Anyhow, there is no reason to suppose the output stage has agreater max output
(+20dBu or whatever) than the mix stage. They are all op amp based and run from
the same supply. The bottom line is the clipping point of the mix stage and the
op stage should be the same unless you have an oputput transformer with gain
which AFAIK the Mackie does not.

Cheers

ian

[hank alrich]

mcp6453 > wrote:

> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix
> bus. (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips
> internally at about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its newer
> models?

_Really_ clean mixes can be had from any of the old Mackies as long as
one _listens_ while watching meters and one determines not to light a
yellow LED.

Didn't meet this problem during my brief usage of a first-edition Onyx
1620. Also didn't mix much with it, mainly just ran stuff into it and
messed with EQ, and listened. Good sounding little board. Fully capable
of excellent work.

> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful, you
> can easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a little
> more forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to purchase another
> Mackie, but if they have corrected the problem, I'm not totally opposed to
> considering them, unlike M-Audio.
>
> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen & Heath or a
> Soundcraft. Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan into
> the fire? I'd love to have four mix busses, but my input needs are quite
> minimal.


--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers > wrote:

> On 11/6/2010 5:31 PM, mcp6453 wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I know how to solve the problem. What I would prefer is a properly
> > designed piece of equipment. I built consoles back in the seventies, and
> > none of them had any headroom problems. They just looked like crap.
>
> How much are you willing to spend?
>
> Back in the 70s, operating levels were lower and consoles were smaller.
> Your grandfather's Ampex started distorting noticeably when it was hit
> with an input level of about +14 dBu. That's 10 dB less than you can
> squeeze out of a Mackie. To confound the problem, because the next LED
> down from the CLIP light is a full 10 dB lower, any time the meter is
> reading above +10 or so, you really don't know how close the mix bus is
> to clipping. .

There is plenty of kit available that costs significiantly more than a
Mackie Onyx board and which offers better signal path. Not many are
paying for this these days, compared to the number of folks wanting
something cheaper.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

mcp6453 > wrote:

> On 11/6/2010 3:43 PM, ChrisCoaster wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 11:51 am, mcp6453 > wrote:
> >> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem. Based on
> >> discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is in the mix
> >> bus. (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the audio clips
> >> internally at about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem in its
> >> newer models?
> >>
> >> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful,
> >> you can easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a
> >> little more forgiving. This design flaw makes me disinclined to
> >> purchase another Mackie, but if they have corrected the problem, I'm
> >> not totally opposed to considering them, unlike M-Audio.
> >>
> >> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen & Heath or a
> >> Soundcraft. Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan
> >> into the fire? I'd love to have four mix busses, but my input needs are
> >> quite minimal.
> > ______________________
> > In addition to the above, I have an older Mackie brochure explaining
> > the gain structure of their pan-pots: They increase the gain
> > progressively as you pan further away from center detent. Maximum
> > gain is +3dB at either hard Left or hard right. Something to do with
> > perceived loudness compensation or something. When you PFL solo your
> > gains during setup/sound check, just use a *little* less trim/don't go
> > as high on the LED meters on the board.
>
> Yeah, I know how to solve the problem. What I would prefer is a properly
> designed piece of equipment. I built consoles back in the seventies, and
> none of them had any headroom problems. They just looked like crap.

And they weren't cheap, either.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

RD Jones > wrote:

> On Nov 7, 10:51 am, wrote:
> > On 2010-11-07 said:
> > >> when you pfl remember that yellow is red
> > >Excellent!
> > Darn it, it's just simple gainstaging. LIstened to somebody
> > whine the other day on a product support forum from yahoo
> > that when he grabbed signal off the inserts of a foh console
> > they were clipping the inserts of his recorder.
> >
> > Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
> > system anymore?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Richard webb,
> >
> > replace anything before at with elspider
> > ON site audio in the southland: seewww.gatasound.com
>
> The FOH guy was not gainstaging for the recorder.
>
> He probably could have, but it's not really his signal path once it
> leaves the back of the desk.
> If the recorder has no input attenuation,(like the HD24) the only
> other options are asking
> FOH nicely to back off a bit, which he may not be inclined to do,
> whether or not he wants
> to be nice about it, or inline passive attenuators.
>
> rd

I don't see many FOH guys about nowadays who can gain stage for the job
they're supposed to be doing, and never mind gain staging for the
recording.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

mcp6453 > wrote:

> On 11/7/2010 9:23 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> > On 11/6/2010 11:51 AM, mcp6453 wrote:
> >> It is clear that the Mackie 1402-VLZ has a headroom problem.
> >
> > No, YOU have a headroom problem. Learn to manage it.
> >
> >> Based on discussions here some time ago, I assume that the problem is
> >> in the mix bus. (When a channel is panned hard left or hard right, the
> >> audio clips internally at about 0db.) Has Mackie corrected this problem
> >> in its newer models?
> >
> > Your statement of the problem doesn't make any sense, but I understand
> > your concern. When all the channels are running near their peak level
> > simultaneously, they sum to a voltage higher than the mix bus can
> > handle. However, if you follow the Level Setting Procedure and run the
> > channels so that their peaks are around 0 (mid scale) on the meter, you
> > won't overdrive the bus. The reason for the problem is that, because the
> > mix level is lower, people tend to think that's a bad thing and push up
> > the cahnnels rather than pushing up the master. There's plenty of
> > headroom in a 1402 VLZ Pro as long as you set it up correctly.
> >
> > The VLZ3 has somewhat mitigated this operator problem by running a lower
> > internal level in the console. They were able to do this without
> > compromising the noise output because they can get quieter ICs now than
> > when the original VLZ was designed.
> >
> >> The mixer is fine for normal stereo mixing, but if you're not careful,
> >> you can easily bump your head. I'm going to get something that is a
> >> little more forgiving.
> >
> > And what might that be? And will you test it before you make your
> > prucasase, or just listen to Net stories?
> >
> >> If I don't get another Mackie, I'm considering an Allen& Heath or a
> >> Soundcraft. Is either of those mixers jumping out of the frying pan
> >> into the fire? I'd love to have four mix busses, but my input needs are
> >> quite minimal.
> >
> > I don't know what Soundcraft is doing these days, but I had an A&H
> > ZED=R16 in for a review and I found no problems like that. But then I
> > didn't try to overdrive it because I knew that I could, and since I
> > didn't have any problems in normal usage, I didn't see any reason to
> > complain. If you want a mixer that will let you run all the channels at
> > full output, all up fully in the mix, and it wtill won't clip, get a
> > PreSonus SudioLive. Because it's digital and there are plenty of bits
> > inside to handle the large sum, all you need to do is drop the master
> > fader to get the output of the final D/A converter down to what the
> > analog output stage can handle and you have a clean output.
>
> Mike, I usually respect your opinion and even enjoy reading your non-RAP
> materials when I see them. When I read posts like this one, my opinion
> changes. I'm just asking for help, not personal criticism ("YOU have a
> headroom problem. Learn to manage it.") You've replied to me in this
> manner several times before. Other times, you've been helpful. Maybe your
> life would be better if you would just avoid my threads. If anyone has
> reason to be annoyed by my questions, it's Scott Dorsey, and he has never
> once responded in a condescending fashion.

There is a FACT in play here, and it is the FACT that many of us can
gain stage an original 1202 such that under ordinary professional
operating conditions no clipping will occur anywhere in the signal path
from I to O.

If I were were you I would pay attention here, because you ARE being
offered help. In the typical fashion you reject the answer because it is
not the answer you thought you wanted. People can make your board work
fine. Why don't you learn how to do that, too?

I remind of the quality of Tonebarge's mixes on a RAP compilation CD,
done on an old (at the time even) 1604. No matter who had what to work
with where and with whom for source material, getting mixes to that
level is non trivial and obviously, it ain't all about the console.

If you are completely stuck on your own version of the answer, why ask
the question in the first place?

Note that a Speck LiLo might fix your wicket nicely, as it's a hell of a
lot better, and more expensive, signal path. Then there's the current
issue from Mr. Neve, etc. Plenty of killer boards out there now, both
analog and digital.

http://www.speck.com/lilo/lilo.shtml

http://rupertneve.com/

None of the cheaper IC-based boards have the kind of headroom I enjoyed
in a house-built mixer formed around many API components. That board
took us 2.25 years and $24K to build (cheap at the time for a console of
its quality), finished in 1974. It looked like a million bucks, too.

You will learn nothing by disrespecting Mike's opinion. He is well
informed and articulate. Read for the info and then think on it.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

Ty Ford > wrote:

> It's not like you were dating and he actually told you, "Yes, your ass looks
> big in that dress." On second thought, maybe it is like that. Get over it.

It's just like that, the question having been asked. Ya just gotta learn
how to gain stage and signal route a big ass. What's not to like?

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

mcp6453 > wrote:

> So the answer to my original question is that Mackie recognized the design
> flaw and took steps to correct it. I'm going to get rid of my 1402 VLZ Pro
> and probably get an Allen & Heath.

Mackie realized that most of the people who buy Mackie mixers don't know
much about it and they attemtped to make it easier for people who are
too lazy to follow the gain setting instructions in the manual.

Get your A&H. I have one. Nice inexpensive board that I use for PA, a
GL2200.

The whole porlbem is with your driving, and not with the vehicle. There
is not a single piece of audio gear on the planet that cannot be
misused, and clipped.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

Mr Soul > wrote:

> > So the answer to my original question is that Mackie recognized the
> > design flaw and took steps to correct it. I'm going to get rid of my
> > 1402 VLZ Pro and probably get an Allen & Heath. I need to see one first.
> I never had any problem with headroom on my 1402 VLZ Pro so I am at a
> loss to understand. Perhaps others here understood your original
> problem, but I wasn't sure about it.
>
> Mike C

It is this simple: every make and model of audio gear offers one the
chance to screw up. Most folks blame the gear, instead of going back to
basics and figuring out what is screwing up where and how, and then
making the appropriate adjustments to alleviate "the problem".

Mackie's headroom, in various pieces of kit, has been discussed here at
length. In every case the situation has be settled among those who will
learn by learning how to gain stage the board properly.

And just so I don't get accused of thinking I'm a big deal, I learned
this the accidental way during an SR gig with a major folk artist
performing in a duo, where I used the 1202 in conjunction outboard
studio-grade preamps. There were only two players, two voices, two
instruments at a time. I used four channels total. The night was snowy,
the band arrived late as did I. I threw the system up (Crest amps into
Meyer UPA1A's), we did a silly-fast soundcheck, and the doors let in the
crowd. About the third song, after thinking how amazingly good it all
sounded, I noticed that the 1202 was peaking no higher than the next to
last green LED. My first reaction was to try to raise that level, but
the board was feeding the Meyer processor which was up with the amp
rack, and I'm at the back of the hall.

So I stopped and relistened, and I left it like it was. Thereafter I
discovered I'd discovered mackie nirvana in the gain staging arena.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[[email protected]]

On 2010-11-13 (hankalrich) said:
<snip some of my own quoted material>
>> > Wtf is this with people can't figure out how to gain stage a
>> > system anymore?
>> The FOH guy was not gainstaging for the recorder.
>> He probably could have, but it's not really his signal path once
>>it leaves the back of the desk.
<snip again>

>I don't see many FOH guys about nowadays who can gain stage for the
>job they're supposed to be doing, and never mind gain staging for
>the recording.
Which was my point. IF one is too braindead to understand
that he's clipping the mic amps going in then ...


But, so long as it's loud ...





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers > wrote:

> I have not tested an Allen & Heath in this way. I would suggeest that
> you do so yourelf if you want a mixer that you can't screw up. Maybe
> it's the one, maybe it isn't.

I have an A&H GL2200. It is a nice little board. I can screw it up if I
want to.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[[email protected]]

On 2010-11-13 (hankalrich) said:
<snip>

>thinking how amazingly good it all sounded, I noticed that the 1202
>was peaking no higher than the next to last green LED. My first
>reaction was to try to raise that level, but the board was feeding
>the Meyer processor which was up with the amp rack, and I'm at the
>back of the hall.
>So I stopped and relistened, and I left it like it was. Thereafter I
>discovered I'd discovered mackie nirvana in the gain staging arena.
Which is always the way I used a 1202 vlz. I owned one for
years, until it burned during my after Katrina fire. I
never had a problem with that board, so long as I was the
one operating it.

AS I keep telling people using the Mackie, Yellow is the new
red. IF you're hitting yellow back 'er down Jack.

Whatever kit I"m using if I'm noticing a clip I go back
through my gain staging and make sure I"m copacetic at each
"stage" starting with the input trims. IT isn't rocket
science. Just because the controls go to 10 doesn't mean
they have to be set there.
THat's why we have meters of various types, and those things
on the sides of our heads called ears.





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com



Great audio is never heard by the average person, but bad
audio is heard by everyone.