[genericaudioperson]

Hello,

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say? For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

[Mike Rivers]

genericaudioperson wrote:

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say?

Weigh both. The percentage difference in weight is the percentage
difference in better.

example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

If I could only produce $5.63 worth of sound from a mixer, why spend a
few hundred dollars for it? Really, if money is your concern, buy
Behringer and shut up. If ridicule is your concern, buy A&H or maybe
Soundcraft. If you want something middle-of-the-road that, unless you
get a lemon (and it happens) will work well for a long time, get a Mackie.

Don't worry about weighing the "sound quality" of one with the other.
There are far too many parameters. Go with your gut and your wallet.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"genericaudioperson" wrote in message
...
Hello,

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say? For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

I believe the cost difference is how much marketing do you want to pay for
they sound the same
I found the VLZ3 a uniquely poor mixer in terms of channel cross talk and
ability to pick up RF sources, even with nothing attached to it
George

[Arny Krueger]

"genericaudioperson" wrote
in message


For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing
Mackie is better overall. But how much of a percentage
difference would you say? For example, if the Mackie
produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer about
$5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

I routinely use either a Mackie DFX-12 or a Behringer 1222 for similar
applications. They both sound good, but the Behringer is a little easier to
use. The Behringer cost a little less. I've been using them both for about a
year and neither has had any problems. I think the Behringer was about $50
less.

[[email protected]]

On Dec 2, 12:18*am, genericaudioperson
wrote:
Hello,

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. * But how much of a percentage difference would you say? *For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

It's hard to compare. From my experience, There are more service
problems with Behringer, less with Mackie. Behringer is a crapshoot:
You may get a comparable board at a much lower price and have it work
perfectly for years. Or not.

BTW, I just switched from a high end Behringer to a high end Mackie in
my TV studio: It actually sounds better, and I don't know why!

[George's Pro Sound Company]

wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 12:18 am, genericaudioperson
wrote:
Hello,

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say? For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

It's hard to compare. From my experience, There are more service
problems with Behringer, less with Mackie. Behringer is a crapshoot:
You may get a comparable board at a much lower price and have it work
perfectly for years. Or not.

BTW, I just switched from a high end Behringer to a high end Mackie in
my TV studio: It actually sounds better, and I don't know why!

I wasn't aware of any behringer or Mackie "high end" product
everything from these companies is pretty pedestrian IMO

[Scott Dorsey]

genericaudioperson wrote:

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say? For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

Isn't the Mackie horrible enough for you? Why do you want something even
worse?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Eeyore]

genericaudioperson wrote:

Hello,

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say? For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

The answer is that the mackie will probably last longer. Behringer have a
dreadful reputation for unreliability.

Graham

[[email protected]]

On Dec 2, 9:15*am, "George's Pro Sound Company"
wrote:
wrote in message

It's hard to compare. From my experience, There are more service
problems with Behringer, less with Mackie. Behringer is a crapshoot:
You may get a comparable board at a much lower price and have it work
perfectly for years. Or not.

BTW, I just switched from a high end Behringer to a high end Mackie in
my TV studio: It actually sounds better, and I don't know why!

I wasn't aware of any behringer or Mackie "high end" product
everything from these companies is pretty pedestrian IMO

In Behringer terms, the SX3242FX is higher end. I replaced it with a
Mackie Onyx 32.4, one of their higher end boards. The M has more
options and somehow sounds better.

But I may have a problem with the Mackie! I just noticed that a CD
deck into the L&R of the stereo input 29/30 only seems to sound and
register on the right channel. Everything is set normal, pan centered.
I need to try another stereo input, and try the CD on another input(s)
to rule in/out the possibility of a bad input channel. Damn, right out
of the box.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 9:15 am, "George's Pro Sound Company"
wrote:
wrote in message

It's hard to compare. From my experience, There are more service
problems with Behringer, less with Mackie. Behringer is a crapshoot:
You may get a comparable board at a much lower price and have it work
perfectly for years. Or not.

BTW, I just switched from a high end Behringer to a high end Mackie in
my TV studio: It actually sounds better, and I don't know why!

I wasn't aware of any behringer or Mackie "high end" product
everything from these companies is pretty pedestrian IMO

In Behringer terms, the SX3242FX is higher end. I replaced it with a
Mackie Onyx 32.4, one of their higher end boards. The M has more
options and somehow sounds better.

But I may have a problem with the Mackie! I just noticed that a CD
deck into the L&R of the stereo input 29/30 only seems to sound and
register on the right channel. Everything is set normal, pan centered.
I need to try another stereo input, and try the CD on another input(s)
to rule in/out the possibility of a bad input channel. Damn, right out
of the box.

if you haven't already, try each input seperatly, and look for solo/pfl
buttons that might be engaged shutting off half of the meter
George

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Charlie Olsen" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:12:51 +0000, Eyesore wrote:

genericaudioperson wrote:

Hello,

For the smaller 6 or 8 channel mixers, I'm guessing Mackie is better
overall. But how much of a percentage difference would you say? For
example, if the Mackie produced $5.63 worth of sound, is the Behringer
about $5.12, or is it more like $4.50?

The answer is that the mackie will probably last longer. Behringer have a
dreadful reputation for unreliability.

Graham

That's been my experience, especially for a rig that is used live.

and my experience is opposite,mackie seldom lasts long enough to see a
return on your investment where withing two or three uses the behringer is
already earning you money
If you Google myself and graham you will find I use a lot of behringer when
the application calls for it
graham, or as he is otherwise affectionately know as"Eyesore" Has no real
world experience with using (he has experiance with fewer than 6 units, I
have around 100 in service )in a proper application and his opinions are
base partly on the fact his company, Studiomaster, was basically put out of
business by behringer innovative manufacturing and product offerings
I had VERY bad luck with 6 of 1402 mixers and several of the 1400i
amplifiers from Mackie, as well as haveing to service or replace dozens of
the large frame sr series desks
I see Mackie and behringer as equlivant products in every aspect except you
pay 2/3rds more for the Mackie

it's big internet gather all the info you can and form your own decisions
neither mackie or behringer would be a significant outlay of money so the
decision is not going to make or break you
george

[jakdedert]

George's Pro Sound Company wrote:

I see Mackie and behringer as equlivant products in every aspect except you
pay 2/3rds more for the Mackie

it's big internet gather all the info you can and form your own decisions
neither mackie or behringer would be a significant outlay of money so the
decision is not going to make or break you
george


Okay. Just to throw a wrench into the monkey works; does anybody have
experience with the Behr' MDX 1200 Autocom compressor? I don't expect
to use it for my main comp/limiter; but this evening picked it up in a
package deal with two speaker stands for $25.

Opinions? Is it just garbage, or is there a place in this world
(besides the sh*tcan) for this piece?

jak

[[email protected]]

On Dec 2, 7:51*pm, jakdedert wrote:
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:

I see Mackie and behringer as equlivant products in every aspect except you
pay 2/3rds more for the Mackie

it's big internet gather all the info you can and form your own decisions
neither mackie or behringer would be a significant outlay of money so the
decision is not going to make or break you
george

Okay. *Just to throw a wrench into the monkey works; does anybody have
experience with the Behr' MDX 1200 Autocom compressor? *I don't expect
to use it for my main comp/limiter; but this evening picked it up in a
package deal with two speaker stands for $25.

Opinions? *Is it just garbage, or is there a place in this world
(besides the sh*tcan) for this piece?

jak

Any working compressor can be used for something. I use an old DBX 266
for a backstage and lobby feed at a theater on one channel and an
archival video record feed with the other channel.

[Tim Perry]

"jakdedert" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:

I see Mackie and behringer as equlivant products in every aspect except
you
pay 2/3rds more for the Mackie

it's big internet gather all the info you can and form your own
decisions
neither mackie or behringer would be a significant outlay of money so
the
decision is not going to make or break you
george


Okay. Just to throw a wrench into the monkey works; does anybody have
experience with the Behr' MDX 1200 Autocom compressor? I don't expect
to use it for my main comp/limiter; but this evening picked it up in a
package deal with two speaker stands for $25.

Opinions? Is it just garbage, or is there a place in this world
(besides the sh*tcan) for this piece?

jak

If you don't have anything else and need one it's priceless.

As far as I can tell its a "Composer" with a couple less features.

[jakdedert]

Tim Perry wrote:
"jakdedert" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:

I see Mackie and behringer as equlivant products in every aspect except
you
pay 2/3rds more for the Mackie

it's big internet gather all the info you can and form your own
decisions
neither mackie or behringer would be a significant outlay of money so
the
decision is not going to make or break you
george


Okay. Just to throw a wrench into the monkey works; does anybody have
experience with the Behr' MDX 1200 Autocom compressor? I don't expect
to use it for my main comp/limiter; but this evening picked it up in a
package deal with two speaker stands for $25.

Opinions? Is it just garbage, or is there a place in this world
(besides the sh*tcan) for this piece?

jak

If you don't have anything else and need one it's priceless.

As far as I can tell its a "Composer" with a couple less features.


I'll check back for hands-on opinions, but otherwise, I guess the only
real judges are on either side of my head, and the wetware between.

FWIW, I took the cover off and it appears to be fairly solidly
constructed. It's full of TLO74 and LM344 chips, some discrete
transistors, a lot of 1% leaded resistors and has about a dozen ALPS
pots, a linear multivoltage power supply--all on a sesame seed...er,
single-sided pcb.

jak

[Eeyore]

George's Pro Sound Company wrote:

and his opinions are
base partly on the fact his company, Studiomaster, was basically put out of
business by behringer innovative manufacturing and product offerings.

Totally incorrect.

The old Studiomaster was put out of business by a dispute with a subcontractor.
We had plenty of orders.

Graham

[George's Pro Sound Company]

problem I have had with Mackie has
been the infamous ribbon cable problem on the 1604VLZ boards and one DOA
Big Knob.

Maybe it's the luck of the draw but I've seen more off center pots, more
defective faders and just general mechanical gremlin type stuff with
Berhinger than I have with Mackie.

I have not used any of the latest gear though so my information is a
little
behind and not really in line with what the OP was asking.

Last piece I bought was a 1604VLZ original (except for the BigKnob), the
one with the ribbon problems which Mackie sent me a new cable for.

Maybe things have improved for Berhinger and maybe things have gone down
hill for Mackie as they are now made in China from what I understand.

There was no behringer when I bout 6 of the 1402's ,all at one time for on
location Sr and recording at the Dodge Poetry festival
The fault was not bad parts but bad design, the powersupply was internal(a
feature I liked) but it ran so hot that it burned it's self
out(poor/non-existant heat sinking) this fail was accelerated by using them
outside
in airconditioned studio, or even simply inside this problem rarely if ever
happened
but add the heat of the sun to the grey paint to the too much power supply
with too little heat dissapation and it was sure death within hours

The amps and large frame sr desks were just crap from the get go

the 1402's cost me 515$ ea just 4 years later I got the same feature set
from behringer for around 100$
PLUS the behringer used a external(line lump) PS which have been reliable
like poyring water out of a boot with instruction written on the heal

I think what it used to be, at least for me, was Mackie had a quality
control factor to it compared to Berhinger but like I said maybe times
have
changed since Mackie has gone off shore.

Like I said Mavkie was a feature pewr dollar break through as well as
makeing what seemed liked a honest to goodness little mixer that go work for
my company

None of them were working after a week in the feild

several years later behringer out mackied mackie, same sound same
reliability but 5 to 1 price ratio

made the behringer a MONEY EARNER almost as soon as it was plugged in
George

[genericaudioperson]

Sorry, Mike, for the ambiguity. I wasn't trying to make fun of Mackie
or Behringer. I have only a rudimentary understanding of circuit
design. Whoever designs a Mackie or Behringer mixer knows so much
more about electronics than I do.

I was actually trying to put out a number for a percentage
comparsison. So, if you set the nominal "sound value" at $5.50, and
the other one was "10 percent better sound" then it's sound value
would be $6.05.

[Mike Rivers]

genericaudioperson wrote:

I was actually trying to put out a number for a percentage
comparsison. So, if you set the nominal "sound value" at $5.50, and
the other one was "10 percent better sound" then it's sound value
would be $6.05.

It makes no sense to assign numbers to something that you can't measure
or even really quantify subjectively, particularly since there are so
many variables that make up "sound." Suppose mixer that sounds crappy
when run at high levels but sounds fine when you don't push it. How much
would that be worth? If this was never a problem because I know how to
set up gain structure properly, the "better" mixer isn't worth any more
to me - unless there's some other benefit that might be useful. But for
someone who turns all the knobs up to 7 because he thinks that's right
and then finds that some channels are distorted could find more headroom
worth paying for.

So what's your REAL question?




--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Misifus[_2_]]

genericaudioperson wrote:
Sorry, Mike, for the ambiguity. I wasn't trying to make fun of Mackie
or Behringer. I have only a rudimentary understanding of circuit
design. Whoever designs a Mackie or Behringer mixer knows so much
more about electronics than I do.

I was actually trying to put out a number for a percentage
comparsison. So, if you set the nominal "sound value" at $5.50, and
the other one was "10 percent better sound" then it's sound value
would be $6.05.



Would you accept that the differences between the makes has more to do
with reliability than sound quality, and that different people on the
group have had opposite experiences with Mackie and Behringer? Thus, it
isn't clear, but either way they are much the same. I would bet that
plugging the same source into both of these mixers and then out into the
same FOH speakers, you could not tell the difference between them.

Buy one from a place you can return it to if it doesn't work properly
and you'll be on fairly firm ground. That is, don't get one from ebay,
buy it from a dealer, even if it's Musician's Friend.

-Raf

--
Misifus-
Rafael Seibert

Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii
home: http://www.rafandsioux.com

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:05:48 -0600, Misifus
wrote:

Would you accept that the differences between the makes has more to do
with reliability than sound quality
Makie has a really funny utube on the mixer site of them taking a
group of recognizable mixers and dropping them from ever higher
altitudes then walking and driving over them with increasing wieghts.
The competetors all get destroyed along the way and the makie
practically squished still is usable.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 08:15:50 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I routinely use either a Mackie DFX-12 or a Behringer 1222 for similar
applications.

I've used both the Mackie 1202 and Behringer 602 as well when running
sound on stage for the person I was accompanying. The Behringer
sounded a brighter and harsher overall, but had more features.
I just bought a used 402 for myself for the same purpose.