Dot,

Are Mackie pre-amp's (VLZPro) as bad as some comment - or are they just not colored? With little access to other mixers, and the chance to A/B I had to ask. And would I bennefit from, say a Soundcraft or A&H or just focus on a decent 2 ch. unit? I'm mostly overdubbing.

Thanks,
Stixxs

www.stillwater-studios.com

I have found that while MAckie's may not be the "best" pre's out there, they are FAR superior to most and pretty neutral too. Depending on what yer after, I'd recomend them before almost anything else in the average to above average price range. They are simply workhorses that offer a lot of SNR and tonal flexibility. A&H mixers , from MY experience just don't have as much "Ooomph" as MAckie's. I recently had a horrible experience with an A&H mixer at a live gig. It simply had no "Balls" what-so-ever, and I had to run everything so hot just to make everyone heard out front, that any hope of a clean recording was lost. It was so bad, that I actually switched mixers between sets(A whole other tale unto itself GRIN) and once I got everything leveled again, the difference was like night and day.

Actual Church Flyer: The sermon this morning: "Jesus Walks on the Water." The sermon tonight:
"Searching for Jesus."

I find the Makie pre's a little bland, and not very flattering, but they are still pretty good for the cash and can work very well with certain mics.

AS long as you don't push them hard, and realize you won't win awards, they are definitely usable!


Bruce Valeriani
Blue Bear Sound

I've used Mackei VLZ pres many tiems and my own personal console is an A&H GL3300. The mackies IMHO are very boring, sterile pres. They're your typical "average acheiver" that's just good enough to not suck. By contrast My A&H pres are a *little* fuller, more robust, a trifle sweeter. To my ears they're just not a harsh or sterile-sounding. I also notice more headroom than any Mackie I've ever used. That said, until you get well, WELL into the tens and hundreds of thousands of dollar consoles, the difference between consoles--sound-wise-- aren't so huge that it's going to make or break your project, not by a long shot!

"Are they bad or just not colored" well, that doesn't make alot of sense to me. Colored pres are neither good nor bad--it's just a characteristic. Sometimes you want color, sometimes you don't. It's not a question of what's good or bad, it's a question of what works for the task and what doesn't.

Would you be better off going A&H, Soundcraft, etc....I don't know. Yes? No? Possibly? I think it's who is behind the console that matters much, MUCH more than what the console itself is, or what pres are in there.

You also have to consider that the mic preamp is only one of many stages teh signal passes through in a console, and those make a big impact in the sound output from the console. My A&H has IMO much smoother, more musical EQ than any Mackie I've used, for instance. The extra metering capabilities helps me optimize my gain structure, which is part of attaining a "good" sound and "good" mix. There are way more signal routing options and channel strip features that let me maniuplate my signal if necessary. So it's more than just pres.

If it's between a different console or an outboard dedicated mic pre, you'd most definitely be better off with the external pre IMO.

We're also talking a $4K console to a $1K console here...so then there's that...

*Hey, you in the gondola! Keep your hands and legs inside the car at all times please!*

My take- is that you cannot get sounds to sit as "up front" with the vlz's as you can with a good pre. With good recordings you want to have real depth- I want some stuff to be sitting right in front of your face- sounding like it is jutting forward from the speakers. With stuff like the vlz, it is much harder to get that. It sounds a little distant.

I honestly have no idea whether the allen & heath would be better than the mackie. The fella that mentioned that he has an allen and heath has a much better model than the "mix wizard" so it is a little "apples and oranges".

quote:

---

Originally posted by gtoledo3:
My take- is that you cannot get sounds to sit as "up front" with the vlz's as you can with a good pre. With good recordings you want to have real depth- I want some stuff to be sitting right in front of your face- sounding like it is jutting forward from the speakers. With stuff like the vlz, it is much harder to get that. It sounds a little distant.

---

Well put; I feel more or less the same way. To me, the more sounds you're trying to mix together, the more lost everything gets with them...

quote:

---

I honestly have no idea whether the allen & heath would be better than the mackie. The fella that mentioned that he has an allen and heath has a much better model than the "mix wizard" so it is a little "apples and oranges".

---

Yup, the GL3300 is definitely fancier than the mix wizes. The Mix Wizard owner's i've heard from on teh subject have said that it's a more pleasant-sounding mixer than the mackies. I also hear the EQ has the same "feeling" as the GLs, just "less of it" if that makes sense, and sounds like folks are still preferring the pres to the VLZs. I haven't used a Wiz so I don't know first-hand. My comparison was a little apples-to-oranges, but you get the idea. It's a closer league, than, say, a Mackie VLZ to a Midas Heritage....yow, now THERE'S a differnce

*Hey, you in the gondola! Keep your hands and legs inside the car at all times please!*

Stixxs, something to keep in mind is that a single Mackie sounds different [ and better ] than several Mackie pres, because as you begin using more they all suck on the power supply and the performance degrades.

If you're mostly overdubbing, I'd recommend you look into an external dual-channel mic pre - and then use the Mackie for extra pres when you need more channels.

On one hand, I don't think the Mackie pres are as bad as people make them out to be, but they're also not as good as some would have you believe. Even very inexpensive stand-alone pres, like the M-Audio DMP3 and the Studio Projects VTB-1 are noticable improvements, IMO, over the Mackie pres.

Dan Richards
Digital Pro Sound
The Listening Sessions

Thanks Dot and everyone else, I think a higher quality pre in addition to the VLZ will do it.

Stixxs

www.stillwater-studios.com

I have recorded many of my personal songs with mackie XLR's and they are good to make a good sounding source sound good. For my lastest project I was able to get a hold of an RNP, which I found to be clearer than the mackie, but I found that that wasn't always preferable. I found that when recording vocals, the mackie was more rounded and more forgiving than the RNP. Perhaps, it would have helped to use a nice tube mic or something, but with my gear I actually liked my vocals through my mackie better.

I think as someone said before, mackies would work great with a separate dual set of pre's to excel where the mackie's do not.

Pretty soon I will post a song that I recorded almost entirely (except for a few samples) with the RNP and one produced almost entirely with a mackie. I think people would be surprised. Also, another thing to mention is that I never use the EQ on my mackie, only in the software domain.

-Ian

I remember having the VLZ and the soundcraft notepad few years ago. My recordings were done solely with the Rode NT1 mic. I found that the VLZ pres to be a little bright....the Soundcraft sounding a little warmer and fuller....