Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
As for Behringer mixers, I´ve pointed out in various forums that there´s a
huge variability among them. If you have a very old model from, say, 1996
(easily distinguishable by their dark grey livery and, in the case of the
MX2642 I´m always referring to, missing preamp pots and simple three-band
EQ
in the stereo section), these units are rotten pieces of junk, agreed.
Later
they improved on the design and first added a decent EQ and a input level
pot to the stereo section (these models have a grey livery). The final
production run (then called MX2642A, which comes in silver livery) featured
redesigned preamps which make this a really good-sounding mixer for the
price (they were keen to offload them when the new series was introduced
and
consequently, many dealers sold these mixers for 200 Euros new). I have one
as my main mixer (seriously), and especially for looping applications and
flexible fx and looper routings, this is the best portable 19" mixer
available. The preamps are relatively quiet (even quieter than my old
Soundtracs console, and a lot quieter than the original 2642 design), the
EQ
section is decent (if I ever use EQ, I´m using proTools´ EQ Rack plug-in
anyway) and the sound is very transparent (in contrast to the original 2642
from around 1996 which sounded like there were pillows in front of the
speakers). I would not hesitate to get me another one (and believe me, I
have every reason to slag off Behringer, having once been a freelance
employee).
The designs are clearly Mackie-inspired (too close for comfort for Mackie,
I
believe) but I know the designer of the Eurodesk series who clearly stayed
away from Mackie´s designs technically.
Other Behringer stuff is -- I have to second that -- plain BS. The
Virtualizer sounds worse than my old Dynacord DRS-78 and was noisier than
my
AKG BX-15, and their RSP Hush 2000 rip-off was adding more noise to a
signal
than reducing it. And talking about their valve-based Vintager series...
rumour has it that valves were only used for decoration ("look it glows in
the dark") but not for musical reasons...
Stephen.
____________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
"Our land is a rape machine, I´d go outside if it looked the other way. You
wouldn´t believe the things they do." (Gary Numan / "Down in the Park")
Visit the official [´ramp] website at www.doombient.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "loop.pool" <looppool@cruzio.com>
To: "LOOPERS DELIGHT (posting)" <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 6:39 AM
Subject: Behringer-Mackie debate
> Ben wrote, quoting the Repeater mod guy:
> "He told me (I'm paraphrasing from memory, so may not
> be accurate) that the Behringer stuff is made at the same factory in
> China as the Mackies (whether labelled 'Made in China' or not), use
> better components then Mackie, have lower noise floor than Mackie,
> better grounding etc etc. All for a lower price."
>
>
> Wow, I've A-Bed them a couple of times and that is not the truth from
what
> I've heard with my own ears.
> The cheap Behringer mixers are considerably noisier than the Mackie
1202VLZ
> or the 1402VLZ, both of which
> I have used extensively, live.
>
> From what I heard, Behringer reverse engineered the Mackies and made
>them
> look identical, cutting major cost
> on the microphone preamplifiers which are really quiet and transparent in
> the Mackies.
>
> If they are made in the same factory in China (which I don't dispute)
>how
> could Behringer charge hundreds of dollars
> less for them than the Mackies and stay competitive? They have had to
>cut
> costs somewhere and my ears tell me that it
> is the mic pre amps where they did.
>
> Any other A-B comparisons out there?
>
> ********
> I personally was stoked to find the Behringer little mixer that had two
mic
> pre-s for under $100 but I bought one, played with it for a day and
returned
> it immediately as being way, way too noisy.
>
> Of course, you will find equally adamant arguments about Analogue
> recording versus Digital recording and Macs versus
>PCs...................I
> guess it's what works for you and what makes you happy. Undboubtedly,
> great music could be made on either one.
>