MACKIE 1604-VLZ
jim...@gmail.com
elementary school play? We don't have alot of money, or is it worth
spending more for the MACKIE 1604-VLZ Pro?
Or is there a cheaper kind? (doesn't have to be mackie)
Thanks.
Ralph Staub
If you're considering the mackie, most bottom-of-the-line mixers will
keep up with it for less money. Mixers in this range are "disposable"
and you'll probably have it less than 2 years before things start
failing. The behringer stuff is about the same quality and durability,
and at 1/2 the price, far less painful ($$$) when it's time is up.
The inflated cost of the Mackie is to float the bloated saleries in the
marketing department. Mackie's right up there with Saturn... "We'll
still sell you GM crap that's about as reliable as a Yugo, but you'll
pay the no-haggle (a.k.a. full) price and think we did you a favor..."
Remember, a "cheap" mixer should first be "cheap". ;-)
Ralph
David Martel
When Mr. Bishop gave you the audio equipment advice for your school's
play he may have had his tongue in his cheek. I hope you find the help you
need and I think you did receive that to some extent. Sadly, it was not the
help you wanted. Before you spend too much money to little purpose perhaps
you might try speaking with local theater groups and find a local audio guy.
Good luck,
Dave M.
bringm...@gmail.com
flexibility and great value for the dollar. There's better and more
expensive but this mixer is excellent regardless of what some zealots
may say.
bringm...@gmail.com
Ralph Staub
> what ridiculous advice. The Behringer is not even in the same class.
>
OK, so the behringer is a step up. I didn't want to split hairs...
Ralph Staub
George Gleason
I agree
behringer would have to come down quite a way to equal Macikie at this
point
George
Ron(UK)
Don't feed the Trolls
Ron
--
Lune Valley Audio
Public address system
Hire, Sales, Repairs
www.lunevalleyaudio.com
Phildo
<jim...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115243182.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Get the Behringer equivalent. Better and cheaper.
Phildo
Phildo
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115293717.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Phildo
Walter Harley
> elementary school play? We don't have alot of money, or is it worth
> spending more for the MACKIE 1604-VLZ Pro?
Why are you trying to purchase a sound system? Why not just rent one? Or
better yet, hire a sound person, with his/her own gear.
If you're just doing a play every couple of months, this will be
considerably cheaper and give you better results than trying to buy and
operate your own. There's years of experience entailed in the difference
between crappy sound and good sound: it's not a matter of "buy it, set it
up, and you're done."
If you're going to be using the system daily or weekly, of course, it makes
more sense to purchase one. But even there, you might want to start by
renting, to get a better sense of what you need.
Greg S
Greg S
"Walter Harley" <wal...@cafewalterNOSPAM.com> wrote
> If you're going to be using the system daily or weekly, of course, it
> makes more sense to purchase one. But even there, you might want to start
> by renting, to get a better sense of what you need.
>
Phildo
this one has a degree?
Phildo
Kevin Aylward
My, my, I am indeed enjoying this attention.
I have really gotten to you aint I. Hey dude, get over it.
Why don't you have a go at joining MENSA, thats where those that fail to
make the degree grade go as a fallback plan.
Kevin Aylward
informati...@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
bringm...@gmail.com
class.
George Gleason
> Phildo wrote:
>
>><bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1115293717.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>The plain old 1604 VLZ rocks. Great headroom, clear sound,
>>>wonderful flexibility and great value for the dollar. There's
>>>better and more expensive but this mixer is excellent regardless of
>>>what some zealots may say.
>>>
>>
>>Oh dear, seems like we have another Professor Kev on the board. I
>>wonder if this one has a degree?
>>
>
>
> My, my, I am indeed enjoying this attention.
>
> I have really gotten to you aint I. Hey dude, get over it.
>
> Why don't you have a go at joining MENSA, thats where those that fail to
> make the degree grade go as a fallback plan.
>
other than that , go sell it to someone who cares
George
Rob Beech
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115379331.2...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> I got a certificate once in kindergarten for helping stack chairs after
> class.
>
Worth the same in my job
Rob
Kevin Aylward
Well, you obviously do, or you wouldn't have felt compelled to respond
to my post.
Tim Scott
"Kevin Aylward" <see_w...@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LPHee.6996$a9....@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Phildo wrote:
>> <bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1115293717.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>> The plain old 1604 VLZ rocks. Great headroom, clear sound,
>>> wonderful flexibility and great value for the dollar. There's
>>> better and more expensive but this mixer is excellent regardless of
>>> what some zealots may say.
>>>
>> Oh dear, seems like we have another Professor Kev on the board. I
>> wonder if this one has a degree?
>>
>
> My, my, I am indeed enjoying this attention.
>
> I have really gotten to you aint I. Hey dude, get over it.
>
> Why don't you have a go at joining MENSA, thats where those that fail to
> make the degree grade go as a fallback plan.
Oh, come on, that was funny - can you not take a joke?
lighten up a little, please!
George Gleason
> George Gleason wrote:
>
>>Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>
>>>Phildo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>><bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:1115293717.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The plain old 1604 VLZ rocks. Great headroom, clear sound,
>>>>>wonderful flexibility and great value for the dollar. There's
>>>>>better and more expensive but this mixer is excellent regardless of
>>>>>what some zealots may say.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Oh dear, seems like we have another Professor Kev on the board. I
>>>>wonder if this one has a degree?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>My, my, I am indeed enjoying this attention.
>>>
>>>I have really gotten to you aint I. Hey dude, get over it.
>>>
>>>Why don't you have a go at joining MENSA, thats where those that
>>>fail to make the degree grade go as a fallback plan.
>>>
>>
>>with that degree in your hand you now may be qualified to wipe my ass
>>other than that , go sell it to someone who cares
>>George
>
>
> Well, you obviously do, or you wouldn't have felt compelled to respond
> to my post.
>
your a legend in your own mind
perhaps you might consider I am downloading a big file and quite bored
your making the biggest ass of yourself right now , though as far as
trolls who have come and gone your not even close to the top 10 list
but I am bored none the less and just feel like pissing on you
because you deserve it, lil buddy
George
Phildo
"George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:ETIee.185330$cg1.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>> Phildo wrote:
>>
>>><bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1115293717.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>>The plain old 1604 VLZ rocks. Great headroom, clear sound,
>>>>wonderful flexibility and great value for the dollar. There's
>>>>better and more expensive but this mixer is excellent regardless of
>>>>what some zealots may say.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Oh dear, seems like we have another Professor Kev on the board. I
>>>wonder if this one has a degree?
>>>
>>
>>
>> My, my, I am indeed enjoying this attention.
Sorry, didn't see this because Professor Kev is in my killfile.
>> I have really gotten to you aint I. Hey dude, get over it.
Why? It's fun. You give us so much good material to work with it's like
shooting a sitting duck.
>> Why don't you have a go at joining MENSA, thats where those that fail to
>> make the degree grade go as a fallback plan.
Joined when I was 18 thanks but never kept it up.
Phildo
David Martel
The comment from Phildo was unnecessary. The comment from Kevin does not
fall within the scope of "analog circuits" which is the area that Kevin
promised to limit himself .
I think that both of you are indulging in silly name calling.
Dave M
Phildo
"David Martel" <mart...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:GbNee.6499$GQ5....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Kevin and Phildo
>
> The comment from Phildo was unnecessary.
Why is that? Better to show the fools for what they are otherwise people
that don't know any better might take them seriously.
Phildo
bringm...@gmail.com
electrical engineer and really like the Mackies and have not been
impressed at all with the Behringers. Whenever I have used Behringers
I have noticed a lack of headroom and easy distortion at the top end of
the meters. With the Mackies I have had a much better experience.
Does anyone know what op amps they both use? Burr Brown? If you guys
really like the Behringer and not the Mackie I would love to know why.
My experience has been quite different. Thanks for any input.
Pooh Bear
bringm...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is it possible for us to discuss this without the flames? I am a
> electrical engineer and really like the Mackies and have not been
> impressed at all with the Behringers. Whenever I have used Behringers
> I have noticed a lack of headroom and easy distortion at the top end of
> the meters. With the Mackies I have had a much better experience.
>
> Does anyone know what op amps they both use? Burr Brown?
LMAO ! No they predominantly use op-amps from JRC/NJR ( New Japan Radio
Company ).
Burr-Brown ( now part of TI ) op-amps would probably treble the price ( or
more ) and actually likely make little difference to the sound either.
Graham
Phildo
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115498949.3...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Is it possible for us to discuss this without the flames?
As long as you stop making stupid statements then you won't get flamed.
>I am a
> electrical engineer
Do you have a degree? ;-)
> and really like the Mackies and have not been
> impressed at all with the Behringers.
That's strange. Given a blind test between the old Behringers and the
mackies nobody would be able to tell the difference. The new Behringers are
a lot better than the 1604s around today although I have yet to try the onyx
series.
> Whenever I have used Behringers
> I have noticed a lack of headroom and easy distortion at the top end of
> the meters.
I've always had that experience with mackies. Comes from the summing amps
crapping out way before they should do.
> With the Mackies I have had a much better experience.
Personally I think you've just fallen for the mackie marketing hype.
> Does anyone know what op amps they both use? Burr Brown? If you guys
> really like the Behringer and not the Mackie I would love to know why.
Mackie is overpriced and overmarketed. Behringer is the same level (or
better) of gear and half the price. You do the math.
> My experience has been quite different.
I think your experience is more tempered by mackie advertising than anything
else. Neither company produces great mixers (apart from the DDX3216) but
they are great for the low end user, light years ahead of what used to be
available. The modern Behringer stuff is better quality than the mackie. The
older stuff was pretty much identical and suffered the same flaws. As I said
before, in a blind test you wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
Phildo
bringm...@gmail.com
rudeness. It appears we have had exact opposite experiences regarding
Mackie and Behringer. Oh well. Regarding falling for marketing hype,
that's not it. I don't fall for it. I use me ears and they are very
good. Please refrain from the insults as I have not insulted you once.
Cheers
Kevin Aylward
If you check my posts, you will see that Phildo is an unqualified
layman, making many vacuous assertions, with persistent personal insults
from him the norm.
Kevin Aylward
> <bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1115498949.3...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> Is it possible for us to discuss this without the flames?
>
> As long as you stop making stupid statements then you won't get
> flamed.
>> I am a
>> electrical engineer
>
> Do you have a degree? ;-)
>
>> and really like the Mackies and have not been
>> impressed at all with the Behringers.
>
> That's strange. Given a blind test between the old Behringers and the
> mackies nobody would be able to tell the difference. The new
> Behringers are a lot better than the 1604s around today although I
> have yet to try the onyx series.
>
>> Whenever I have used Behringers
>> I have noticed a lack of headroom and easy distortion at the top end
>> of the meters.
>
> I've always had that experience with mackies. Comes from the summing
> amps crapping out way before they should do.
Have you done actual technical tests to verify this assertion, or are
you just using obviously known technical information to infer this, and
then just claim its your wonderful golden ears that allow you to notice
and not the technical information?
From Mackie marketing bumph we can infer that they use lower resisters
at their summing amps. We can then infer that maybe there is a
potential, in principle, that the summing amps might not have enough
drive capability. Whether this is truly the case needs either proper
tests, or a simple inspection of the circuit diagram.
To do the tests, one would need to put the same sine signal in each
channel, and as channel is added in, note the distortion.
Please explain exactly what you actually *do* that *verifies* that it is
the summing amps that causes you believe is the issue. "In my
experience" tells us nothing as to what objective tests you may, or may
not have done. Until you produce some objective experimental data, the
assumption must be that your claim is simply guesswork, based on
prompting by the Mackie marketing department.
Ralph Staub
> If you check my posts, you will see that Phildo is an unqualified
> layman, making many vacuous assertions, with persistent personal insults
> from him the norm.
...and even with all that against him, he still provides better, more
common sense advice than you. Pull your head out of your backside and
smell the dung you're flinging, Kevin.
Ralph
George Gleason
> bringm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>Yes I do have a degree, and your idea of stupid statements is just
>>rudeness. It appears we have had exact opposite experiences regarding
>>Mackie and Behringer. Oh well. Regarding falling for marketing hype,
>>that's not it. I don't fall for it. I use me ears and they are very
>>good. Please refrain from the insults as I have not insulted you
>>once.
>>
>>
>
>
> If you check my posts, you will see that Phildo is an unqualified
> layman, making many vacuous assertions, with persistent personal insults
> from him the norm.
>
>
is a well respected , experienced , knowledgeable, helpful industry pro
having honed his chops mixing some of the biggest acts in some of the
most famous venues around the world
while you kevster are a shitstain
George
bringm...@gmail.com
Ralph Staub
<snip>
> Until you produce some objective experimental data, the
> assumption must be that your claim is simply guesswork, based on
> prompting by the Mackie marketing department.
Until YOU provide some "objective experimental data" to prove him wrong,
Phildo's experience outweighs your ignorance.
Ralph
Geezer Sonics
bringm...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's how it works:
Anyone who disagrees with Phildos OPINON on Mackie mixers, has obviously
swallowed the Mackie cool aid. Phildo will tolerate no disagreement,
because he's right and you are wrong.
I promise, that in the future, Phildo will not hesitate to point out
that you are a know nothing idiot, because you think that Mackie mixers
are Better than Behringer. You will only be readmitted to the cabal, if
you return on hands and knees, and admit that Phildo was right all along.
Phildo.is.the.final.word.on.this.subject.
Got it?
Kevin Aylward
Oh, you must be the only one to have missed the bit, that its me that
qualified analogue design engineer, with a verifiable track record in
analogue design over 25 years, and Phil has neither, and we are
discussing analogue design here. So, just what ignorance are you
referring to?
Kevin Aylward
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>> bringm...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Yes I do have a degree, and your idea of stupid statements is just
>>> rudeness. It appears we have had exact opposite experiences
>>> regarding Mackie and Behringer. Oh well. Regarding falling for
>>> marketing hype, that's not it. I don't fall for it. I use me ears
>>> and they are very good. Please refrain from the insults as I have
>>> not insulted you once.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> If you check my posts, you will see that Phildo is an unqualified
>> layman, making many vacuous assertions, with persistent personal
>> insults from him the norm.
>>
>>
> And if you check the google record for this group you will find Phildo
> is a well respected
So, people respect someone that persistently insults pretty much
everyone, and I would take such peoples opinion seriously for what
reason?
If you google the sci.electronics.design ng I dare say you will find me
even more respected, so what's your point?
bringm...@gmail.com
Phildo
"Ralph Staub" <ra...@espsound.com> wrote in message
news:Wenfe.7208$_g1.5071@trnddc04...
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
>> If you check my posts, you will see that Phildo is an unqualified layman,
Actually far from unqualified Kev. I have a first class honours degree, not
that I insist on shouting about it from the rooftops in every post.
I also have many years experience as a working sound engineer.
Hell, I was even house engineer at a venue you would give your right arm to
play in for 2 years.
Phildo
George Gleason
I guess the truth hurts
behringers mixers are better than any mackie mixer I have used
though I have not used the new onyx line , so I reserve judgment on that
count
and no boddy givesd a rats ass who you agree with , just some truths are
self evident and phildo has the experiance to speak on these truths
love him or hate him, he is still correct on this
George
George Gleason
>>
>>And if you check the google record for this group you will find Phildo
>>is a well respected
>
>
> So, people respect someone that persistently insults pretty much
> everyone, and I would take such peoples opinion seriously for what
> reason?
he really only insults clueless idiots with self inflated ego like yours
>
> If you google the sci.electronics.design ng I dare say you will find me
> even more respected, so what's your point?
so why don't you go to your little sand box and do your shitting there?
>George
Kevin Aylward
> "Ralph Staub" <ra...@espsound.com> wrote in message
> news:Wenfe.7208$_g1.5071@trnddc04...
>> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>
>>> If you check my posts, you will see that Phildo is an unqualified
>>> layman,
>
> Actually far from unqualified Kev. I have a first class honours
> degree,
What field? Domestic science? Basket Weaving?
>not that I insist on shouting about it from the rooftops in
> every post.
I certainly don't. You do quite a dandy fine job of doing that for me.
Kevin Aylward
>>> And if you check the google record for this group you will find
>>> Phildo is a well respected
>>
>>
>> So, people respect someone that persistently insults pretty much
>> everyone, and I would take such peoples opinion seriously for what
>> reason?
>
> he really only insults clueless
Care to back that up with some actual facts? Be specific now. Seriously.
Present a real argument as to what I am clueless about?
Or do your always just aimlessly regurgitate anything you read?
George Gleason
> George Gleason wrote:
>
>>>>And if you check the google record for this group you will find
>>>>Phildo is a well respected
>>>
>>>
>>>So, people respect someone that persistently insults pretty much
>>>everyone, and I would take such peoples opinion seriously for what
>>>reason?
>>
>>he really only insults clueless
>
>
> Care to back that up with some actual facts? Be specific now. Seriously.
> Present a real argument as to what I am clueless about?
>
> Or do your always just aimlessly regurgitate anything you read?
>
so as far as this forum you are clueless
you clearly have a self inflated idea of your worth
again , seeing as you choose to be a wart on the sole of the forum
why not just go where you can contribute
perhaps
alt.look.at.my.degree
or rec.kevsters.blowbuddies
or show your worth here instead of just how much you need a bath
George
Kevin Aylward
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>> George Gleason wrote:
>>
>>>>> And if you check the google record for this group you will find
>>>>> Phildo is a well respected
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, people respect someone that persistently insults pretty much
>>>> everyone, and I would take such peoples opinion seriously for what
>>>> reason?
>>>
>>> he really only insults clueless
>>
>>
>> Care to back that up with some actual facts? Be specific now.
>> Seriously. Present a real argument as to what I am clueless about?
>>
>> Or do your always just aimlessly regurgitate anything you read?
>>
> You have not posted any understanding of live sound yet
More rhetoric.
As I said, care to *actually* *produce* some posting evidence of this?
>
> so as far as this forum you are clueless
So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim.
So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim.
So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim.
Look, dude, back up your claims, or retract them. If you can't back up
your claims, they are false by default. Its that simple.
Ron(UK)
> <jim...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1115243182.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Quick question.. Is the MACKIE 1604-VLZ a good choice to get for an
>>elementary school play? We don't have alot of money, or is it worth
>>spending more for the MACKIE 1604-VLZ Pro?
>>
>>Or is there a cheaper kind? (doesn't have to be mackie)
>
>
> Get the Behringer equivalent. Better and cheaper.
>
> Phildo
>
>
The only people who really like Mackie mixers are those who blew their
hard earned cash on one and now refuse to believe that they were duped
by the hype. The one sentence that turns up on almost all professional
musicians riders are NO MACKIE... When it comes to live audio they are
just not a pro piece of kit.
this time not IMHO
Ron
--
Lune Valley Audio
Public address system
Hire, Sales, Repairs
www.lunevalleyaudio.com
Ron(UK)
> Phildo wrote:
>
>> <jim...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1115243182.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Quick question.. Is the MACKIE 1604-VLZ a good choice to get for an
>>> elementary school play? We don't have alot of money, or is it worth
>>> spending more for the MACKIE 1604-VLZ Pro?
>>>
>>> Or is there a cheaper kind? (doesn't have to be mackie)
>>
>>
>>
>> Get the Behringer equivalent. Better and cheaper.
>>
>> Phildo
>>
>
>
> The only people who really like Mackie mixers are those who blew their
> hard earned cash on one and now refuse to believe that they were duped
> by the hype. The one sentence that turns up on almost all professional
> musicians riders are NO MACKIE... When it comes to live audio they are
> just not a pro piece of kit.
>
> this time not IMHO
>
> Ron
>
Phildo
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115512133.5...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Yes I do have a degree, and your idea of stupid statements is just
> rudeness.
You spout crap, you WILL get pulled up on it.
> It appears we have had exact opposite experiences regarding
> Mackie and Behringer.
I suggest you go back and look in the google archives for this group to see
what has been said about mackie. Suffice to say you are talking crap and all
I am doing is pointing this out to anyone who may be dumb enough to take it
seriously.
> Oh well. Regarding falling for marketing hype,
> that's not it. I don't fall for it.
Then you must be deaf as a post. Is the only other credible explanation.
> I use me ears and they are very
> good.
If you think mackie are good then I suggest you get yourself to an
audiologist soon as possible.
>Please refrain from the insults as I have not insulted you once.
Then stop spouting crap.
Phildo
bringm...@gmail.com
but i still love my mackie. hugs for all
Phildo
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115556761.0...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> that's no excuse for rudeness
>
If you come on here and post complete crap as fact you WILL get pulled up on
it. Continue to defend your statements and you WILL get insulted. Deal with
it.
Phildo
Phildo
"Geezer Sonics" <ge...@deafguy.com> wrote in message
news:geeze-30E8D8....@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Is nothing to do with mackie being better than Behringer as I think both
companies produce low end mixers that aren't really suitable for live work
(apart from the ddx3216). It is more down to the fact that mackie mixers are
crap yet their marketing hype has convinced gullible suckers like our
thirsty friend that they are up with the A&Hs, Midas and Soundcrafts of this
world. The modern Behringer mixers are indeed of better quality and half the
price of the current chinese-produced mackies. That is fact not opinion.
> Phildo.is.the.final.word.on.this.subject.
Don't just take my word for it. Just do a google search for this topic on
the newsgroup and see for yourself.
> Got it?
Thanks for getting that straight.
Phildo
bringm...@gmail.com
with irrational people. for some reason they really hate mackies. i'm
glad they have other mixers they like but it's a shame they can't allow
anyone else an opinion because they are obviously intelligent albiet
rude, arrogant and childish.
Phildo
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115582206.1...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> kevin, i learned long ago that you can't have a rational conversation
> with irrational people. for some reason they really hate mackies.
If you haven't worked out why yet then it is you who is irrational;.
> i'm
> glad they have other mixers they like but it's a shame they can't allow
> anyone else an opinion because they are obviously intelligent albiet
> rude, arrogant and childish.
And right.
Phildo
Geoff Wood
"Kevin Aylward" <see_w...@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
> If you google the sci.electronics.design ng I dare say you will find me
> even more respected, so what's your point?
What do you mean "even more respected" ?
geoff
Geoff Wood
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115582096....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> what a bunch of mackie haters here. i never knew they existed. wow,
> but i still love my mackie. hugs for all
Hope it is liquid-resistant ....
geoff
Geezer Sonics
wrote:
>
> Is nothing to do with mackie being better than Behringer as I think both
> companies produce low end mixers that aren't really suitable for live work
> (apart from the ddx3216). It is more down to the fact that mackie mixers are
> crap yet their marketing hype has convinced gullible suckers like our
> thirsty friend that they are up with the A&Hs, Midas and Soundcrafts of this
> world. The modern Behringer mixers are indeed of better quality and half the
> price of the current chinese-produced mackies. That is fact not opinion.
No, it is opinion. You (and all of your minions) can state that it is
fact, all fucking day, every day, and it won't change the fact that it
is an opinion.
> > Phildo.is.the.final.word.on.this.subject.
>
> Don't just take my word for it. Just do a google search for this topic on
> the newsgroup and see for yourself.
I've been around this group since the beginning. I don't need to google
for your diatribes on Mackie. Your complaints can be pretty easily
summarized;
-summing bus can be overloaded. However, an experienced operator can
mix on the Mackie without overloading the summing buss.
-The eq section is less than optimal. You get what you pay for.
-*Some* units have been unreliable. However, many people get years of
use from Mackies without incurring problems.
> > Got it?
I still got your number buckwheat. Never lost it.
> Thanks for getting that straight.
Sure Phildo, whatever you say.
Ralph Staub
> Oh, you must be the only one to have missed the bit, that its me that
> qualified analogue design engineer, with a verifiable track record in
> analogue design over 25 years, and Phil has neither, and we are
> discussing analogue design here. So, just what ignorance are you
> referring to?
The ignorance (and arrogance) that I speak of is the same thing that
makes you believe that an education and/or a degree makes you
intelligent. It's also the same ignorance that makes you spout your
mouth off about your education and 25 years of analog design.
It's painfully apparent that even with the education and years of
practice, you still don't have an "understanding". It's quite natural,
actually. Your self-agrandizing reaction is identical to a frustrated
musician, trying his whole life to be extraordinary, but no matter how
much practice he gets he never shows that magic spark... never exceeds
the sum of his knowledge. The only thing you have to cling to is the
education and experience that would not have been so wasted had it gone
to someone with the natural abilities which elude you. Facing that type
of futility day in and day out is quite often imbittering, and I'm sorry
for your plight. My empathy won't stop me from killfiling your drivel
though...
Plonk...
bringm...@gmail.com
Kindergarten. Surely that demands some RESPECT !
lighten up people
George Gleason
> George Gleason wrote:
>
>>Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>
>>>George Gleason wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>And if you check the google record for this group you will find
>>>>>>Phildo is a well respected
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>So, people respect someone that persistently insults pretty much
>>>>>everyone, and I would take such peoples opinion seriously for what
>>>>>reason?
>>>>
>>>>he really only insults clueless
>>>
>>>
>>>Care to back that up with some actual facts? Be specific now.
>>>Seriously. Present a real argument as to what I am clueless about?
>>>
>>>Or do your always just aimlessly regurgitate anything you read?
>>>
>>
>>You have not posted any understanding of live sound yet
>
>
> More rhetoric.
>
> As I said, care to *actually* *produce* some posting evidence of this?
>
>
>>so as far as this forum you are clueless
>
>
> So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim.
> So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim.
> So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim. So you claim.
>
> Look, dude, back up your claims, or retract them. If you can't back up
> your claims, they are false by default. Its that simple.
>
>
here is your history, show me the live sound posts.
show me where your anything but a wanker
the proof is in your google
George
George Gleason
> In article <3e796oF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Is nothing to do with mackie being better than Behringer as I think both
>>companies produce low end mixers that aren't really suitable for live work
>>(apart from the ddx3216). It is more down to the fact that mackie mixers are
>>crap yet their marketing hype has convinced gullible suckers like our
>>thirsty friend that they are up with the A&Hs, Midas and Soundcrafts of this
>>world. The modern Behringer mixers are indeed of better quality and half the
>>price of the current chinese-produced mackies. That is fact not opinion.
>
>
> No, it is opinion. You (and all of your minions) can state that it is
> fact, all fucking day, every day, and it won't change the fact that it
> is an opinion.
>
>
>
I have owned enough of both(well over a dozen each of both mackie and
behringer mixer)
the behringer sounds better is more reliable and cost 2/3rds less
than the mackie
George
George Gleason
> In article <3e796fF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
>
>
>>>Oh well. Regarding falling for marketing hype,
>>>that's not it. I don't fall for it.
>>
>>Then you must be deaf as a post. Is the only other credible explanation.
>>
>>
>>>I use me ears and they are very
>>>good.
>>
>>If you think mackie are good then I suggest you get yourself to an
>>audiologist soon as possible.
>
>
> who holds an opinion different from yours. Ponce.
it is not a "opinion" it is a experienced observed fact
it is 6 1402 I bought all at once cooking themselves due to poor design
it is a B 802 that worked through a torrential downpour uncovered
you may be a geezer but you are confusing experience with opinion
it is not my opinion that behringer mixers are better
it is a fact
but why the hell are we arguing about whos turd stinks less?
george
Tim Scott
> In article <3e796oF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is nothing to do with mackie being better than Behringer as I think both
>> companies produce low end mixers that aren't really suitable for live
>> work
>> (apart from the ddx3216). It is more down to the fact that mackie mixers
>> are
>> crap yet their marketing hype has convinced gullible suckers like our
>> thirsty friend that they are up with the A&Hs, Midas and Soundcrafts of
>> this
>> world. The modern Behringer mixers are indeed of better quality and half
>> the
>> price of the current chinese-produced mackies. That is fact not opinion.
>
> No, it is opinion. You (and all of your minions) can state that it is
> fact, all fucking day, every day, and it won't change the fact that it
> is an opinion.
>
>
>> > Phildo.is.the.final.word.on.this.subject.
>>
>> Don't just take my word for it. Just do a google search for this topic on
>> the newsgroup and see for yourself.
>
> I've been around this group since the beginning. I don't need to google
> for your diatribes on Mackie. Your complaints can be pretty easily
> summarized;
>
> -summing bus can be overloaded. However, an experienced operator can
> mix on the Mackie without overloading the summing buss.
So what you are saying, is that someone who operates a Makie desk has to
work harder to get round its limitations of not being able to cope with
signals in the way a desk is supposed to.
I would assume you would mean an experienced operator of a Makie desk, as
any pro level engineer, i.e. what most here would define as being an
experienced operator would hate having to work in such a backward way. An
experienced operator would be used to using proper desks that work in the
way they should, and certainyl would not be used to having to work in such a
way.
Phildo
"Geoff Wood" <ge...@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote in message
news:427e...@clear.net.nz...
>
> "Kevin Aylward" <see_w...@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
>
>> If you google the sci.electronics.design ng I dare say you will find me
>> even more respected, so what's your point?
>
design where you have experience and could maybe contribute something
useful.
This is a pro live sound newsgroup where you have nothing of value to
contribute because your posts so far have shown you to lack any knowledge of
professional live sound.
Face it Kev, you blew it here. It may have come as a blow to your oversized
ego that the entire group didn't bow down and go into a bout of Kev-worship
but you'll just have to understand you just don't have any credibility here.
Respect has to be earned and having a degree just doesn't cut it here.
Phildo
Tim Scott
> If you google the sci.electronics.design ng I dare say you will find me
> even more respected, so what's your point?
If we as sound engineers went into your sci elec design group and started
spouting out things that weren't true and backed it up with nothing, and
then said we must be right because we are sound engineers and not electrical
engineers, what kind of reaction do you think we would get?
Rob Beech
"Ole Johansen" <oleg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:427e8d8e$1@proxy....
>
> I'll step into this discussion with both feet fully knowing that a few
> people will jump all over my post........
>
> To start off I'll just say that I have worked for the norwegian import
> company of Behringer. I have also for years sold Mackie products. My job
has
> been to sell, install and do service on equipment plus teaching users to
use
> specific products.
>
> In my opinion you usually get what you pay for. Behringer are cheap copies
> so that's what you get. they have very good lawyers so they know how close
> to an original they can go without loosing a lawsuit..... (just look at
the
> new guitar pedals that are Boss copies....) I would never ever recomend
any
> digital Behringer products. But I have not used their digital mixer enough
> to really comment on that...... But I have not been impressed with what
I've
> heard /seen so far......
>
> Mackie are in my experience better than Behringer both in sound and build.
> The percentage of returned products are a lot higher in behringer land
than
> Mackie land. Behringer even copied the Mackie marketing strategy.... The
> Behringer ULN preamps........ probably their biggest marketing flop
> ever...... Mackie have kept their prices at the same level as their US
> made products even after they moved production to Asia. So they are now
> overpriced..... But not as much as some people here suggest.......
>
> So to sum up my post: Behringer are cheap entrylevel products. Mackie are
a
> step up in quality but 2 steps up in price.......
>
> Ole
>
>
I can't say i personally agree with that. but again its my opinion.
i have a lot of behringer gear. including such things as teh DDX3216,
deq2496 and dcx2496. i also use 4 of their ep2500's as monitor amps.
to add to this i have about a dozen 2 channel compressors, a handful of 2
and 4 channel gates. and knocking around somewhere at home an old 2310
corssover, mx3242x desk a 4 and 8 channel DI, fx units and the ultrabass.
After owning this gear for some time (some of it years) i have had 1
problem. mx3242x group faders got a bit dirty and crackled. this was sorted
almost instantly by behringer.
The rest of it, most of which is used night after night and shall we say,
not looked after as well as it could be. has never caused problems once.
I beleive their ddx3216 is a great digi desk regardles of price and the low
price is a bonus.
I also beleive you have to spend over 5 times as much to get a digital eq or
speaker management processor to beat the new 2496 range.
ep2500 is £180 here in the uk now and there are many an amp at £600 that
dont come close.
On the other hand i have owned mackie speakers and mackie desks in teh past.
i have used many a mackie desk in venues around the country and beyond. and
i have not yet had an item that has not failed.
my items failed within 6 months. many a story about trouble with the desks
i have also used in venues.
i've had a bad experience with mackie and dont want to go there again.
Rob
Rob Beech
<bringm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115587812....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> And I on the other hand have a certificate for helping stack chairs in
> Kindergarten. Surely that demands some RESPECT !
>
> lighten up people
>
Geoff Wood
"Tim Scott" <tim....@nospamplease.orange.net> wrote in message
news:d5m543$qdr$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
I have a collection of lower end gear that includes Mackie 8-buss (only use
channels strip to direct outs), and a 1202VLZ -Pro mixers. I also have some
Alto mixers (Taiwanese). The sound quality is not dissimilar, the Altos
were *much* cheaper, but the Mackies are sure more solidly built.
I also have an RNP which sounds significantly nicer than all the previous.
geoff
Kevin Aylward
> In article <3e796oF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is nothing to do with mackie being better than Behringer as I think
>> both companies produce low end mixers that aren't really suitable
>> for live work (apart from the ddx3216). It is more down to the fact
>> that mackie mixers are crap yet their marketing hype has convinced
>> gullible suckers like our thirsty friend that they are up with the
>> A&Hs, Midas and Soundcrafts of this world. The modern Behringer
>> mixers are indeed of better quality and half the price of the
>> current chinese-produced mackies. That is fact not opinion.
>
> No, it is opinion. You (and all of your minions) can state that it is
> fact, all fucking day, every day, and it won't change the fact that it
> is an opinion.
Agreed.
>
>
>>> Phildo.is.the.final.word.on.this.subject.
>>
>> Don't just take my word for it. Just do a google search for this
>> topic on the newsgroup and see for yourself.
>
> I've been around this group since the beginning. I don't need to
> google for your diatribes on Mackie. Your complaints can be pretty
> easily summarized;
>
> -summing bus can be overloaded. However, an experienced operator can
> mix on the Mackie without overloading the summing buss.
Yep. Phildo clearly is not knowledgably enough to know how to operate a
mixer correctly. He translates his lack of experience to, the mixer
sucks.
Its a classic case of "a bad workman blames his tools".
Kevin Aylward
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
>> Oh, you must be the only one to have missed the bit, that its me that
>> qualified analogue design engineer, with a verifiable track record in
>> analogue design over 25 years, and Phil has neither, and we are
>> discussing analogue design here. So, just what ignorance are you
>> referring to?
>
> The ignorance (and arrogance) that I speak of is the same thing that
> makes you believe that an education and/or a degree makes you
> intelligent. It's also the same ignorance that makes you spout your
> mouth off about your education and 25 years of analog design.
Oh...
>
> It's painfully apparent that even with the education and years of
> practice, you still don't have an "understanding". It's quite natural,
> actually. Your self-agrandizing reaction is identical to a frustrated
> musician, trying his whole life to be extraordinary, but no matter how
> much practice he gets he never shows that magic spark... never exceeds
> the sum of his knowledge. The only thing you have to cling to is the
> education and experience that would not have been so wasted had it
> gone to someone with the natural abilities which elude you. Facing
> that type of futility day in and day out is quite often imbittering,
> and I'm sorry for your plight. My empathy won't stop me from
> killfiling your drivel though...
>
In other words, no, you don't have any evidence of my ignorance after
all, just more of the same tired old rhetoric.
Kevin Aylward
> "Kevin Aylward" <see_w...@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:QWofe.21872$a9....@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>> If you google the sci.electronics.design ng I dare say you will find
>> me even more respected, so what's your point?
>
> If we as sound engineers went into your sci elec design group and
> started spouting out things that weren't true and backed it up with
> nothing,
And what exactly have I claimed that wasn't true?
Be specific now.
Phildo
> In article <3e796oF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is nothing to do with mackie being better than Behringer as I think both
>> companies produce low end mixers that aren't really suitable for live
>> work
>> (apart from the ddx3216). It is more down to the fact that mackie mixers
>> are
>> crap yet their marketing hype has convinced gullible suckers like our
>> thirsty friend that they are up with the A&Hs, Midas and Soundcrafts of
>> this
>> world. The modern Behringer mixers are indeed of better quality and half
>> the
>> price of the current chinese-produced mackies. That is fact not opinion.
>
> No, it is opinion. You (and all of your minions) can state that it is
> fact, all fucking day, every day, and it won't change the fact that it
> is an opinion.
You just keep on telling yourself that if it makes you feel any better about
how stupid you are making yourself look on here every time you stick up for
mackie.
> I still got your number buckwheat. Never lost it.
Then how about actually getting a clue after all this time? Jeez, some
people never learn.
>> Thanks for getting that straight.
>
> Sure Phildo, whatever you say.
You just keep repeating your little "mackie are great" mantra child. The
rest of us will keep laughing at you.
Phildo
Phildo
> "Ole Johansen" <oleg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:427e8d8e$1@proxy....
>>
>> I'll step into this discussion with both feet fully knowing that a few
>> people will jump all over my post........
Not at all. People that spout crap get educated. Yours is a well reasoned
post even if a lot of what you say is a couple of years out of date.
>> To start off I'll just say that I have worked for the norwegian import
>> company of Behringer. I have also for years sold Mackie products. My job
> has
>> been to sell, install and do service on equipment plus teaching users to
> use
>> specific products.
How long ago did you do this? Your views seem somewhat out of date.
>> In my opinion you usually get what you pay for. Behringer are cheap
>> copies
>> so that's what you get. they have very good lawyers so they know how
>> close
>> to an original they can go without loosing a lawsuit..... (just look at
> the
>> new guitar pedals that are Boss copies....) I would never ever recomend
> any
>> digital Behringer products. But I have not used their digital mixer
>> enough
>> to really comment on that...... But I have not been impressed with what
> I've
>> heard /seen so far......
That goes against the views of every other poster on here that has used the
digital equipment and love it.
>> Mackie are in my experience better than Behringer both in sound and
>> build.
Your experience differs greatly from mine and many other posters here.
>> The percentage of returned products are a lot higher in behringer land
> than
>> Mackie land.
You forgot to use "used to be" instead of "are".
>Behringer even copied the Mackie marketing strategy.... The
>> Behringer ULN preamps........ probably their biggest marketing flop
>> ever...... Mackie have kept their prices at the same level as their US
>> made products even after they moved production to Asia. So they are now
>> overpriced..... But not as much as some people here suggest.......
Why pay more than double for what is essentially the same product and get
something that is less reliable?
>> So to sum up my post: Behringer are cheap entrylevel products. Mackie are
> a
>> step up in quality but 2 steps up in price.......
Maybe a couple of years ago. Mackie quality went down drastically when they
moved production to Asia. Behringer quality went up dramatically when they
opened their own factory in China and stopped using OEM manufacturers.
Mackie were good in their day and Behringer used to be cheap copies of
mackie. Times have changed.
Phildo
Phildo
> That's what i like about you Phildo, your immediate need to slam anyone
> who holds an opinion different from yours. Ponce.
In this case it is not an opinion but rather a fact.
You are correct however, I do have a very low tolerance for idiots,
especially idiots who continue to insist they are right even after the truth
has been pointed out to them.
Suffice to say you fall comfortably in to that category.
Phildo
Pooh Bear
Kevin Aylward wrote:
> Yep. Phildo clearly is not knowledgably enough to know how to operate a
> mixer correctly. He translates his lack of experience to, the mixer
> sucks.
>
> Its a classic case of "a bad workman blames his tools".
Or maybe " a bad design shows its weaknesses " ?
Graham
Phildo
>
>> Yep. Phildo clearly is not knowledgably enough to know how to operate a
>> mixer correctly. He translates his lack of experience to, the mixer
>> sucks.
You wish Kev. I know how to use a mackie and get past its shortcomings.
Thing is, I shouldn't have to. If the mixer was any good in the first place.
Someone like yourself without the know-how and experience I have would not
be able to get good results from the mackie which means, when you get right
down to it, that the mixer sucks.
I shall have to come round in person when I get off and explain this basic
principle to you since you only live a few minutes away from me.
Phildo
Steve White
> And what exactly have I claimed that wasn't true?
>
> Be specific now.
That you aren't a troll. Is that specific enough.
Mind, credit where credit's due ... your trolling still seems to be paying
off ... so we can at least accept that you are good at trolling.
Steve W
bringm...@gmail.com
Geezer Sonics
wrote:
I have little regard for most of your opinions Phildo, this one included.
Kevin Aylward
>> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>
>>> Yep. Phildo clearly is not knowledgably enough to know how to
>>> operate a mixer correctly. He translates his lack of experience to,
>>> the mixer sucks.
>
> You wish Kev. I know how to use a mackie and get past its
> shortcomings.
Apparently not. I have actually, dare I say "sound engineered" with one
on many occasions. Never had a compliant about any distortion, from the
band or the crowd.
> Thing is, I shouldn't have to. If the mixer was any
> good in the first place. Someone like yourself without the know-how
> and experience I have would not be able to get good results from the
> mackie
I simply turn it on, and plug the mic in. Sounds fine.
>which means, when you get right down to it, that the mixer
> sucks.
Has a large gravitational field does it?
>
> I shall have to come round in person when I get off and explain this
> basic principle to you since you only live a few minutes away from me.
>
> Phildo
Please do.
Kevin Aylward
Here we go again. As to what many matters am I trolling on? Please be
specific now.
Yep. This all says much. Not one, can back up their claims.
Steve White
> Here we go again. As to what many matters am I trolling on? Please be
> specific now.
>
> Yep. This all says much. Not one, can back up their claims.
Have you fogotten already?
Anyone reading this only has to search Google to find the evidence.
Steve W
Geezer Sonics
wrote:
> You just keep on telling yourself that if it makes you feel any better about
> how stupid you are making yourself look on here every time you stick up for
> mackie.
If I cared about your perception of me, I wouldn't bother posting here.
And fuck you, if you think that your proclamation of character really
means anything.
It isn't about sticking up for Mackie. It's about sticking up for
personal choice, if someone says they are comfortable with using a
Mackie product.
The fact is, a percentage of this group feels justified in crucifying
anyone who doesn't agree with the groups' bias against a product, or the
company, and you are the asshat who leads the charge.
> > I still got your number buckwheat. Never lost it.
>
> Then how about actually getting a clue after all this time? Jeez, some
> people never learn.
Learn what Phildo, that everyone must toe your line? I agree, I will
never learn that.
> >> Thanks for getting that straight.
> >
> > Sure Phildo, whatever you say.
>
> You just keep repeating your little "mackie are great" mantra child. The
> rest of us will keep laughing at you.
I didn't say Mackies are great, post it if you can prove I did. And at
47, I'm not a child. And it will be cold day in hell, if I ever lose
sleep because *you* are laughing at me.
Geezer Sonics
wrote:
> I shall have to come round in person when I get off and explain this basic
> principle to you since you only live a few minutes away from me.
>
> Phildo
Is this a threat?
Geezer Sonics
"Tim Scott" <tim....@nospamplease.orange.net> wrote:
> > I've been around this group since the beginning. I don't need to google
> > for your diatribes on Mackie. Your complaints can be pretty easily
> > summarized;
> >
> > -summing bus can be overloaded. However, an experienced operator can
> > mix on the Mackie without overloading the summing buss.
>
>
> So what you are saying, is that someone who operates a Makie desk has to
> work harder to get round its limitations of not being able to cope with
> signals in the way a desk is supposed to.
> I would assume you would mean an experienced operator of a Makie desk, as
> any pro level engineer, i.e. what most here would define as being an
> experienced operator would hate having to work in such a backward way. An
> experienced operator would be used to using proper desks that work in the
> way they should, and certainyl would not be used to having to work in such a
> way.
Tim, the summing buss issue proclaimed as a big problem. the simple
solution is set channel faders a little lower than nominal, or give up a
bit of noise floor by attenuation at the mic pre. Neither of those
solutions require an extraordinary amount of skill, or experience to
implement.
And if system operator doesn't have the ability to comprehend or
implement those "fixes", chances are that they shouldn't be using a
board that's anymore complicated than the Mackie.
I do agree that a step up to a Mix Wiz, would be large improvement in
function and performance over any of the Mackies up to, and including
the VLZpro. The Onyx seems like it addresses the shortcomings of its
ancestors.
Geezer Sonics
<rqwfe.725028$w62.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
George Gleason <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Mixing on a m#ckie is like driving a 60's BSA with the right side shift
> and left side brake
> works fine(for a short while) as long as you learn how freaking stupid
> its design is
The basic Mackie design is 15 years old. Yes, like the BSA, it is out of
date.
Tim Scott
No, read what Phildo has written, he has offered a free training session, at
your premises, and a demo of why makie desks are not good.
Geezer Sonics
<bPvfe.724852$w62.2...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
George Gleason <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Geezer Sonics wrote:
> > In article <3e796fF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Oh well. Regarding falling for marketing hype,
> >>>that's not it. I don't fall for it.
> >>
> >>Then you must be deaf as a post. Is the only other credible explanation.
> >>
> >>
> >>>I use me ears and they are very
> >>>good.
> >>
> >>If you think mackie are good then I suggest you get yourself to an
> >>audiologist soon as possible.
> >
> >
> > That's what i like about you Phildo, your immediate need to slam anyone
> > who holds an opinion different from yours. Ponce.
>
> it is not a "opinion" it is a experienced observed fact
> it is 6 1402 I bought all at once cooking themselves due to poor design
> it is a B 802 that worked through a torrential downpour uncovered
And none of the original series mixers, have been in the product line
for some time.
> you may be a geezer but you are confusing experience with opinion
> it is not my opinion that behringer mixers are better
> it is a fact
We'll have to disagree on that.
> but why the hell are we arguing about whos turd stinks less?
I am not arguing with you.
Kevin Aylward
Not good != bad
Kevin Aylward
Indeed. I Could not agree more more.
Phildo
> I have little regard for most of your opinions Phildo, this one included.
Your loss child.
Phildo
Phildo
> In article <3e8ks6F...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I shall have to come round in person when I get off and explain this
>> basic
>> principle to you since you only live a few minutes away from me.
>>
>
Much as you would like it to be given your current childish tantrum, no.
More a "meet up for a beer and discuss this in person".
Better luck next time child.
Phildo
Phildo
> In article <3e8kauF...@individual.net>, "Phildo" <Ph...@phildo.net>
> wrote:
>
>> You just keep on telling yourself that if it makes you feel any better
>> about
>> how stupid you are making yourself look on here every time you stick up
>> for
>> mackie.
>
> If I cared about your perception of me, I wouldn't bother posting here.
And yet when I make you look stupid you go on a tirade of phildo-bashing.
Very mature of you.
> And fuck you, if you think that your proclamation of character really
> means anything.
Well it obviously means a hell of a lot to you or else you wouldn't get so
upset and throw such a hissy fit. Calm down child, it's only usenet.
> It isn't about sticking up for Mackie. It's about sticking up for
> personal choice, if someone says they are comfortable with using a
> Mackie product.
If someone spouts crap they will get pulled up on it. If they make an
incorrect statement they will get educated, if they continue to stick by
their mistakes then they will get abuse for being so stupid. If. like
yourself, they get upset at being shown to be a bit of a thicky then a
flamewar will ensue. That's usenet. If you don't like it then don't bother
coming here.
> The fact is, a percentage of this group feels justified in crucifying
> anyone who doesn't agree with the groups' bias against a product, or the
> company, and you are the asshat who leads the charge.
Just because you got shown up to be a dimwit by sticking up for mackie don't
try to take it out on other people. Deal with your own problems instead of
trying to blame others for your shortcomings.
Has it occurred to you that there is a very good reason so many people here
dislike mackie mixers and are so vocal about their views? Maybe you should
take this as an opportunity to learn instead of just messing in your daiper
when people don't agree with you? Are you so dimwitted that you ignore all
the people telling you that you are wrong in your views and fail to grasp
the most simple of concepts that they in fact could just be right. Is your
ego so over-inflated that you cannot possibly admit to the possibility you
may be wrong, even to yourself?
>> > I still got your number buckwheat. Never lost it.
>>
>> Then how about actually getting a clue after all this time? Jeez, some
>> people never learn.
>
> Learn what Phildo, that everyone must toe your line? I agree, I will
> never learn that.
No, people should learn that some things are fact and not opinion. You don't
have to agree with my opinion when I state it but to ignore facts is just
idiotic on your part and only serves to show you as clueless to everyone
else here. Instead of sticking to your views come hell or high water, try
looking at the facts with an open mind, read the posts of your fellows on
here and learn from their shared experiences. That is what we are here to
do - share experiences and learn from each other, correcting misinformation
where it occurs and stopping the spread of such marketing department created
fairy stories.
>> >> Thanks for getting that straight.
>> >
>> > Sure Phildo, whatever you say.
>>
>> You just keep repeating your little "mackie are great" mantra child. The
>> rest of us will keep laughing at you.
>
>
> I didn't say Mackies are great, post it if you can prove I did.
No, I suppose you didn't. Still, you stick up for them which is just as bad.
> And at
> 47, I'm not a child.
Could have fooled me. You are posting like a 9 year old spoiled brat.
> And it will be cold day in hell, if I ever lose
> sleep because *you* are laughing at me.
That's why you have made several very angry-sounding phildo-bashing posts
today saying how much I don't bother you. Methinks you doth protest too
much.
Come back when you have a clue child.
Phildo
shannon
Its not the basic design that pisses me off, its the lack of pads.
I see them with clip lights nailed and the masters pulled back used by
people who don't have a clue how to make an external pad, and nor should
they have to.
Other than that, its a small appliance.
Years ago, EV bought Tapco and they marketed a mixer called the C12
which had the same cheap look and the same marketing claims as the
Mackie. The same claims that they hadn't done anything fancy with the
outside so that they could pay for good circuitry inside.
Same shit different day.
Its more like 25 years ago though, and all thats changed is the op amp
models.
Geezer Sonics
> > The basic Mackie design is 15 years old. Yes, like the BSA, it is out of
> > date.
>
> Its not the basic design that pisses me off, its the lack of pads.
> I see them with clip lights nailed and the masters pulled back used by
> people who don't have a clue how to make an external pad, and nor should
> they have to.
Good point. A wide range mic pre should be able to handle a line level
signal, without forcing the user to insert an external pad.
> Other than that, its a small appliance.
I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but appliance is an accurate word
for the cheap small mixers.
> Years ago, EV bought Tapco and they marketed a mixer called the C12
> which had the same cheap look and the same marketing claims as the
> Mackie. The same claims that they hadn't done anything fancy with the
> outside so that they could pay for good circuitry inside.
What aI vaguely remember about those, was what seemed to be cheap faders
and pots.
> Same shit different day.
> Its more like 25 years ago though, and all thats changed is the op amp
> models.
Going back 25 years, I don't remember multi-segment metering on inputs,
channel mute switches, or PFL being all that common on low end mixers.
And you were lucky to get three bands of eq, and they were all fixed. I
think Kelsey was probably the Mackie of the day.
Geezer Sonics
wrote:
> And yet when I make you look stupid you go on a tirade of phildo-bashing.
> Very mature of you.
Hasn't happened yet Phildo.
> > And fuck you, if you think that your proclamation of character really
> > means anything.
>
> Well it obviously means a hell of a lot to you or else you wouldn't get so
> upset and throw such a hissy fit. Calm down child, it's only usenet.
Hardly a hissy fit.
> > It isn't about sticking up for Mackie. It's about sticking up for
> > personal choice, if someone says they are comfortable with using a
> > Mackie product.
>
> If someone spouts crap they will get pulled up on it. If they make an
> incorrect statement they will get educated, if they continue to stick by
> their mistakes then they will get abuse for being so stupid. If. like
> yourself, they get upset at being shown to be a bit of a thicky then a
> flamewar will ensue. That's usenet. If you don't like it then don't bother
> coming here.
And when someone persists in bullying his opinion, they get called back
on it. Deal.
> > The fact is, a percentage of this group feels justified in crucifying
> > anyone who doesn't agree with the groups' bias against a product, or the
> > company, and you are the asshat who leads the charge.
>
> Just because you got shown up to be a dimwit by sticking up for mackie don't
> try to take it out on other people.
You still don't understand that I am not "sticking up for Mackie".
> Deal with your own problems instead of
> trying to blame others for your shortcomings.
And what problems would those be? And what shortcomings, besides being
prone to argue with idiots on usenet.
> Has it occurred to you that there is a very good reason so many people here
> dislike mackie mixers and are so vocal about their views?
Speak for yourself. You are not the group.
> Maybe you should
> take this as an opportunity to learn instead of just messing in your daiper
> when people don't agree with you?
Diaper? Are you projecting?
> Are you so dimwitted that you ignore all
> the people telling you that you are wrong in your views and fail to grasp
> the most simple of concepts that they in fact could just be right.
Actually, I've heard that some people had good results with their
Mackies and Behringers, and that some haven't. Whose facts as I am
supposed to consider, MDST alumni only?
> Is your
> ego so over-inflated that you cannot possibly admit to the possibility you
> may be wrong, even to yourself?
My ego is quite properly inflated, thank you. Checked it today with the
Terrasonde Ego Analyzer.
>
> >> > I still got your number buckwheat. Never lost it.
> >>
> >> Then how about actually getting a clue after all this time? Jeez, some
> >> people never learn.
> >
> > Learn what Phildo, that everyone must toe your line? I agree, I will
> > never learn that.
>
> No, people should learn that some things are fact and not opinion.
Yes, and I happen to know the difference between the two. But I don't
believe that you do.
> You don't
> have to agree with my opinion when I state it but to ignore facts is just
> idiotic on your part and only serves to show you as clueless to everyone
> else here.
Once again, you are projecting your opinion as that of the group. And I
have the inflated ego?
> Instead of sticking to your views come hell or high water, try
> looking at the facts with an open mind, read the posts of your fellows on
> here and learn from their shared experiences. That is what we are here to
> do - share experiences and learn from each other, correcting misinformation
> where it occurs and stopping the spread of such marketing department created
> fairy stories.
I have considered the facts with an open mind, and the experiences of
many who post here. The fact that I, or anyone else, disagrees with your
opinion, hardly makes us dupes of "the marketing department". But
project as you wish.
> >> >> Thanks for getting that straight.
> >> >
> >> > Sure Phildo, whatever you say.
> >>
> >> You just keep repeating your little "mackie are great" mantra child. The
> >> rest of us will keep laughing at you.
> >
> >
> > I didn't say Mackies are great, post it if you can prove I did.
>
> No, I suppose you didn't. Still, you stick up for them which is just as bad.
>
> > And at
> > 47, I'm not a child.
>
> Could have fooled me. You are posting like a 9 year old spoiled brat.
And you are posting like a 5 year old, playground bully.
>
> > And it will be cold day in hell, if I ever lose
> > sleep because *you* are laughing at me.
>
> That's why you have made several very angry-sounding phildo-bashing posts
> today saying how much I don't bother you. Methinks you doth protest too
> much.
>
> Come back when you have a clue child.
Yeah dad, I'll get right on that.
Pooh Bear
Geezer Sonics wrote:
> In article <427fe3aa$1...@clear.net.nz>, shannon <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> > > The basic Mackie design is 15 years old. Yes, like the BSA, it is out of
> > > date.
> >
> > Its not the basic design that pisses me off, its the lack of pads.
> > I see them with clip lights nailed and the masters pulled back used by
> > people who don't have a clue how to make an external pad, and nor should
> > they have to.
>
> Good point. A wide range mic pre should be able to handle a line level
> signal, without forcing the user to insert an external pad.
Why ? There's a perfectly servicable line level balanced input designed for line
level signals.
Graham
Kevin Aylward
> "Geezer Sonics" <ge...@deafguy.com> wrote in message
>> 47, I'm not a child.
>
> Could have fooled me. You are posting like a 9 year old spoiled brat.
>
You kidding, right? Phildo is accusing someone else of being childish?