Konnekt 24D or Onyx 400F?

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:45 am

TC Gear doesn't sound like a cardboard box...

Some Mackies do...

---another one of my opinions...

BULLSHIRT, sir, and I challenge you to come up with solid proof of such contentions, if you're speaking about anything out on the market past the ONYX series. Twisted Evil

Where is your proof for such claims?

Seriously, I wouldn't put the TC preamps in any higher category than the ONYX, having heard and worked with both extensively. IMHO, they are both quite good, and in the same category: The last stop in quality and sonic character before spending the BIG bucks on Grace, Millenia, etc. Further IMHO, the only real differences are the features of the boxes themselves, the deployment, the ins, outs, software supplied, functionality, etc.

I firmly maintain - as I have done many times before - the biggest differences one THINKS they're hearing with these boxes (at this price range) is largely LEVEL change (NOT necessarily quality changes) and it's 99% subjective anyway. You have a good gig with one, so you love it. You like the colors, or the knobs, on the front panel. You like the way it looks in your rack, on your desktop, etc. etc. The driver for another crashes and tanks a session, so you hate it. Doesn't mean the hardware is good OR bad, just how you percieve it.

Perhaps the biggest complaint I can muster with the Mackie ONYX's (like most of their stuff as well) is the slightly unpredictable range in the last 1/4 turn of the input trims. They're usually tough to set (and reset) exactly the same way twice. (I don't know if the 400 or 800F has the same issues.) Beyond that, there's little to condemn on them, unless you just hate the idea of usuing a highly successful brand that is now manufactured overseas instead of at home in the states. (just like everyone else now, too...)

Go do a double-blind test and prove me wrong. Get me that "Cardboard sound" you're talking about and post it somewhere for all of us to hear. I dare you. Twisted Evil

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 7:27 am

That's an SR24, definitely "boxy"...

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 7:57 am

...You can hear that cardboard sound on some of the posts I've made, TGGP's "Devilskin Suitcase" would sound a hell of a lot better if it weren't recorded through a Mackie. There's very little dimension, little if any depth - I blame the board, and that board would be my old Mackie.

Which, along with many other songs I've recorded or mixed live on their boards, is enough reason for me to look elsewhere if I were to go shopping for another mixer or pre.

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:25 pm

BobRogers wrote:

... And sorry for editing you to sound like Yoda ...

apologise - do not
good - this is

unlearn what you have learned

do or do not
there is no try

Cool

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:42 pm

"Do or do not" hijack my thread, yo!

Banned. The whole lot of you. Under pain of Gearslutz.com

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:45 pm

See, this is what bugs me about Mackie bashing.... as usual, it's apples and oranges, never anyting tangible or provable. I thought we were talking about the 400F vs. the TC. A completely different class of product than the old original Mackie line.

The SR24 is (was) for Sound Reinforcement, it's not a recording front end per se; it's a live board, albiet with some pretty good features for the buck. Depending on the model, it might have been one of the older ones (pre "VLZ-PRO" preamps), or it might be one of the later generations. For the money, features & sound coming out of it, it (and the SR32) smoked anything else in its price class at the time of its release on the market. (20 preamps & four line ins of that calibre for under $1500?!?! C'mon...)

I've always said: If you can't make a good recording or live sound mix with a basic Mackie mixer, get out of the biz. There could be other things going wrong. IMHO, a "boxy" sound maybe has a lot more to do with the talent, mic choices and placement, or just a bad sounding room to begin with.

My old Mackies were wonderful products at the time, and I've made some great recordings with them before I moved on to the Onyx line. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Wink

Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:50 pm

I'm not bashing... OK, a little.

But seriously, Mackie makes a great product for quick and easy DJ setups, cheap (big) mixers for sound reinforcement (as you pointed out - yes, mine was an SR24x4 VLZ), and an all around sturdy build across their product line.

I've probably mixed on every model they've made within the past 15 years - as well as through many of their speaker cabinets...

However, I do not and cannot say that I'd look into purchasing another for critical recording - arguably, I've yet to hear anything (to my knowledge) recorded on either the rackmount Onyx Pre's or the TC, so on that point I'll gladly call Bullshirt on myself, and leave it at that...

Cool

Moderator Joined: Apr 13, 2006 Posts: 121

Sounds like you guys are debating Mackie pres vs. Mackie boards rather than "Mackie: good or bad" per se - the older VLZ and SR boards sound like cardboard because the channels do, but not the preamps necessarily.

I had a VLZ for submixing outboard synths, etc a few years ago, and bypassing the channel with a half insert to pick off of the preamps/inputs only to go to an A/D made a huge difference. The pres aren't Great River or Grace, but they are quite a bit better than the boards they came in. The channel EQs just killed any hint of sonic character to whatever goes through them (hence I no longer own a Mackie board...).

I've heard good reviews of the Onyx line (pres at least), but never the SR boards, or older VLZs - they are what they are. I think you are both right - the Onyx may be a better board in general, but being a preamp-only unit, the Onyx 400 should benefit from good preamps without the degradation of a mediocre channel strip.

The TC Konnekts are also great units for the money.

Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:18 pm

Fair enough, Bent. Thumbs Up

FWIW, I'm about to get a 400F for a client who needs 4 inputs/pre's for a home recording rig, and I'll give you an honest appraisal of how it works out. I'm also getting close to getting the Konnect for my own studio monitoring rig, so i may actually get to do an a/b with them both at some point.

In the meantime, consider this a standing invitation should you ever get to Phila someday, and I'll give you a first hand workshop with a live gig or two with the Mackie Onyx line.

Off to sell a couple of VLZ's on Craigslist.... Thumbs Up

Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:34 pm

I'll be up in Selinsgrove / Sunbury for a few days around the middle of June (my sister's getting married - she lives in Selinsgrove) but with the new job I don't think I'll be able to swing by your neck of the woods.

However, because of the new job I will be travelling occasionally on the company dime, so I'll be happy to take you up on the offer if the occasion arises...

Cool

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 1:40 am

I got my Mackie Onyx 400f in the mail today. Unable to wait, since my studio's packed up in boxes, I drove to my buddy's house to try it out.

We had a blast tonight. Recording is so much fun when there's no pressure and you're happy with the results. Even using untreated rooms and just the handful of mics I brought over, it may be some of the best drum and guitar work I've done (sonically). I'll attribute much of this to starry-eyed, new gear romance and being in an unfamiliar recording environment, but so far I'm very impressed with this unit.

Setup-and-installation was like Covergirl: easy, breezy, and beautiful. I say without exaggeration that it took under a minute.

The Mackie seems mindful of system resources. Probably not as low-latency as my old Alesis io26, but compared to how I've seen his Presonus FireStudio 2626 perform on his computer, it was like running a new system. I was able to record 8 simultaneous channels running dozens of heavy plug-ins without a hiccup.

Contrary to what's been posted--and I'll withold absolutes until I get to try it in familiar territory--I didn't notice any prickly AD conversion. Granted, I have only limited experience to draw upon, but the performances we captured tonight felt like they had depth and width I've never personally gotten before. Whether or not the Mackie was the better choice of the two units, tonight's preview leaves me very pleased and excited.

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:03 am

Glad to hear you like the 400F. Would have replied earlier but lack of experience meant I would have had to just "make something up" - hey I could'a been a politician...

Had mine for about 3 months and so far pretty pleased. It's easy to use, and I like the sound(that's subjective, huh?). Hardly ever DI into interface but have with this on bass and sounds great.
Only complaint is headphone levels seem a bit low - if I give to the drummer it's probably going to need some help.
Have to run gain quite high for an SM7 but that sounds good to...

This topic sponsored by: