1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Mackie HR824's revisited

Discussion in 'Recording' started by Screws, Feb 10, 2003.

  1. Screws

    Screws Active Member

    Feb 16, 2001
    Home Page:
    Well, you were all right.

    By that I mean that the 824's, though nice sounding to track on, and usable to mix on, were funny sounding in the low end, which has made translation to other speakers a major hit and miss affair.

    Being a relative newcomer to mixing, I was used to blaming myself for the consistently bad mixes I was hearing the next day - and the trouble was always in the low end with the kick and bass. Since I'm a bass player, it's not like I don't have a clue as to what the right balance and sonic relationship should be down there.

    But after the original Mackie HR824 post here, I started doing some tests (especially Bill Robert's 50hz test) and began to question not myself as much as the Mackies.

    I had begun using Auratone cubes with much greater confidence in my eq and efx decisions as well as balance issues, but I still had to check the 150hz-and-lower region on the Mackies. Same problems

    And then yesterday a fellow RO poster and friend loaned me his Dynaudio Acoustic BM6A's. What a joy to actually be able to hear clearly what's happening between the kick and the bass. Not to mention the lowend of the organs, strings, trombones and anything else below 200hz. LOWEND DEFINITION!!! And these things have a smaller woofer than the Mackie's. The high end and mids sound better too.

    Thanks to Dean Dydek for the extremely wonderful and enlightening experience I've received from his gracious loan. Thanks to Bill Roberts for the original Mackie post which gave me understanding about some of the reasons why I was pulling my hair out. Thanks to RO for this forum - gee, I'm gushing.
  2. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Jul 2, 2002
    77 Sunset Lane.
    KEWL!!! At last, someone who has the balls to admit when someone else is right! Kudos Screws! ... and to think of all that consternation that was goin' down on the boards in regards to this subject. I shuddered when I saw the topic but I must say I am totally pleasantly surprise by this post. This has made it worth it, Thanks Fats :D , Genelec, Hafler, KRK, and PMC
    Those are good. …………………….. Pick one.
  3. Mario-C.

    Mario-C. Active Member

    Nov 17, 2002
    Mexico City
    Home Page:
    Fats I've been lurking for months before joining the boards and it was the information that you and Bill posted here that helped me decide to go back to the NS-10's, I couldn't be happier, all my mixes are sounding better than ever, now I use the mackies to hold cups and cd's :D
  4. Davedog

    Davedog Distinguished Member

    Dec 10, 2001
    Pacific NW
    Recently i read back over that whole tour-de-force on the subject and was surprised by some of the vehement defense folks had at their choice of monitors...when really all that was needed was a few trials of different systems to confirm what was being taught...I lived in a studio years back that went from JBL 4311's to urie 813's(?)to a small set of westlakes...in each case,as we learned, we got better bass response by actually measuring the cone extrusion on the woofers and adhereing to this principle even though our ears said different....its really not hard to change ones mind when theres non-refutable proof right in front of you...i spent my days with the ns-10's too and they are a steep learning curve for anyone...its what you eventually want out of your effort that will pay dividends for you in the future....i could mix quality on 824's but i would have to 'ignore'particular things in the sound spectrum they present...i mix on a set of genelec 1029'sw/1091sub...this is a set of nearfields...i like it because i dont mix loud and the ear fatigue is at minimum,and i'm not driving them past their ability to accurately reproduce the tonal spectrum of the instruments i'm hearing...i reference to a pair of celestion model 3's for my home stereo ref's and check everything on a beautiful pair of b&o s75 4ways..for those who werent active in the early 70's listening and such these are some of the flattest speakers ever made...all the components are phase arrayed in the cabinets and are proof positive the danish folks have been high-degree audiofiles for some time now....peace :c:
  5. audiowkstation

    audiowkstation Active Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    I just want to be the bearer of good news. I had the 824's here for a while and my speakers are accurate in this room Better than +/- 0.8dB (at chair per channel and with both channels) from 19hZ to 17K

    Once you are use to it...other speakers inaccuracies hit you in the head with a sledge. You know what? The little auratones are very accurate 120 and up. NS10's 60 and up, Dynaudios (yep) 37 and up. I worked with dynaudio. They are the real deal.

    Now, I betcha I could dig a pair of 824's for theater sound in the consumer realm. You need that bass bump for movie sound.

    I am simply pleased that I had something to say that influenced you to make a change. This change helped. It is all about helping and "good news"

    I apologize if I got a little nasty about it but when you know something, it must be shared. If I cannot share knowledge, then what good am I?

    I won't steer anyone the wrong way here. I am passionant about this profession, I want to see someone eat my lunch in sound quality. Please set the bar high and reach for it. Once you grab it, set it a little higher..you will find it...keep going!!
  6. Alécio Costa - Brazil

    Alécio Costa - Brazil Distinguished Member

    Mar 19, 2002
    Indeed. Uncle Cedar and Bill just nicely stressed what I also noticed down here, but at first I just could not believe..

    My cheap Monitor Ones translate much better.
    Oh my God!
  7. Bowisc

    Bowisc Active Member

    Aug 22, 2002
    I'm a Believer.

    I've had the HR-824's for about a year now. And it's been a very difficult time getting them to cooperate with me. I am just reaching the point where I feel I can "work around" them, but decided instead to sell them and upgrade to BM6a's. I'm wasting may too much energy and effort trying to "work around" their many defficiencies.

    Had a chance to listen to the BM6a's last month over several occassions; took CD's with me. They have the articulate low-end/mid punch that the HR-824's lack. I finally felt more free to express than ever before.

  8. Rader Ranch

    Rader Ranch Guest

    i had the 824's side by side with ADAM S2A's for a number of weeks. i tried the ADAM's mainly 'cause of the hype surrounding the ribbon tweeter, but instead was completely sold by the low end. despite what specs the 824 has, the S2A's perceptually were just as deep, but far more tight and controlled/focused...and, like apparently most everyone else, my mixes began translating much better after switching.

    but there are, of course, countless examples where specs don't mean $*^t...or was that the point of the big thread folks are talking about??? sorry, i missed it... :)
  9. Alécio Costa - Brazil

    Alécio Costa - Brazil Distinguished Member

    Mar 19, 2002
    How much did you pay for the S2A´s?
    I have heard that S1á are around U$1400, passive models.

    Uncle Cedar, what is up with these ADAM´s?

Share This Page