I was in a local studio not long ago and they had Mackie'824s. At first I thought they sounded really good, although they seemed to have an exagerated bottom end.
I asked the engineer about the sub, and he replied " There isn't any. We shut it off, there was to much bottom end." As it was, everything I was hearing was from the
824's. Somewhat skeptical, I played the part that I needed to play for a session, and then went back to my own studio with some doubts about my own monitors - EV
Sentry 100's and some YSM 1's. About 6 weeks later I heard the final mix of that project and whaddya know? The mix had a very poorly defined and weak bottom
end. The room they were in was a well designed room and was designed and tuned by an outside consultant; so what gives? All reports I have read and heard from
users indicate this is a great monitor...
Bill Y
Comments
Screws, sound like your room is cooperating at those frequencys
Screws, sound like your room is cooperating at those frequencys but try this software package that is tested and fully calibrated. You can be flat at 50hZ and 63 but can be up a bunch at 55hZ.
Run this software provided to all at no charge and proceed with more testing. The sweep is most important. 4 station audio test equipemt for PC http://www.moonaudi…
PS, do the frequency f=generator, set both channels to -10 and sweep the frequency bar, watch that needle..if it swings back and forth as you go up and down, their is the problem. Mainly it is room generated.
Hi. 1- The Mackies are extremely under-damped in the bass, du
Hi.
1- The Mackies are extremely under-damped in the bass, due to the particular way the passive radiator is used. They ringggggg for long after the note has stopped. This means they blur and bloat the bass, but you cannot measure this with simple test gear.
2- The Rat Shack meter is total shite. I used to think at least the analog one was usable. But one day, I decided to put it into a real calibrator (GenRad). It was up to 20 dB wrong at the low and high ends. Toss it. It is only useful for getting an approximation of total SPL. It is not helpful for frequency response.
Originally posted by Bill Roberts: Good to see you come around t
Originally posted by Bill Roberts:
Good to see you come around the home again!
Well, thanks.
Work with what you got.
Whew! That's reassuring. I'll try to tame the low-end, somehow, though it might take some time. But it's the 3K problem that has been such an epiphony reading this thread. Yesterday I tried using mid-sweep EQ set to 3K and raising it up a decibel or two just to try to make sure I'm not overdoing it. I re-listened to some prior mixes this way and I'm left aghast wondering if this is more like what my mixes sounded like to others. But I realize that this isn't a way to correct for it. In fact, it might make the phase problem worse. But at least if I do this occasionally I'll be less likely to overemphasize this area in my mixes, which I might have been doing, at least on some.
About the CD, send me a link, it is a go.
Great. Unfortunately, all the info hasn't gotten put together yet in one place. When that finally happens, it will show up under the name "5th (or Fifth) or RAP" along with the liner notes for all the prior rec.audio.pro compilations at hoohahrecords.com/rap/index1.htm
But don't let that stop you. You can put in your order now. The disks will be ready any day now. Harvey Gerst is handling the money and distribution, which you can read about here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=F711262634CA465A.33B3C47507A7CDA9.DEFB4A705EE94155%40lp.airnews.net with another note later in that thread, found at
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=011DD4C0DDFF3B78.EB95FEAF67FDA0B7.0645A2A672CEE40E%40lp.airnews.net
You can find an almost-final list of the tracks to be on these 5 CD's here (see if you recognize any names :):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=asvsm7%24ct3%241%40bob.news.rcn.net
But in this recent update, Harvey mentions that a few more tracks will be added:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4EC0FB7FA5EC3733.9CA5AF9F5B425D1B.41E198F34554A2C8%40lp.airnews.net
And once everything is finished, the first link I mentioned above will have the final list.
;) For what it's worth, info on the ns10m. From the Man himself
;) For what it's worth, info on the ns10m. From the Man himself.
--Rick
Doesn't surprise me. They could have changed vendors 10 times s
Doesn't surprise me. They could have changed vendors 10 times since '79. My two Shack meters are a few years old. They are pretty accurate when measuring the overall SPL level of pink noise or music. But that is a average balance kind of thing. Actual sinewave frequency response outside of, say, 300 to 3,000 Hz is really bad. I was disappointed, having expected them to be better. I used a piston phone calibrator, then double-checked using a free-space calibrated mic. Same.
Originally posted by Bill Roberts:
I use a B&K myself, the shack meters use to be +/- 1 devices (1979). I guess Quality Control went into the trash as well. Maybe they use the same designers :^,
Here you go Screws http://www.macmusic.org/softs/soft.php/l
Here you go Screws
Originally posted by Bill Roberts: Screws, sound like your roo
Originally posted by Bill Roberts:
Screws, sound like your room is cooperating at those frequencys but try this software package that is tested and fully calibrated. You can be flat at 50hZ and 63 but can be up a bunch at 55hZ.Run this software provided to all at no charge and proceed with more testing. The sweep is most important. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.moonaudi…"]4 station audio test equipemt for PC[/]="http://www.moonaudi…"]4 station audio test equipemt for PC[/]
PS, do the frequency f=generator, set both channels to -10 and sweep the frequency bar, watch that needle..if it swings back and forth as you go up and down, their is the problem. Mainly it is room generated.
What a great free piece of software!
Thanks for the great link!
Carry on...
Hey Bill, Thanks big-time for the software link. I haven't
Hey Bill,
Thanks big-time for the software link. I haven't had a chance to use it yet, I've got to install some digidesign driver from their website so I can run the test tones out through my Audio Media card.
Meanwhile, I've started using an old pair of Auratones. WOW! Eq and mix decisions can be trusted on these ugly little things. Now it seems I only have to check the bass and occasionally check the entire mix on the Mackies.
Thanks for everything. Once I finish mixing I'll give you a call and see if we can meet regarding your mastering services.
I have recently did some mixes on hr824s and I am hearing the la
I have recently did some mixes on hr824s and I am hearing the lack of bass translation myself. Haven't had trouble with the 3k issue yet, but give it time I guess. I'm still a little wet behind the ears on this one.
I am curious about these spl meters, and think it will be a good investment to get one. (Now I'll know if I'll fry that mic when the guitar player refuses to turn down!)
I see radio shack has the analog needle one and the digital one with more bells and whistles for another $10.
You guys seem to say go for the needle one. What's the reason for this?
Thanks,
-Wes
Originally posted by Wes Loveday: I see radio shack has t
Originally posted by Wes Loveday:
I see radio shack has the analog needle one and the digital one with more bells and whistles for another $10.
You guys seem to say go for the needle one. What's the reason for this?
Thanks,
-Wes
I'm wondering the same thing. I have the digital meter from RS but have never tried to verify it's accuracy, because I don't have a good reference. Is it way off?
It seems hard to add anything more of value here regarding the M
It seems hard to add anything more of value here regarding the Mackies, but I thought maybe one more vote of validation would be just that.
I must say that I've also struggled with the lowend on the Mackies and something just not sounding right. I am first and foremost a drummer, and it is a struggle to get a good sounding drum sound mixed on the Mackies and have it translate well to other speakers.
I bought them because I tend to mix things a bit muddy, and I thought the warm low-end would help get things cleaned up a bit.
I have a set of M&K THX150's with the coupled THX 350 sub (for video stuff), and also a set of KEF 104's (home stereo). KEF, and PSB tend to have that british sound thing to me, where they are a bit on the warm side to but the low end is not real strong either. It's ironic that I like stuff mastered by others on the M&K's and KEF, but I don't like my stuff. And I really prefer the listening environment of the M&K over the others, but have never mixed with them.
Time does have a value.
I figure that by the time I'm done trying to get the bottom end to sound half way decent, I'm always sick of the material and spent almost as much time or more tweaking the bottom end as I did getting the tune cut to begin with. For me, I found there to be a major problem a bit higher than 55Hz though, it seems to extend up to the 150Hz range to me.
By the way Bill, I'm not sure that I can agree with your JBL 4311 choice? Maybe I'm just tired of seeing all those old 43xx boxes for the many years they were around and would like to believe something else has come along to replace them by now?
The Mackie 824 is a wonderful sounding speaker. When you hear pl
The Mackie 824 is a wonderful sounding speaker. When you hear playback on them there is a big fat lows and shimmering highs thing going on....
... (Swedish Chef) "The bass 't goes der boom boom and the highs t' go der tingy tingy... mmmm mork mork!"
...
But they're not ACCURATE! That's all. If your mix sounds like sh*t, studio monitors should reflect that, not put a dress and lipstick on it so it can dance around the cell for "Bubba". :D Just the fact that the 824 has been certified as a THX system belies the fact that they are more of a "playback" speaker rather than a "monitor". Fats
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarcasm is just one more service we offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If NS10s are not accurate and Mackies are not accurate, then wha
If NS10s are not accurate and Mackies are not accurate, then what's the difference? Either way, you have to learn the monitors and mix accordingly.
At least the Mackies let you hear all of the detail of high end digital recording, whereas the NS10s don't. I'd rather hear all the detail and adjust from there, than not hear everything. And everyone seems to complain about listening for extended periods on the NS10s. Not so with the Mackies.
Although I don't have the credentials of many on this bbs, I can still get good sounding mixes on the Mackies, that translate well on all other systems and that's the bottom line.
Ron, If they work for you that's wonderful. Good for you. T
Ron,
If they work for you that's wonderful. Good for you. The passive radiator continues to ring after an initial burst which to me, is a real problem with the 824's. IMO NS10's are more accurate than HR824's. I can mix on them for as long as I wish to and I don't find them fatiguing. I really wish people who have never used NS 10's would quit saying this. It isn't true. Any speaker will fatigue you, if you mix sucky! I will say I wouldn't want to mix on NS 10's only, however I could, if I had to. Perhaps what it is that I like about NS 10's is that they are so strong in the mids. This forces me to cut mids and smooth out a mix. I find that it makes for the mix's to translate to other speakers very well. It can't be ignored that NS 10's are regularly used to mix hits. I can't say I have ever heard of this with the Mackies although I wouldn't say it isn't possible. Exaggerated bass response to me presents a real problem in rooms that can't handle it and from the posts and critiques I have seen here at RO I would say the two problems seem to be a real problem for many who have reported using the Mackies. I have a real anti Mackie bias in regards to recording gear although I do think they make some outstanding portable PA systems. Fats
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tannoys, Dynaudio, Blue Sky, JBL, Earthworks, Westlake, NS 10's :D , Genelec, Hafler, KRK.
Those are good. …………………….. Pick one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.What you said Macaroni is certainly true. Here is where the
.What you said Macaroni is certainly true.
Here is where the difference lies.
Personal preference.
VS
Linear dynamics.
I can make the Mackie absolutely flat as a board at a given dB level. As you climb up in dB things change more than they do on NS10's. Music is made up of peaks and valleys in the dynamics and if a speaker performs with very close frequency response curves at various levels, then that is the accuracy that is much more important in music. I noticed a pair of used NS10's on ebay going for close to double retail new of a year ago. Why? Because all major engineers know that linear dynamics VS frequency response is the closest way to actually find the trouble spots. They are deadly phase accurate as well. Snares sound like snares, shakers like shakers and bass guitar like a bass guitar at all volumes within their abilities.
I REPEAT!
If the NS10's do not sound super smooth and sound like the best 60hZ and UP you have EVER heard, your mix is off! Your balance will not translate at all volumes!!!!! That simply, if they are nasty, you are making nasty sounds. They do not lie. I KNOW THIS!
There is an audiophile rave going on using a single 4 inch cone speaker in a TQWP enclosure. (Tuned quarter wave pipe)
For the first time, these audiophiles (thousands of them) are now experiencing things closer to what the engineers experienced during production. They are experiencing linear dynamics. JBL had the LE 5/2 driver in the 4310.and 4311 and the WX model which was one of the first mids to actually provide linear dynamics. Since the term linear dynamics had a patent pending and is now patented, the term "linear efficiency" prevailed. Those loudspeakers were the entire backbone for all productions of popular recordings from 1972 through 1982. The important thing for a monitor to do is provide proper dynamic coherency to the mix and stay within a dB swing that is acceptable at many volumes. In this, the Mackies’ fail sadly. Since Altec 604's (another linear eff. speaker was used exclusively in the 50's and 60's, the JBL in the 70's and 80's and the Yamaha in the 80's and 90's, why do we want to render mixes that are not consistent with all the art that is out there today? Do we want to invent the wheel?
I know MANY top failities that still use the 604's ALTECS from the 50's!! Why? They work. They work well. Motown used them, try to buy a set today. Just try, you think NS10's have gone up? The 4311's and the NS10's work.
Everyone is building some stuff to attract you and forgot the real deal.
What I use is the best loudspeaker for what I do for any price. I use the NS1000M. Any CD that is properly engineered is unbelievable. The bad ones sound like total shit. Take what you hear on NS10's and have a speaker that goes from 20hZ to 20K flat and their is more of this ugly factore to hear that I have to correct. I am hearing more Shit than ever and I have been in this profession now since 1976. Now my job is to polish turds and it stinks. Professional audio engineering and studio productions are becoming something that is loosing ground and If I can say anything to help the situation, I simply will and should. Their are engineers using all kinds of speakers out there since the standard is now gone to all but those who foresaw it like me and the inconsistencies that are happening make me do wild things just to be close to the pocket. Some people will get it eventually on their speakers and they should but really, why not start at the top and work your way through it instead of having another entire curve to have to deal with. I am afraid if this continues to go on, you will find that modern recordings will be totally incompatible with older recordings and this is why forces like Sony have developed SACD/DSD and not letting anyone in they do not approve of. This is the last gasp to save the recording arts from certain mis-calibration. Unfortunantly, this last gasp has produced some trash and treasures as well dude to differences in opinions. IF 80% of every one of my 14 to 15 thousand recordings sound great (commercial) and new stuff is sucking ass...you have to think about that for a while. I have, and it is here.
I have had people come in this facility and I cue up a CD and they have peed in their pants, literally. I have had this happen more than once but 100% of the folks say, this is the best I have ever heard this recording, and it is stock. That simple. Accuracy. I am listening now and it is hard to type, so bloody fine it makes you cry.
Their are some fine productions still happening, one thing is synonamous with all of them, mastering has been done on Linear Eff. loudspeakers.
Go out and buy any European speakers and rediscover how your recordings really sound. They got it going on. Cabasse, Eton, Dynaudio, Vifa, Seas, Peerless, Audax, Morel...just check them out. Much more like the real thing. Get a set of Missions and then go get a set of Bowers (B&W) Mike Knows.
It goes deeper than you realize and their are 900+ loudspeaker manufactures out there trying to protect their financial stakes in this too, not to mention equipment and head end manufactures.
Their is a standard and protocol. If it gets ruined, the entire realm is at stake.
I know, I am passionate about it too.
Remember, I am also a Loudspeaker consultant and designer.
I will compile a short list of loudspeakers that can actually translate. Fats did not name numbers as some of the westlakes can and some cannot, and their are some trashy JBL's out there too. A vega and a vette is not the same car and both are Chevrolets.
That is all I have to say. PM me if you folks cannot understand, I can cut and paste some of the 15000 words I have put on this thread
Just the fact that the 824 has been certified as a THX system be
Just the fact that the 824 has been certified as a THX system belies the fact that they are more of a "playback" speaker rather than a "monitor". Fats
I was just wondering if this statement applied to the Blue Sky System one (which is also certified as a THX system). I noticed that they were on your list of monitors that you suggested, so I was just curious what your experience with them has been and whether you consider them more of a "playback" type speaker?
Thanks!
Also, people here haven't talked about the "Adam" monitors here very much, any opinions on their accuracy or lack thereof? Over on musicplayer.com they seem to be getting rave reviews...
Bill & Fats... Just so you guys know, I'm learning a lot from
Bill & Fats...
Just so you guys know, I'm learning a lot from both of you and I appreciate your insights.
I'll be going to NAMM next week here, so I would love a list of linear efficient speakers to check out. I'll bring some ref CDs and see what I can hear/learn.
Believe me, I have no qualms about changing speakers. I just want to make sure I make a definite and significant improvement.
Thanks again.
When I used the NS10's (I use the 1000's now) I used them on sev
When I used the NS10's (I use the 1000's now) I used them on several amplifiers and they do make a difference. KR Audio Antares, Threshold Stasis, Yamaha P2500, Krell Model 20, Yamaha CA-810, and Yamaha B2. Mostly high end amplifiers, NOT stuff like the bright and brassy RA100. Always with Premium speaker cable too. Kimber Kable is my rec for speaker wire, the 4TC or 8TC.
Accurate dynamics need accurate amplification.
Bill (and others), I recently (before reading this post) ordere
Bill (and others),
I recently (before reading this post) ordered some Mackies for my home studio - thinking that they were really decent monitors for the money. However, you've got me ready to send them back. I was stuck between buying the Mackies or Dynaudio BM6A's. I went with the Mackies due to the near $500 price difference. However, if you guys think the Dyns are the way to go, then I will spend the extra to get a pair of speakers that I can feel confident about. Thanks for your thoughts.
Rob Chittum
Rob .... I have not had personal experience with the Dynaudio BM
Rob .... I have not had personal experience with the Dynaudio BM6A's .. so I can not comment about them. The Mackies are a good speaker, and placement will be critical, as will being able to do an RTA on the room, and use a good EQ to tune things up.
Speaking of RTA/EQ .. I bought a Berhinger ( I know guys!) 8024 new for $190 from one of the catalog houses.. it was just too good a deal to pass up, and I had read an unbiased personal review by a guy who used test equipment etc .. well, my A/B results of using it against how I currently have the room tuned, where I used an old Urie Sonopulse and AKG 451 w/Ashely EQ was VERY close with the Berhinger .. I was very surprised. I am not a Berhinger fan, but this unit, IMO, is a good option for those of us who may not have a fortune to invest in RTA/EQ's.
I hope someone will help Rob with the Dynaudio BM6A's issue. Again, just watch the low end on the Mackie .. if you get used to making good mixes on them, you'll be fine, they do, however, have thier "own sound", as do most speakers.
My personal take seems to be headed toward thinging that the current craze of bi-amped nearfields is over rated, and that a slightly larger good speaker and amp might well be better.
Having read through all the threads I have learned a lot about m
Having read through all the threads I have learned a lot about monitoring. It would seem my original simple question has started a small war of controversy; but hey, if people are asking questions they are still learning something. And they want to learn.
I think that given enough time an engineer could learn to mix on just about anything, once they develop a reference and learn it well. Without a reference you are shooting blindly in the dark.
Some references are more accurate than others because they reveal the detail of what the engineer is trying to achieve. If the details are foggy, hyped, twisted or just plain not heard, what is your reference for comparison?
As an example, the piece of paper sitting on your table - is it really white? compare it to another piece of paper. Are they both the same white? Does one look whiter if the lighting changes? Which one is really white now? What is your reference?
And so it is with speakers, from what I gather from the more learned and experienced people
replying to questions such as mine. I think it would be easier to produce a mix on a monitor that has been designed as an accurate reference, and lest we not forget to install them in a properly tuned acoustic enviroment to maintain that reference accuracy. Why do so many people refuse to use common sense and refuse to aknowledge that guys like Bill Roberts and Fats really know what they are talking about? It's easier to learn from somebody elses experiences and mistakes than to waste time blindly making your own mistakes to finally arrive at the same conclusions. Life is too short.
Bill Y.
Bill Y., Thank you. A vote of confidence sometimes goes
Bill Y.,
Thank you. A vote of confidence sometimes goes a long way. Sometimes I feel as if I am beating a drum that no one can hear, or that they simply refuse to hear as it doesn't validate their choices or preferences. It's like that Fleetwood Mac song, "Oh, Well",
"Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to....".
It really helps when sometimes, someone chimes in with a word of support. Right now I can really use it. Thanks so much ... Fats
:w:
I just read these threads and these guys are trying to tell you
I just read these threads and these guys are trying to tell you something. I own the Mackies and find that the main reson why I use them is to check for things under 60hz and to show clients what it might sound like in thier home system or in their 85 VW Rabbit with 2- 15" woffers crammed in th back :eek: I could care less about rap music but I'm into a little bit of exagerated bass thats why I like the Mackies. Thats also why I hate the son of a guns too because the phase goes a little wacky hence the bass boost and introduces masking and thus more alcohol consuption.
But when it comes to cutting the EQ I throw on the Auratones. I use them with a Samson Servo 260 amp. This setup is reletivley inexpensive and one of the standard tools of the trade. (SM57 anyone?)Like the NS10's, in their own way, they help show the freqs that need attenuation. Model # 5CTC, they are video shielded and have tweet unlike the first ones out. You can still get replacement woofers and such from the same guy thats been making them for years.
I use Auratones too. Some days I will mix on them alone dependin
I use Auratones too. Some days I will mix on them alone depending on how my ears are working. I haven't heard of the Samson amps being a standard but it is something to consider. I have seen print ads for the Samson powered monitors and they do look interesting. I use big ass Tannoy DMT 12's to check for ultra highs and lows. Between the 3 systems I get a real good idea of how the mix will "travel". Fats
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tannoys, Dynaudio, Blue Sky, JBL, Earthworks, Westlake, NS 10's :D , Genelec, Hafler, KRK.
Those are good. …………………….. Pick one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mix77: Larry Howard You are right man, B
Originally posted by Mix77:
Larry Howard You are right man, Bill and that other guy really know their sh*t.Mix77
Hmmm...is this some kind of real inside derogatory slam of my friend Fats?
if so...tone it down a bit, please.
I've been absent for a long while (cutting an album) and haven't kept up on my moderation duties as much as I'd like.
Well, I come back this morning to surf around a bit...and lo and behold I see we have a new friend...Mix77.
Hi Mix77...my name is recorderman... welcome to our humble little forum.
We prefer not to have flame wars here,
as can be found on many other sites (p.s.w., g.s., or the d.u.c....to name a few)....
...but be forwarned that there are more than a few people that do hang here from time to time that can smell the hype and ignorance, and do not like it....
...so if I'm wrong then I appologize...If I'm right, then cut it back a little or I'll have to either:
1. pull out my swiss army knife (and after choosing the right tool) cut it down to size.
2. Delete it
...and now back to our regularly scheduled program......
Originally posted by Mix77: Recorderman, We I first came on
Originally posted by Mix77:
Recorderman,We I first came on this site and as I read the post I felt the need to input some Professional help. Then came the slams by brainwashed "engineers" telling us how great this inferior gears is. It's one thing to say well that's all I can aford but to say in a cocky manner "this is what platium albums are made on" is a joke. As for "Hype" is concerned, a partial list of our credits; CBS, ABC, NBC, Pepsico, Coke-Cola, Garth Brooks, Shaynia Twain, Greg Allman, Whitesnake, Loverboy, David Benson Group, Carmen, Sandy Patty, Surivior, Eddie Money, Rolling Stones, David Lee Roth just to name a few....
Hello Mix77.....
I'm late for my session...so I'll reply in full tomorrow...suffice to say though that :
1. MOST importantly it's the person NOT the gear.
2. The credits you mentioned (especially thye generic label credits) mean dick.
example:
I once recorded a Joe Walsh (among a bunch of other who's who of the biz) gtr solo on a Ringo Starr record....on a Mackie.
Well there you've heard it kiddies!!! If you can't afford a Neve
Well there you've heard it kiddies!!! If you can't afford a Neve or an SSL you might as well just pack it all in and quit. You can't make records without them. Mix 77 said so! As we have been educated by the great one. (one "what" I won't say) we can all just quit trying , pack up our stuff, RO can shut down and we can leave it to the "Pros" to do it all!
Mix, Dude, why don't you cool your jets or take it back to some other place where this nonsense is tolerated? You are the one posting erroneous info. Man, you are really so full of yourself or you're a liar! I notice you keep saying "we" in reference to work approaches or credits. Could it be that you yourself are not responsible for any of the sited work? I checked your web page and I must say it is very ambiguous. It could mean almost anything and as we all know web pages can be posted by almost anyone. I could be mistaken in this but I can't find enough info to discount this idea. I also have a sneaking suspicion that you are affiliated with another guy from S.C. who just got "slapped down" in a major way here and I'm wondering if the reason you decided to pick a fight with me is to exact some form of revenge for my part in that. You can't deter me in this. I will continue to look out for RO and my own self interests.
I never said that a Mackie is better than an SSL. I don't really like Mackies (for recording). If you had been around for the last six months and read any of my posts regarding Mackies you would know that. But I still say that the days of the big console are limited except in major recording studios. If you can't see that you're blind! Computer /DAW recording is changing all the rules. My one reconciliation in this whole matter is I can tell your going to get your ass kicked someday in a bar fight when you try this sh*t on someone who can actually reach out and choke the living sh*t out of you. Or perhaps that has already happened and that's what your problem is?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarcasm is just one more service we offer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Bill, I tried your test on my Mackies with the Radio Shack
Hi Bill,
I tried your test on my Mackies with the Radio Shack db meter (the one with the needle). I had to use an old Mix Reference CD I had around here so the frequencies weren't exactly as you mentioned, but I figured were close enough.
1250 Hz 80 db
50 Hz 79 db
63 Hz 81 db
I was a little perplexed to find this out, since I was convinced the Mackies were the main trouble I've had getting low end to translate. In fact, though I did do the test with the Mackies set to full space and 37 Hz, I've recently started mixing at half space to try to fix the bass/kick dilemna I've been having.