Skip to main content

Mackie d8b vs Yamaha 02R96

I am new in the market for a digital mixing board and was just about to buy a Mackie d8b (because a good friend has one and loves it) and then I recently found out about the Yamaha 02R96. I'm wondering if anyone has opinions one way or the other about these boards to help me choose what is the best product and how reliable it is. Thanks very much.


Member Thu, 09/26/2002 - 00:14
For reliability I can only speak from my own experience.My D8B broke down on me 3 times in Three years,which is a lot.Apparently I have one of the first models that had faulty components but still Mackie didn't do anything about it for me.All I can do is wait for it to break down some other time since those faulty components are numerous in this desk .Apart from that I was happy with the desk but if I had to buy now I would go for the Yamaha .The Yamaha have always been reliable (I've owned an O2R) and the 02R 96 have some features unavailable to the Mackie like the ability to do 96k , touch sensitive faders and it can act as control surface for ProTools or Nuendo (Logic Audio Planned). In fact it's called O2R 96 but it's much more a small DM2000 . A friend of mine bought a DM2000 and he raves about it . If I were you I wouldn't hesitate.

Member Fri, 09/27/2002 - 21:31
The Mackie has more inputs
It was true with the O2R ,but the 02R96 is a different beast . 24 analog/16 inserts/4 extension slots .You can do 32 channels of 24/96 AES plus the 24 analogs and you'll have access to EQ/Gate/Comp/Aux on every channel.The real plus of the Mackie is the plug in architecture ,the screen display,the integrated bargraph,the routing/Patching capabilities.I know most of the maclies don't have problem but as it is I'm stuck with a desk I can't even sell (cause I know it's gonna break down again) and the only response I had was "ask your local Mackie representative" who said "see your dealer for repairs" .Great isn't it ?

Member Sun, 09/29/2002 - 11:21
I love my d8b. The only problem ive ever had with it is that the stop button is a little worn out after all the use.
I cant really speak much about the new O2R 96, But IMHO the preamps in the d8b compared to the o2r(original) are alot better. amongst other things.
PS: The makie people are working on an upgrade to make the d8b 96Khz compatable.

Member Wed, 10/23/2002 - 08:42
with regard to the D8B. Based on the "never ending" bonanza pricing from Mackie over the last 6 months, does anyone think that they are phasing it out for a newer better version to compete with the yamaha DM200 mixer???

If someone has any inside info i would appreciate it. I am thiniojng seriously about buying a new desk and the DM2000 looks a little harder to use than the mackie and Mackie also has an intergrated solution I like with the HDR 24/96. Any help??

Kurt Foster Wed, 10/23/2002 - 10:35
You bet'cha!
They're going to squeeze that consumer tit one more time at 96 /192 before the format changes to DSD/SCAD. They could go to DSD right now but manufacturers want to milk that PCM technology "consumer cow" once more before they move it to greener pastures. Then they will finally admit to us that PCM creates as many problems as it fix's and DSD is the best way to approach it. Then everyone with a mid level digital console will be looking at it saying to themselves, "Wow, I could have had a car,or a new kitchen, or a......." ......Fats

Kurt Foster Wed, 10/23/2002 - 11:59
Sure, to the best of my abilities.
PCM pulse code modulation. Uses buffer to smooth out a data stream that spits out clusters of data in pulses. Bandwidth is limited by half the sample rate. 96 k bit rate = 48k response. Uses sharp roll off filters at the top end of the freq response to prevent alising artifacts. (Nyquist bulls*#t) Basically your breaking a mirror and then reassembling it hoping you've found all the pieces, looking at it wondering why it looks so wierd....
DSD Direct Stream Digital, 1 bit on off, is supposed to sound closer to analog than anything else. On a scope it is reported to appear as an analog signal! It's been around for years and even in use by a few privileged few. I have never heard it but it's not hard to imagine something sounding better than PCM. What excites me about DSD is if it's a direct stream, what can you do with internet and interconnecting with other work stations on the planet? One bit is going to be a lot easier to store than 24 on the solid state memory that is going to be the wave of the future….That's all I know about it and it's a layman's take on it. I'm not a tech but I do know what sounds good. Fats

Kurt Foster Fri, 10/25/2002 - 10:15
The Sony DMX 100 is probably the best small format digital console on the market at the moment. Universal Audio Web site It has a good sound for the technology it's using but I reiterate. We are in the time of the Model "T" when it comes to digital technology. All the big hardware based stuff is very expensive and has a limited life. If you are a big commercial facility whose business plan requires leasing equipment or making equipment expenditures every year, then hardware is still the way to go. It simply sounds the best. Less processor loads on the computer because all the mixing calculations are being done by the console. But you have to be at the $20K price point before the performance really begins to outstrip DAW. But face it, all the digital stuff suffers when compared to analog gear. With technology changing every 12 to 16 months home studio operators are better served using DAW's. You can invest in good front end, mics, pres, eq's and comps and an accurate monitor system. Use extra cash to treat your listening environment. Use the cheapest DAW /computer /converter combination you are comfortable with. It hurts less to replace every 2 or 3 years! I doubt that the dust will ever settle in the audio marketplace in our lifetimes. Not as long as there is military and defense spending and development to drive the technology.
Here are two other links for the Yamaha digital mixers..........Fats

Yamaha 02R96
Universal Audio Web site
Yamaha DM2000
Universal Audio Web site

Member Tue, 11/26/2002 - 06:39
Originally posted by Cedar Flat Fats:
They're going to squeeze that consumer tit one more time at 96 /192 before the format changes to DSD/SCAD. They could go to DSD right now but manufacturers want to milk that PCM technology "consumer cow" once more before they move it to greener pastures.
Fats, while I agree DSD has a lot of potential there are a lot of issues that have not been resolved with DSD. It's not as easy as you think to adopt a completely new format and technology. As with most new technology it is expensive and the devices (chip components) are not available in large quantities. There is also some limitations as far as ability to edit DSD streams.

But, the point is PCM has been around along time which means the cost is relatively low and this means manufacturers are able to offer products to a broad range of markets. Such as the home/project market. Have you seen any prices on any DSD gear ?

So while I appreciate your enthusiasm it is important to put things in perspective about how quickly new technology makes it into the main stream.

As far as the original question, I would stay away from the Mackie. I think Yamaha and Sony are leading the industry in innovation and support in the low/med digital console market. I know there are a lot of Mackie users and I honestly do not mean to disparage their decisions. But, Mackie is not known for their software development. They do a pretty good job of building low cost hardware but their continuing problems with software issues should be considered. A digital console is 75% software and this requires a very different expertise.

If there is any way to swing the Sony DMXR-100 that would be my first recommendation. They have dropped the price considerably. I actually saw one sell for $6300 which blew me away. But if this is not with in your reach then take a look at the Yamaha.


Kurt Foster Tue, 11/26/2002 - 11:10
Time will tell. I will say I can remember hearing all those same arguments regarding 16 bit vs. 20 and 24 bit just a few years ago.. There is already a 4 channel DSD recorder being marketed. I think it will be only a matter of time before we see Multitrack DSD products on the market. How long do you think the O.E.M.'s will let things lie at 192? They have got to keep pushing the envelope to keep us all buying product. It is in their own self interest to keep telling us that the next thing down the pike is the answer to all our audio woes. ……… Fats

Kurt Foster Wed, 11/27/2002 - 18:11
Lee ( said,
There is also some limitations as far as ability to edit DSD streams.
I just came across a new ad campaign for SADIE's newest mastering product DSD. In their words "for the production, editing and mastering of today's highest quality digital audio distribution formats". Sh*t! It's coming faster than even I thought. As Lee pointed out it's probably real pricey but costs do come down with economy of scale. I predict by this time next year we will be hearing the rumblings of this. Maybe DSD "Pro Tools" first? ...... Fats

Kurt Foster Wed, 11/27/2002 - 19:25
Well MOTU has just released the marketing campaign for their new HD192 system at the same price as the 1296. Man, if I had just gone the distance and bought a couple of the 1296's and DP3 (like I was considering) I would really be pissed! The 1296 has just been out for a little less / more than a year. I am so glad that MOTU/ DP3 is a Mac system.... that's why I finally decided not to get it, I wanted to go PeeCee. I wish I could say I knew it... but it was just luck! If DP3 ran on a Windows machine I would be in a world of hurt right now. The question now is where does MOTU go next year? DSD? Next Xmas will tell …….. Fats