Skip to main content
forums, blogs, song critique, support & more...

HR824's

Profile picture for user byacey

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

Profile picture for user Screws

Screws Sat, 01/04/2003 - 19:31

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.

audiowkstation Sat, 01/04/2003 - 20:11

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.moonaudio.com/softwar5.htm"]4 station audio test equipemt for PC[/]="http://www.moonaudio.com/softwar5.htm"]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.

monopole Sun, 01/05/2003 - 01:46

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.

audiowkstation Sun, 01/05/2003 - 05:36

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 :^,

k.w.blackwell Sun, 01/05/2003 - 10:24

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.

Profile picture for user Screws

Screws Sun, 01/05/2003 - 17:18

Bill,

Got any ideas where to get a similar test program for the Mac?

monopole Sun, 01/05/2003 - 17:24

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 :^,

Alécio Costa -… Mon, 01/06/2003 - 18:18

hey Uncle Bill!! what happened with the email pic of my room I sent ya? I am just waiting for some tips of yours!
LOL
Hugs
Alécio
:p

CARY Wed, 01/08/2003 - 12:24

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.moonaudio.com/softwar5.htm"]4 station audio test equipemt for PC[/]="http://www.moonaudio.com/softwar5.htm"]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...

Profile picture for user Screws

Screws Wed, 01/08/2003 - 17:06

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.

lwstudio Fri, 01/10/2003 - 00:54

ive never liked the mackie sound either.ive heard quite a lot of bad mixes done on them too...

WLoveday Fri, 01/10/2003 - 06:03

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

mixman77 Fri, 01/10/2003 - 06:39

We appologize for the inconvenience, but this member's posts have been deleted.

SonOfSmawg
Administrator

[ January 29, 2003, 01:57 AM: Message edited by: SonOfSmawg ]

CARY Fri, 01/10/2003 - 07:31

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?

jscott Fri, 01/10/2003 - 10:21

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?

Profile picture for user Kurt Foster

Kurt Foster Sun, 01/12/2003 - 12:37

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Macaroni Sun, 01/12/2003 - 16:31

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.

Profile picture for user Kurt Foster

Kurt Foster Sun, 01/12/2003 - 16:56

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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

x