Compact Line Mixer for mobile rig

Discussion in 'Consoles / Control Surfaces' started by lorenzo gerace, Dec 26, 2004.

  1. lorenzo gerace

    lorenzo gerace Active Member

    Jan 27, 2002

    I recently came accross an used mixer that I'd want to use in my mobile rig just as a monitoring device for the live or remote gigs I do; It's a Mackie CR1604, and I'd have it top rackmounted in my rig feeding it line level returns from my SDR2496 HD recorder. I don't need to use its preamps to record, I have outboard pres, it would be used to just monitor the performance (and the quality of the tracks obviously) and to create a 2track mix for the DAT and CDrW to be used as a backup or reference for the musicians/producer to have at the end of the session. Occasionally I'd use it to provide a cue send for musicians ODs or a ref track in case of a video shoot.
    All of the post work is done in Pro Tools by swapping drives with the SDR2496, so it's not going to be used as a critical mixdown stage.

    Is it clean enough for my purpose ? I know that the VLZ and VLZ Pro are much better, but I haven' find an used one yet. I just need a simple line mixer that will allow a bit more flexibility (and a bit better audio quality) than my current unpronunceable one that only has 8mono/16 stereo pairs with balance control and no real pan.
    Considering that I can have it for 300EU complete with Rotopod option and rackmount kit, do you think its' a good deal? How's the quality of the mixer?

    Thanx for your feedback

  2. Big_D

    Big_D Well-Known Member

    Aug 21, 2004
    Quakertown PA
    I have the CR1604 as well as the VLZ and I like the CR better. It's noise specs are not as good as the VLZ but it just sounds more natural to my ear. The mids are not sweepable so the EQ is actually worse than the VLZ. I do use the pre's but go right back out via the inserts and they are not that bad, IMO better than the VLZ. It's routing options are not as good as the VLZ either. All that said I think it would be fine for what you want to use it for. $300 is the average price for one of these so don't pay more, but you can't beat it for the money.
  3. lorenzo gerace

    lorenzo gerace Active Member

    Jan 27, 2002
    Thanx for your comment, I just scored a pair more candidates for the same purpose:

    a Soundcraft Spirit FX 16 (but it's way more expensive that what I wanted for that kind of device, even used) and a Yamaha MG16 that I could get for real cheap (almost new), but it doesn't have the flexibility of either the Mackie or the Soundcraft.
    Any comments on those two?

    Also, on another forum (Mackie) one user told me the CR1604 is almost 15 years old in design, is this true? I wouldn't want to find myself with an ancient piece of gear, although I have some pics of it and it doesn't seem so outdated.

    Thanx for the moment.

  4. iznogood

    iznogood Member

    Feb 9, 2004
    go for a vlz... the difference is huge!!!

    it can be hard to find cause it has more value in use than in price... if you know what i mean
  5. frob

    frob Well-Known Member

    Apr 23, 2004
    are you doing multiple monitors to the band if so go with the vlz it has plenty of routing options if not use what sound best to you.
  6. qveda

    qveda Guest

    Hi Iznogood,

    just to clarify, are you saying you feel the VLZ is much better than the previous CR1604?

    just wondering, since several threads have postings that indicate the pre-VLZ sounds better than the VLZ. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

    I'm curious because I'm wondering if I should buy a pre-VLZ or VLZ 1202 for a rig line mixer.

  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

Share This Page