Mackie HR824mkI vs HR824mkII??
svt440
Thread Starter
#1
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #1
Gear interested
 

Thread Starter
Mackie HR824mkI vs HR824mkII??

I am looking for a new pair of monitors to get before I start college this winter in Nashville. I spoke with a guy yesterday at Guitar Center who told me that he went to recording school and graduated this May 2011, and he has worked in several studios and all have had the HR824. He also has a pair and is considering upgrading to the Adam A7X, but as I researched on the A7s, I was not impressed with what I read. So, I am now considering the HR824s, however, I would like to know whats better between the two? I know the old SRM450 speakers by Mackie (in the early 2000s) are much better than the new V2's. Are the monitors the same? I read somewhere a guy said he has a MKI HR824 which he said was made in the USA. So, are they better than the mkII's? Thanks!!
svt440
Thread Starter
#2
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #2
Gear interested
 

Thread Starter
one other thought

Also, I forgot to mention (because I know it depends on the style of music) I am going to be working with the Contemporary Christian genre. The other reason I am leaning towards the Mackies is because I can get a super clean used pair of the mkI's at my Guitar Center right now for $499. I cant get the Adams used anywhere! And they run $700 new a piece and from what Ive read, the two monitors are competing monitors. Only difference is $500 vs $1400. Even if I miss the used Mackies for $500 I can still get a used pair all day long at under $900. Thanks again!
#3
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #3
Gear addict
 
Yeah, right...'s Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by svt440 View Post
Also, I forgot to mention (because I know it depends on the style of music) I am going to be working with the Contemporary Christian genre. The other reason I am leaning towards the Mackies is because I can get a super clean used pair of the mkI's at my Guitar Center right now for $499. I cant get the Adams used anywhere! And they run $700 new a piece and from what Ive read, the two monitors are competing monitors. Only difference is $500 vs $1400. Even if I miss the used Mackies for $500 I can still get a used pair all day long at under $900. Thanks again!
US$499 = c. 350 Euro.

What an extraordinary question.

Do it!!!

NOW!!
svt440
Thread Starter
#4
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #4
Gear interested
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeah, right... View Post
US$499 = c. 350 Euro.

What an extraordinary question.

Do it!!!

NOW!!
Go with the MKI's?
#5
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Lights's Avatar
I have a pair of Mackie HR824s (original). Because I live in the Seattle area, near Mackie, I happen to have a friend that used to be an engineer at Mackie. He said that the MK1 (made in Woodinvile, WA) are a substantially better speaker than the MKII (made in China). He counseled me to never let the pair I have go as there aren't many studio monitors that can touch the Mackies in any price range, let alone for the $450USD you could spend.

I don't have the golden ear myself, so I can only relay what he said. I don't have enough experience with other monitors to give my own opinion.
svt440
Thread Starter
#6
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #6
Gear interested
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lights View Post
I have a pair of Mackie HR824s (original). Because I live in the Seattle area, near Mackie, I happen to have a friend that used to be an engineer at Mackie. He said that the MK1 (made in Woodinvile, WA) are a substantially better speaker than the MKII (made in China). He counseled me to never let the pair I have go as there aren't many studio monitors that can touch the Mackies in any price range, let alone for the $450USD you could spend.

I don't have the golden ear myself, so I can only relay what he said. I don't have enough experience with other monitors to give my own opinion.
Thats really really good to know. I had a slight feeling thats how Mackie did things, and was just assuming based on logical knowledge that the MKIs where going to be better based on where they were produced. Thanks alot!
#7
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #7
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

I haven't heard the mkII, but I strongly dislike the mkI. We had a pair in our studio alongside Adam A7s and Focal Twins, and the Mackies were just all over the shop in terms of top end tonal character and transparency. Made it very difficult to judge anything properly like hi-hats, sibilance and drum OH mic choice.

Just my 2c. I think they sound pretty bad personally, but then again I've never used a Mackie product I actually liked so I have some sort of bias...
#8
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Bob Ross's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexK View Post
I strongly dislike the mkI. We had a pair in our studio alongside Adam A7s and Focal Twins, and the Mackies were just all over the shop in terms of top end tonal character and transparency. Made it very difficult to judge anything properly like hi-hats, sibilance and drum OH mic choice.
I've had a pair of HR824 (mkI) in my personal edit/overdub/mix room since 1998. I find them wonderfully useful for examining detail. iow, for the edit/overdub part of a project, they're my #1 go-to monitor.

However, for the mix portion of any project, they tend to get relegated to #2 status (with #1 being either Tannoy System 800s or Truth Audio TA-1Ps) because, while the Mackie's sound fine to my ears when mixing, that "fine-ness" often doesn't translate.
#9
7th November 2011
Old 7th November 2011
  #9
Gear Head
 
lixisoft's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Ross View Post
I've had a pair of HR824 (mkI) in my personal edit/overdub/mix room since 1998. I find them wonderfully useful for examining detail. iow, for the edit/overdub part of a project, they're my #1 go-to monitor.

However, for the mix portion of any project, they tend to get relegated to #2 status (with #1 being either Tannoy System 800s or Truth Audio TA-1Ps) because, while the Mackie's sound fine to my ears when mixing, that "fine-ness" often doesn't translate.
Me too !! How ever my #1 status for mixing is alternating between Adam A7's \ Avantone MixCubes \ and Minimus 7's. I could never get a mix from my HR824's quickly, with my current setup, I can get dialed in very fast and then spend time on the finer details.
#10
26th August 2012
Old 26th August 2012
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Filthrill's Avatar
 

Wanna know what I think? Trick question. No seriously, Mackie needs to partner up w/ another capable company to come out w/ a really high-end monitor. I mean something that will really surprise the hell out of everyone. I'm rooting for them. A monitor in the league of the Focal SM9s or Barefoot Audio MM27s or hell at least the Dynaudio BM15As. Aside from doing this, Mackie monitors suffer from xtreme averageness. Just one kick-ass high-end monitor Mackie! Oh, w/ kick-ass subs to go w/ em. Don't laugh, it's possible.
#11
26th August 2012
Old 26th August 2012
  #11
Gear interested
 
Sound Evolution's Avatar
 

Don't judge the good old 824 to fast. It has some very clever designing in it. It is Mackie's marketing department that fails to highlight this.

Firstly it has decent designed discrete class A/B amplifiers. Which personally I prefer over any Class D design.

Secondly, they did a very neat trick in the bass department. They use a current sensing system (e.g. a low value resistor in series with the voice coil) to measure the current flow to the voice-coil. That information is send back in a positive feedback loop, and compared to the input. This don't work the same as Motional Feedback, but is a clever way to control cone motion electrically, get lower frequency response and reduce distortion.

Basically Mackie adopted the Ace Bass Patent from Audio Pro. See here for it's explanation how it works:

Products & Technology - ACE-BASS

Of course if you like the HR824's sound or not is a matter personal taste and open for debate. But the HR824 is a remarkable design and in my opinion still a great value for money. (despite the fact I would have done things differently myself in the design though :D).
#12
26th August 2012
Old 26th August 2012
  #12
Gear Head
 

I used to mix on 824 version 1's and NS10's as a second monitor set. The 824's are loud, reliable workhorse monitors. I found them to be pretty flattering of mixes though, and I had trouble with mixes translating from that room when mixed on the mackie's. However I am sure much of that could have been solved with better acoustics within the room.

What exactly are you looking to do with them? They are good for tracking in a small room because they can punch pretty hard. But if you are only looking for mixing capabilities I would personally take a look at other options, even at $499 for the pair. I would consider a set of Tannoy Reveals which you should be able to find used in that price range. The earlier powered reveals were competitors with the 824's at the time and I liked them a lot better. Equator Audio D5's look really interesting in that price range but I haven't heard them yet.
#13
26th August 2012
Old 26th August 2012
  #13
Lives for gear
 
audiogeek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicarii View Post
I used to mix on 824 version 1's and NS10's as a second monitor set. The 824's are loud, reliable workhorse monitors. I found them to be pretty flattering of mixes though, and I had trouble with mixes translating from that room when mixed on the mackie's. However I am sure much of that could have been solved with better acoustics within the room.

What exactly are you looking to do with them? They are good for tracking in a small room because they can punch pretty hard. But if you are only looking for mixing capabilities I would personally take a look at other options, even at $499 for the pair. I would consider a set of Tannoy Reveals which you should be able to find used in that price range. The earlier powered reveals were competitors with the 824's at the time and I liked them a lot better. Equator Audio D5's look really interesting in that price range but I haven't heard them yet.
This is true in my experience as well. I use the V.1's as my primary monitor, and it took me a while to realize they are perhaps too flattering. It was a bit of a challenge getting mixes to translate, but I've gotten better at it with time... they still don't do me any favors though.

In particular, for all the talk of them being 'bottom heavy', they really don't have any sub content at all, at least in my mixing environment. It was a bit of a revelation the first time I heard one of my mixes on a 'home theater' type system with a solid sub woofer... All of a sudden there was so much 30/40/50Hz mud and rumble there that I was completely oblivious to when mixing.

Still, a decent monitor, and at least worth having as a reference monitor if not your primary set.
#14
26th August 2012
Old 26th August 2012
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Lights's Avatar
Isn't it really hard to separate the monitor from the room in the case of bass/sub bass? I found that my early HR824 mixes had not enough bass because my room wasn't well treated. Now that it is, I feel like I'm more accurately mixing. Still, a highpass filter is pretty critical to get rid of unneeded bass energy.
#15
26th August 2012
Old 26th August 2012
  #15
Lives for gear
 
cinealta's Avatar
 

Don't waste your time with either Mackie. Get some Genelecs and be confident in what you're hearing.
#16
27th August 2012
Old 27th August 2012
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Filthrill's Avatar
 

Um...not sure if you're aware of this but just as many people complain about Genelecs as the Mackies because of their characteristics & quirks.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.