Mackie 824s Really that bad?

Tamra · 2nd December 2006, 12:58 AM

I hear the newer ones suck and are really weak for accurate mixing, problems with snare frequencies seem common. I can't afford the nice Dynaudio BM15s or any of the primo monitors. spent too much on Pultecs! : D

Do you think my 824s cross referenced with my Tannoy PBM 6.5's will allow us to do the job accurately?

Arsene · 2nd December 2006, 01:08 AM

I never heard of newer ones that suck. Probably good enough for rock n roll!

Musiclab · 2nd December 2006, 01:23 AM

I don't think they suck at all, I think it depends on your room and how you set them up. I've been using them for years and while I would like to try something better, I think to get there I'm going to have to throw a whole lot of money into some monitors. I had a set of BM15p's here and they absolutley did not work

The Beatsmith · 2nd December 2006, 01:25 AM

Adam A7's

Takesix · 2nd December 2006, 02:13 AM

Check out NHT pro M-20. I heard it shortly, and thought it was very good...
A7 sounds to "thin" to me...but is great considering the price. But I would rather wait and save some money for a better monitor.

Bruce Keen · 2nd December 2006, 02:20 AM

the 824's are decent. If you get to know them you can get consistent results. For the price they are hard to beat. They have a hyped low end and it's better to cut them off a bit. I'm hoping to try the K&H O300's soon.

theblue1 · 2nd December 2006, 02:26 AM

People who hang out here and at other BBs -- and I've been hanging around online recording forums since I first went online at Compuserve in '88 or so, so I've been observing for a while -- are amazingly faddish, driven by half-digested comments, buzz concepts, hype-of-the-month, and pure sheepish mass hysteria.

God love 'em.

I'm one of them, too.

Once, everyone had to have a pair of 824's. Now, they're deeply flawed, fatiguing, etc...

I've seen the same arc with other products...

And then there's the opposite. A product like Sonar is ignored -- or actively derided -- for years but then some new buzz (64 bit, ooh la) comes along and it's the talk of the town. (I'm a Sonar fan, mind you, and some attention to it's many merits is overdue. But sometimes people are just in a lather about the 64 bit audio engine... sometimes even when they can't quite separate that from the completely seperate 64 bit OS version.)

Anyhow, we're a funny race, humans. And then the gearheads and geeks are just that much nuttier.

God love us.

gsilbers · 2nd December 2006, 02:41 AM

i think they rock for hiphop and electronic music. so , music thats inyo face w a lot of bass.
sounds kinda sinewavy too.... kinda hard to explain. they are cool but maybe next to some ns10s would be better.

goldphinga · 2nd December 2006, 03:48 AM

they are great monitors but like any studio speaker,get to know them and your room and you'll get great results with them. ive had mine 4 years and know how mixes should sound on them.

PDC · 2nd December 2006, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Beatsmith

Adam A7's

Where is the bottom end of that speaker? Mackies kill it on the low end.

max cooper · 2nd December 2006, 04:00 AM

I don't own 'em, but I've worked on 'em and I think you could do a lot worse, especially for the money.

Just get them and make some records.

Dirty Halo · 2nd December 2006, 06:04 AM

I've owned a few pair of Mackie 824s and have now sold them. They sound great, but the the problem is, the are not telling you the truth...

I found myself having to "get to know them" and compensate in the mix to get it right. (Especially low end)

So, the question is: How do you want to spend your time?

1. Getting the mix right.

or...

2. Enjoying your mix in your own studio.

I eventually chose to get monitors that were more accurate, will make me work harder, but translate better.

Yes, they sound good, yes you can mix an album with them, but until I'm sure EVERYONE is also listening on the exact same monitors, I had to go with more accurate monitors... just didn't want to spend my time second guessing what I was hearing.

Two cents.

-a

Crash · 2nd December 2006, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Once, everyone had to have a pair of 824's. Now, they're deeply flawed, fatiguing, etc...

I remember this happening with Genelecs. They certainly were the end all be all for many for a while. The fad thing is actually sort of humorous to watch. Today's gold is tomorrow's rubbish. I suggest you check 'em out for yourself and see if they might work for you. As for new being worse than old, doubt it.

Quote:

I found myself having to "get to know them" and compensate in the mix to get it right. (Especially low end)

I have found this to be true with every monitor I have mixed on.

I currently use HR824s, with a sub even. I know them pretty well now and get pretty consistent mixes going. There is nothing wrong with them in my book.

warhead · 2nd December 2006, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldphinga

they are great monitors but like any studio speaker,get to know them and your room and you'll get great results with them. ive had mine 4 years and know how mixes should sound on them.

My story is essentially the same except I've had mine since the very late 90's. I know them, they translate, they deliver a lot top to bottom.

Yes it is fashionable to bash them.

War

AB3 · 2nd December 2006, 06:56 AM

Of course you can make great mixes on them. Getting to know them and room placement is critical. HOWEVER, I like the event studio precision 8's much better for the same money.

Dirty Halo · 2nd December 2006, 09:26 AM

I have found this to be true with every monitor I have mixed on.

I currently use HR824s, with a sub even. I know them pretty well now and get pretty consistent mixes going. There is nothing wrong with them in my book.[/quote]

I'm waiting for the new Barefoot MM27, which hae high promise of translating extremely well... at this point, people are starting to really make monitors that can provie accuracy.

Yes, we should check our mixes in various systems, but from what I've heard, the Barefoots kill in that department.

And I have to say, I always worry about adding an independent sub the the monitoring equation, I'm not sure if that is giving you the best representation of the mix.

Just be careful there.

-a

StudioTinPanAll · 2nd December 2006, 09:47 AM

the mackie's are not very slutty but they are very good for the money...
offcourse barefoot, focal, k&h are all better, but also double the price.
most of my clients actually like the mackie's (with or without the sub)
but once i got my genelec 1038 mounted i started to understand the flaws of the mackie's. (but this is because the 1038 is 5x more expensive)

so : buy mackie's now

upgrade to better in couple years

grtz,

wim

creegstor · 2nd December 2006, 05:36 PM

Save yourself a couple o' hundred dollars and get the 624s instead. It's a better monitor than the 824. Of course try it out and see for yourself first!

The Byre · 2nd December 2006, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

I've owned a few pair of Mackie 824s and have now sold them. They sound great, but the the problem is, the are not telling you the truth...

I found myself having to "get to know them" and compensate in the mix to get it right. (Especially low end)
-a

Down to about 80Hz, they are quoite good, but like most nearfield monitors that have bass ports to give them a low end, they have a very poor response time below 80Hz.

My 30 Cents worth would be to get an active X-over and a sub and set the X-over freaquency to 120Hz (18dB per Oct).

goldphinga · 2nd December 2006, 06:29 PM

mmmmm............they dont have bass ports.......its a passive radiator which isnt the same thing.

not sure about poor response time below 80hz , that sounds like something you made up, unless you have proof of course?

id say i can hear and feel well below that(down to about 40hz) on mine quite accurately.

lane thaw · 2nd December 2006, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creegstor

Save yourself a couple o' hundred dollars and get the 624s instead. It's a better monitor than the 824. Of course try it out and see for yourself first!

It's all subjective, but I could not disagree more - 824 are much easier to work with. Funny thing is I still have my 624's hooked up to a sub as a reference, too lazy to sell the damn things, but always use my JBL's for actual mixing and tracking. Can't imagine using just the 624's for mixing. I've never minded 824 though once you get used to them. They don't deserve the bad rep.

RusRant · 2nd December 2006, 08:14 PM

I'm having a lot of luck with the E-mu PM-5's. Also, love the Blue Sky stuff. The PM-5's have been in my studio for a little over a month now and I can't say enough good things about them. Creative didn't screw these up regardless of what some might assume. Not fatiging at all IMO and they are translating so well it's amazing. May not be for everyone, but I would recommend checking them out.

Steve MacMillan · 2nd December 2006, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Down to about 80Hz, they are quoite good, but like most nearfield monitors that have bass ports to give them a low end, they have a very poor response time below 80Hz.

My 30 Cents worth would be to get an active X-over and a sub and set the X-over freaquency to 120Hz (18dB per Oct).

While 824's have plenty of bottom, I agree using them with a sub fixes most of the problems with an uneven bottom end.

STeve

goldphinga · 2nd December 2006, 10:35 PM

ill say it again- they ARENT ported AND they dont have an uneven bass response. thats your room.

Tamra · 2nd December 2006, 11:26 PM

How do you guys feel about Yamaha NS-10s? Ever hear of Paradigm Mini Monitors?

Studiocat · 2nd December 2006, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tamra

How do you guys feel about Yamaha NS-10s?

hahahahahaha good one!

Protools Guy · 3rd December 2006, 12:07 AM

I've had great results with my 824's and have never lost a gig because of my Mackie monitors.

Now that I'm used to them, my mixes are very consistent.

They are a fantastic value.

Don't sweat your 824's bro.

barefoot · 3rd December 2006, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldphinga

ill say it again- they ARENT ported

True, the HR824 uses a passive radiator. Here is a little info on passive radiator versus ported and sealed cabinet designs: http://gearslutz.com/board/showthrea...55406&p=602149

tgrokz · 3rd December 2006, 12:21 AM

we had a pair of these at our school and jsut to give you an idea of how inaccurate they were, somehow, every fresh faced kid who was a part of the recording class who had no idea what eq/compression/proper mixing/mic placement was and drowned everything in verb made songs cd quality songs......

i remember when my band recorded there. i "mixed" the songs on those monitors and was thrilled with how they came out. took the mixes home, loaded them up on my computer, and boy was i surprised with how TERRIBLE they sounded. thats just my experience though.

parissound · 3rd December 2006, 12:53 AM

I had them for awhile and I had so much trouble trying to get a great mix on them.
The mix sounded so sweet and perfect on them but when I played them on other sound systems it was horrible.

I then purchased the Event APS8 and they were much better, mixes translated better to other systems.

Now I have the Blue Sky monitors and they are in an another level. Excellent

My goal next year is to get the Barefoots.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
824s home use? 824s made in China?	blucaller	So much gear, so little time!	2	8th September 2006 09:12 AM
mackie/828 really bad?	emjay2772	Low End Theory	8	6th December 2005 07:58 AM
La-2a atop Mackie sub... bad idea?	Rufuss Sewell	High end	3	23rd October 2005 11:05 PM

2nd December 2006, 12:58 AM	#1
Tamra Gear nut Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 77	Mackie 824s Really that bad? I hear the newer ones suck and are really weak for accurate mixing, problems with snare frequencies seem common. I can't afford the nice Dynaudio BM15s or any of the primo monitors. spent too much on Pultecs! : D Do you think my 824s cross referenced with my Tannoy PBM 6.5's will allow us to do the job accurately?

2nd December 2006, 01:08 AM	#2
Arsene Gear addict Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Rotterdam, NL Posts: 307	I never heard of newer ones that suck. Probably good enough for rock n roll! __________________ If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem.

2nd December 2006, 01:23 AM	#3
Musiclab Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Elmont NY Posts: 3,202	I don't think they suck at all, I think it depends on your room and how you set them up. I've been using them for years and while I would like to try something better, I think to get there I'm going to have to throw a whole lot of money into some monitors. I had a set of BM15p's here and they absolutley did not work __________________ Lou Gimenez www.musiclabnyc.com

2nd December 2006, 02:26 AM	#7
theblue1 Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 5,703	People who hang out here and at other BBs -- and I've been hanging around online recording forums since I first went online at Compuserve in '88 or so, so I've been observing for a while -- are amazingly faddish, driven by half-digested comments, buzz concepts, hype-of-the-month, and pure sheepish mass hysteria. God love 'em. I'm one of them, too. Once, everyone had to have a pair of 824's. Now, they're deeply flawed, fatiguing, etc... I've seen the same arc with other products... And then there's the opposite. A product like Sonar is ignored -- or actively derided -- for years but then some new buzz (64 bit, ooh la) comes along and it's the talk of the town. (I'm a Sonar fan, mind you, and some attention to it's many merits is overdue. But sometimes people are just in a lather about the 64 bit audio engine... sometimes even when they can't quite separate that from the completely seperate 64 bit OS version.) Anyhow, we're a funny race, humans. And then the gearheads and geeks are just that much nuttier. God love us. __________________ biz \| profile \| songblog \| acoustic \| mutant roots pop

2nd December 2006, 01:25 AM	#4
The Beatsmith Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: UK Posts: 821	Adam A7's

2nd December 2006, 02:13 AM	#5
Takesix Gear interested Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Aarhus Posts: 7	Check out NHT pro M-20. I heard it shortly, and thought it was very good... A7 sounds to "thin" to me...but is great considering the price. But I would rather wait and save some money for a better monitor.

2nd December 2006, 02:20 AM	#6
Bruce Keen Gear maniac Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Paris France Posts: 180	the 824's are decent. If you get to know them you can get consistent results. For the price they are hard to beat. They have a hyped low end and it's better to cut them off a bit. I'm hoping to try the K&H O300's soon.

2nd December 2006, 02:41 AM	#8
gsilbers Lives for gear Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,361	i think they rock for hiphop and electronic music. so , music thats inyo face w a lot of bass. sounds kinda sinewavy too.... kinda hard to explain. they are cool but maybe next to some ns10s would be better.

2nd December 2006, 03:48 AM	#9
goldphinga Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK Posts: 785	they are great monitors but like any studio speaker,get to know them and your room and you'll get great results with them. ive had mine 4 years and know how mixes should sound on them.

2nd December 2006, 04:00 AM	#11
max cooper Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: tx Posts: 8,819	I don't own 'em, but I've worked on 'em and I think you could do a lot worse, especially for the money. Just get them and make some records.

2nd December 2006, 06:04 AM	#12
Dirty Halo Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Location: Hollyweird Posts: 3,525	Depends... I've owned a few pair of Mackie 824s and have now sold them. They sound great, but the the problem is, the are not telling you the truth... I found myself having to "get to know them" and compensate in the mix to get it right. (Especially low end) So, the question is: How do you want to spend your time? 1. Getting the mix right. or... 2. Enjoying your mix in your own studio. I eventually chose to get monitors that were more accurate, will make me work harder, but translate better. Yes, they sound good, yes you can mix an album with them, but until I'm sure EVERYONE is also listening on the exact same monitors, I had to go with more accurate monitors... just didn't want to spend my time second guessing what I was hearing. Two cents. -a

2nd December 2006, 06:56 AM	#15
AB3 Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 1,998	Of course you can make great mixes on them. Getting to know them and room placement is critical. HOWEVER, I like the event studio precision 8's much better for the same money.

2nd December 2006, 09:26 AM	#16
Dirty Halo Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Location: Hollyweird Posts: 3,525	Maybe not... I have found this to be true with every monitor I have mixed on. I currently use HR824s, with a sub even. I know them pretty well now and get pretty consistent mixes going. There is nothing wrong with them in my book.[/quote] I'm waiting for the new Barefoot MM27, which hae high promise of translating extremely well... at this point, people are starting to really make monitors that can provie accuracy. Yes, we should check our mixes in various systems, but from what I've heard, the Barefoots kill in that department. And I have to say, I always worry about adding an independent sub the the monitoring equation, I'm not sure if that is giving you the best representation of the mix. Just be careful there. -a

2nd December 2006, 09:47 AM	#17
StudioTinPanAll Gear addict Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Antwerp Posts: 314	the mackie's are not very slutty but they are very good for the money... offcourse barefoot, focal, k&h are all better, but also double the price. most of my clients actually like the mackie's (with or without the sub) but once i got my genelec 1038 mounted i started to understand the flaws of the mackie's. (but this is because the 1038 is 5x more expensive) so : buy mackie's now upgrade to better in couple years grtz, wim __________________ Studio TinPanAlley

2nd December 2006, 05:36 PM	#18
creegstor Gear maniac Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: NY Posts: 197	Save yourself a couple o' hundred dollars and get the 624s instead. It's a better monitor than the 824. Of course try it out and see for yourself first! __________________ Laugh. Love. Live.

2nd December 2006, 06:29 PM	#20
goldphinga Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK Posts: 785	mmmmm............they dont have bass ports.......its a passive radiator which isnt the same thing. not sure about poor response time below 80hz , that sounds like something you made up, unless you have proof of course? id say i can hear and feel well below that(down to about 40hz) on mine quite accurately.

2nd December 2006, 08:14 PM	#22
RusRant Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: B'ham, AL Posts: 580	I'm having a lot of luck with the E-mu PM-5's. Also, love the Blue Sky stuff. The PM-5's have been in my studio for a little over a month now and I can't say enough good things about them. Creative didn't screw these up regardless of what some might assume. Not fatiging at all IMO and they are translating so well it's amazing. May not be for everyone, but I would recommend checking them out.

2nd December 2006, 10:35 PM	#24
goldphinga Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK Posts: 785	ill say it again- they ARENT ported AND they dont have an uneven bass response. thats your room.

2nd December 2006, 11:26 PM	#25
Tamra Gear nut Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 77	How do you guys feel about Yamaha NS-10s? Ever hear of Paradigm Mini Monitors?

3rd December 2006, 12:07 AM	#27
Protools Guy Lives for gear Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 1,007	I've had great results with my 824's and have never lost a gig because of my Mackie monitors. Now that I'm used to them, my mixes are very consistent. They are a fantastic value. Don't sweat your 824's bro. __________________ I only need one more piece of gear...

3rd December 2006, 12:21 AM	#29
tgrokz Gear maniac Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Long Island, New York Posts: 289	we had a pair of these at our school and jsut to give you an idea of how inaccurate they were, somehow, every fresh faced kid who was a part of the recording class who had no idea what eq/compression/proper mixing/mic placement was and drowned everything in verb made songs cd quality songs...... i remember when my band recorded there. i "mixed" the songs on those monitors and was thrilled with how they came out. took the mixes home, loaded them up on my computer, and boy was i surprised with how TERRIBLE they sounded. thats just my experience though.

3rd December 2006, 12:53 AM	#30
parissound Gear addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Lancaster, Pa Posts: 440	I had them for awhile and I had so much trouble trying to get a great mix on them. The mix sounded so sweet and perfect on them but when I played them on other sound systems it was horrible. I then purchased the Event APS8 and they were much better, mixes translated better to other systems. Now I have the Blue Sky monitors and they are in an another level. Excellent My goal next year is to get the Barefoots. __________________ WWW.MYSPACE.COM/PARISRECORDINGSTUDIO1