The Logic Off Topic list

I am in the process of upgrading my monitors and am considering the
Mackie HR824s.  But first, I wanted to get your opinions on these
monitors.  

In previous posts, several of you have suggested Adams or Dynaudio. 
Granted they are better, but also more expensive.  I can't quite
afford to make that jump (too many other things on my "to-buy"
list....e.g. G5).

My research suggests the Mackies have good bass extension, are
slightly forward on the high end, but overall have a relatively flat
response (which is what I really want).  Anyone have any experience
with the HR824s?  Good monitors or bad?  My primary use is for mixing.

Thanks,
Dave

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, "amgshaffer" <amgshaffer@c...> wrote:
> I am in the process of upgrading my monitors and am considering the
> Mackie HR824s.  But first, I wanted to get your opinions on these
> monitors.  
> 
> In previous posts, several of you have suggested Adams or Dynaudio. 
> Granted they are better, but also more expensive.  I can't quite
> afford to make that jump (too many other things on my "to-buy"
> list....e.g. G5).
> 
> My research suggests the Mackies have good bass extension, are
> slightly forward on the high end, but overall have a relatively flat
> response (which is what I really want).  Anyone have any experience
> with the HR824s?  Good monitors or bad?  My primary use is for mixing.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dave

I would recommend Genelec if the budget stretches, or Tannoy Reveal (Active=
). I use the 
Genelec 1030 and mastering engineers report very little to do to the mixes.=


Pete

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you will see every problem as a nai=
l." – Abraham 
Maslow

www.petethomas.co.uk
www.soundtrack-composer.co.uk

On 20/05/2004, at 4:08 AM, amgshaffer wrote:

> I am in the process of upgrading my monitors and am considering the
> Mackie HR824s.  But first, I wanted to get your opinions on these
> monitors.
>
> In previous posts, several of you have suggested Adams or Dynaudio.
> Granted they are better, but also more expensive.  I can't quite
> afford to make that jump (too many other things on my "to-buy"
> list....e.g. G5).
>
> My research suggests the Mackies have good bass extension, are
> slightly forward on the high end, but overall have a relatively flat
> response (which is what I really want).  Anyone have any experience
> with the HR824s?  Good monitors or bad?  My primary use is for mixing.

IMO you would have to spend around twice the money to find a noticeably 
better speaker than the HR824. I also suggest that if you had twice the 
$$$ to spend you would get a better result buying the Mackie's and 
spending the leftover on improving the room acoustics than putting it 
all into a pair of monitors.



:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Paul Najar
Jaminajar Music Production
www.jaminajar.com

On 20/05/2004, at 4:24 AM, Pete Thomas wrote:

> I would recommend Genelec if the budget stretches, or Tannoy Reveal 
> (Active=
> ). I use the
> Genelec 1030 and mastering engineers report very little to do to the 
> mixes.=

The 1030's have smaller drivers and much less power than the Mackies. I 
had both these speakers side by side in my last studio and there really 
was no comparison - the Mackies were way in front. The comparable 
Genlec to the 824's is the 1031 - at close to twice the price. I've 
mixed on these a lot as well and while I can say that they are not as 
fatiguing over a long session they are not that much better that the 
extra money implies.



:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Paul Najar
Jaminajar Music Production
www.jaminajar.com

> MO you would have to spend around twice the money to find a noticeably
> better speaker than the HR824. I also suggest that if you had twice the
> $$$ to spend you would get a better result buying the Mackie's and
> spending the leftover on improving the room acoustics than putting it
> all into a pair of monitors.

I have to agree with Paul here. I have 824's i my music room and two 
other studios here have Genelecs.
The 824's translate very well to the Genelecs.
_____________________________________________________
MATT MCKENZIE-SMITH
MUSIC • AUDIO DESIGN • PRODUCTION
PO Box 10395, Adelaide 5000, South Australia.
Ph.+61 416 197 883
_____________________________________________________

Thanks Pete, Henrik, Richard, Paul, and Matt for the feedback on the 
Mackie HR824s.  I appreciate the input.  I think I will go the 824 
direction....clearly there are better alternatives, but with other 
studio upgrades I need to make, I need to watch the budget.  Also, 
thanks Paul for the note on acoustic treatment.  This is an area I have 
ignored completely and need to address.

Kind regards,
Dave

Here's a guy selling his for $975     
http://gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=15687
Also, you should get a very good D/A converter ... Lavry, Benchmark, 
Apogee. It will make a lot of difference.

amgshaffer wrote:

> Thanks Pete, Henrik, Richard, Paul, and Matt for the feedback on the
> Mackie HR824s.  I appreciate the input.  I think I will go the 824
> direction....clearly there are better alternatives, but with other
> studio upgrades I need to make, I need to watch the budget.  Also,
> thanks Paul for the note on acoustic treatment.  This is an area I have
> ignored completely and need to address.

On 21/05/2004, at 12:05 AM, amgshaffer wrote:

> Thanks Pete, Henrik, Richard, Paul, and Matt for the feedback on the
> Mackie HR824s.  I appreciate the input.  I think I will go the 824
> direction....clearly there are better alternatives, but with other
> studio upgrades I need to make, I need to watch the budget.  Also,
> thanks Paul for the note on acoustic treatment.  This is an area I have
> ignored completely and need to address.

If you already have even a modestly decent Mic and channel strip, the 
biggest bang for your buck improvement you can make is to improve the 
acoustics of your mixing environment.

Here's another way of looking at it. All the monitors we've spoken 
about exhibit less than 1db variance across their effective frequency 
response. In other words, we all want the flattest response. So if a 
monitor had a 6db or even 12-15db variance we would not even bother 
plugging them in. And yet, by putting perfectly good studio monitors in 
your average untreated room, the 6 - 15 db variance is in fact what you 
are hearing as the EFFECTIVE frequency response once the room 
resonances are taken into account.

The world's top control rooms offer 3-6db acoustic variance within the 
audible range. If you can get the worst acoustic anomaly in your room 
to within 6-8db you'll have yourself one great little mixing 
environment.

I know I'm carrying on a bit about this but it really is for good 
reason.


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Paul Najar
Jaminajar Music Production
www.jaminajar.com