Rain
The low cut at 100Hz is one of the reasons I picked the Mackie instead of the other mixers I was considering. In conjunction with the low shelf at 80Hz, it allows me to really clean up the POD HD.
 
A little notch at 2.5 takes care of the rest and the guitar just seems to sit in the mix so much better, right from the start. I got so carried away with it that I spent almost 2 hours jamming with that set up last night, just for fun. It really tightens things up.
 
 

The frequency choices for the bands is something that's kind of peaking my curiosity. The Mackie manual for the original goes into some quirky/comical references to "Zoltan" from another planet being the dude who came up with the original frequencies chosen for bands in early mixers (from the 50's 60's) that didn't make a lot of musical sense but ended up being the standard for simple EQs on boards for many years. They then go on to say that THEIR (Mackie's) choice of putting the low freq at 80hz as opposed to 100hz (but don't actually specify whether it is a shelf or a bandpass even though they specifically point out the Hi control IS a shelf so I'm not sure whether the low is a shelf or a bandpass but does sound like a shelf... I think) and the Hi shelf is at 12khz (or around there... I forget) whereas earlier mixers used 10khz for their hi control.
 
So I gotta wonder... considering this mixer came out in 92 (I think) making it over 20 years old has the mixer manufacturing industry started using 80hz for low bands and 12+khz for the high bands? Or is this still somewhat unique? I know the Sonar ProChannel bands (at least the low band) are set in a similar fashion. Did Mackie set some kind of trend (because they sure seem to be implying in the manual that setting the bands that way was THEIR idea) or is this something that was more of a natural evolution that all manufacturers started adopting because... well it made sense?
 
Please note that I have only started learning about EQ fundamentals in the past couple years. Before that it was all "twist things until the sound good" type tomfoolery. I guess I do still follow that principle (which Mr. Danzi encourages me to quite often) but it sure does make things easier when the starting/fixed bands are in the right spot as well as knowing "Hey... this kick sound is all fuxxored... perhaps I should poke around the 80hz range to see what's what".
 
Anyway... just some general blathering. Waiting for some meatworld stuff to happen so you all get to enjoy my inanity. lol

Beeps, this is such a cool thread! I don't know how I missed it when you posted it before and I'm sorry I'm a little late to the party now. Nothing I say here will help you, but I am going to share how *I* run my Mackie in my little cave when time allows. :)
 
Now mine probably has more options available because it's the big baystid, but it's really cool because everything in my man cave goes into it and can be sent to Sonar or any other soundcard or tape machine. I'll explain it and maybe it can help you.
 
Here's how I run my stuff.
 
I have 64 possible ins (mic+line) per channel, 8 bus outs and 6 Aux sends/returns.
 
When recording, I have three ways I'm handling how I come out of the console and I use all 3 methods. I have direct outs on each channel as well as bus outs and aux outs too. But my aux stuff is specifically for outboard effects like reverb, chorus, delay and any special effects. I NEVER run any compression or eq type stuff in the aux sends. I run that stuff direct on each channel as it sounds the best and is applied destructively...which those effects work the best that way when using a console. Or I simply don't use anything at all. Most of the time just a few light compressors inserted right on a channel in the Mackie.
 
But to send signal, here's how I do it and why: 
 
1. The first 16 direct outs go to an Apollo. (which I'm just trying out..pretty cool piece!) 
2. The next 16 direct outs go to a 16 track, 1 inch Tascam reel to reel.
3. The 8 bus outs are sent to a Layla 24/96 card.
 
This allows me to send to several places and when I use the number 3 option, anything in the board can be sent to the Layla card because of the switches on each channel of the board allowing me to enable and send to and through the bus of my choice.
 
I don't know how yours looks, but I have switches on each channel of my Mackie that run along side the fader. They look like this...
 
1-2
3-4
5-6
7-8
 
So for example, if we want to send something to the Layla, we can do so on any track in the console because every channel has those push button switches. It doesn't matter what channel. So if we want to send channel 9 to Layla, I would press one of those buttons and it would send out of the bus to Layla.
 
Bus 1-2 are sent to channels 1-2 on Layla...bus 3-4 sent to channel 3-4 on Layla and so on.
 
So when I press say, bus 3 on the switch, I would pan my knob on that channel left which makes it send to 3. This will show signal in Sonar coming through channel 3 on Layla. If I pan the channel on the Mackie to the right, bus 4 will see signal. (as long as you have those sound card channels selected in Sonar in a track) If I have the pan straight up the middle on the Mackie, and a stereo 3-4 set up on a Sonar track, both 3-4 will see signal or I can run two mono tracks using 3 and 4 independently. Understand? This is what they call multi-track mode.
 
The other direct outs are sent to specific places...so when I record on say channels 17-32 of the Mackie, the direct outs are going right to my tape machine. Channels 1-16 going to Apollo.
 
So anyway, that's how I do things here and it's also how I'm *sort of* doing things at my real studio minus the tape machine as I sold the 24 track 2 inch we had there. I just like the in/out capability of a console not to mention having everything permanently sent where I need it to be. A console with good pre's (which the Makcie unfortunately doesn't have...fair at best) is really important if you can afford it. I messed around with one of those new Behringer X32 live boards in the studio about 2 weeks ago as my bud was trying to sell me on it. I just can't take Behringer serious with stuff like that...however, those Midas pre's that come with that thing are something else! 
 
The SSL is really starting to look good...even though it would be a car payment which is nice NOT to have right now. Then again, my whole life growing up in this field....you couldn't touch an SSL for under 250-300 k and if you could, there was something wrong with it. Though it's still pricier than I want to spend, 69 k with a 10k rebate is as low as I'll get in this lifetime for a brand new SSL that WILL do all the stuff I want it to. LOL!! Maybe after I buy the woman a truck. I'll name it SSL. LOL! :)
 
-Danny

Hey Beep you sure your channel mutes don't switch to 3/4 like was said back a bit here, I seem to remember that feature and the only 2 Mackie's I ever owned where the one you have and the same vintage 1202. Might have been the 1202 that did that trick. And ya you can flip the pod to face forward but I seem to remember some sort of metal bracket you use for one way or the other. 

I have the 12 channel VLZ and in my studio I wouldn't be without it. I'm not doing all of that routing with it like you are Beep. It sits there primarily tied into a stereo pair of inputs on my Presonus and I use it as kind of a utility mixer for whatever I want to put into it, usually I have a few keyboards hooked to it, but over the years it has served me well using those aux outputs and even live using the TRS as outputs to record. I don't seem to be able to tell any significant difference in sound quality between aux .vs mains. I don't care how old school it seems I don't think I'll ever get rid of it.

This conversation kind of spilled over into another thread so I'm just going to repost some conclusions that I've made after Danny informed me the aux outs on his particular Mackie are perfectly clean and fine for recording purposes (his is a little more modern than mine but for all intents and purposes should behave the same)...
 
Soooo here's my current line of thinking...
 
I also came up with a good reason to use the 6 aux outs on the board as opposed to the 8 direct outs (if as you say the aux outs are nice and clean). Considering every channel on the board (all 16) has access to the Aux outs (and can access any of the six AND can access 4 of those aux's at one time) then I can set up cables, outboard gear like the Line6/Traynor amps, mics, etc and then set the input trim and EQ for those devices so they sound best. Then I simply have one of my snakes run from the six aux outputs into the six line inputs on the back of the Scarlett. From there instead of having to move cables around and reset channel trims/eq's on the Mackie I can just turn up the appropriate Aux knob on that channel to feed the Scarlett.
 
The direct outs/channel access connections are limited to the first 8 channels on the Mackie and can only be use with the corresponding channel (unlike the aux outs that can take signal from any channel).
 
So here's what I'm thinking (keeping in mind that Scarlett In 1 and 2 are the multi ins on the front which I would rather keep free so if I want to just plug straight in to write something or jam out without firing up all the other gear I can OR I can use the direct outs on the Mackie for special input set ups that I don't need set up all the time)...
 
Mackie Aux Out 1 = Scarlett Line In 3
Mackie Aux Out 2 = Scarlett Line In 4
Mackie Aux Out 3 = Scarlett Line In 5
Mackie Aux Out 4 = Scarlett Line In 6
Mackie Aux Out 5 = Scarlett Line In 7
Mackie Aux Out 6 = Scarlett Line In 8
 
Then I use the 9-16 channels on the Mackie to set up gear I think I will be likely to use on a regular basis, set the ideal trim and EQ and bingo bango... I can just turn on the mixer, turn up the fader to unity, turn up the appropriate Aux level knob on the mixer channel(s) to unity (or whatever I want or even mix and match for blending channels into a single track). If I run out of space within those 8 channels (9-16) I can start creeping backward into the 1-8 channels. Why keep the first 8 channels open? I guess it doesn't REALLY matter aside from organization but the first 8 have the direct outs and I only have two 8 channel snakes (one of which has two bad cables so it is essentially a 6 channel snake). So I would opt to use the direct outs for those eight channels and use them as wild cards or specifically for the TRUE use of the Channel Access which is with a TRS cable sending and receiving from outboard gear (it's an insert... not that I currently have any gear that works like that at the moment but you never know what might come down the pipe). I COULD still use the Aux on those channels anyway but I like keeping things straight in my head because this is all confusing enough as it is. lol
 
So yeah... it's been almost a week since I started really messing with the board but provided I don't run into any stupid noise problems I think this might be a good plan. Even if I do run into a bit of noise with the Aux outs (due to stomp boxes running through the external gear or something) then I can fall back on the direct outs as needed which is a good reason to keep the multi ins 1/2 on the Scarlett free as well.
 
I get the benefits of a permanent patch bay type set up and still have a ton of flexibility. Cool!

Really it was just sheer ignorance as to proper console concepts on my part. Knowing the reasons why one might avoid Aux sends over directs is very instructive but it seems that ideally the signal being outputted from those are supposed to be for all intents and purposes a good clean signal just like the direct outs. Now that I understand it all (or at least these bits) I can make a judgment call as to whether I am getting unacceptable noise or other weirdness whereas before I was just like "duuurrrr... what do these do??? huuurrrr..."
 
Also knowing all this if I got stuck in a pinch I could easily use my other (crappy) board for multi tracking because ALL it has is Aux/Alt type routing. Previously all I could do was use it as a basic board for creating a stereo mix.
 
In the meantime this Mackie is a real treat to use and generally pontificate on.
 
Knowledge is power, yo.

Well that's a pleasant surprise, isn't it? I'm getting jealous of you guys and your Hi Z mixers.
 

Dammit, Rain!! Now I'm contemplating spending some of my business seed money on one of those!! lol
 
Seriously though I gotta wonder exactly how much better it would/could be than the Hi Z on my Focusrite. I do feel like I spend far too much time "chasing" tones with my sims when I use the Hi Z and I'm wondering if something like that would solve the problem. When I listen to what the sims are doing I can tell that they are indeed really quite accurate for the gear modeled but... something just ain't right.
 
The one very immediate benefit though, whether it's truly better than the FR Hi Z or not, would be being able to plug straight into the Mackie and access the EQ but is that really worth $40 to me?
 
I guess that's the
 
*shades*
 
$40 question.
 
YEEEEEEAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!

I might try to find some time and do some testing for you as I too use a Scarlett.
 
I didn't rely on amp sims as extensively since I got my Scarlett because I had a bunch of other options - real amps, the direct out on my Spider IV, a POD HD...
 
Most of my work with amp sims I tried to do using my old M-Audio Fast Track, either direct, either going through a preamp, or a combination of devices. But as far as I can recall, I wasn't happier with the Scarlett in that regard.
 
It always left me with the impression that the amp sim was adding a coat of distortion on top of my otherwise very, very flat and lifeless guitar track - no matter how hot the signal I fed the amp sim.
 
The Hi Z switch was a surprise because for the first time, it sounded as if the guitar was biting into the amp - it was not simply dressed in overdrive, it was overdriving, punching through.
 
 

Sorry, guys. Got caught up in hammering out some more details for my ongoing plans and schemes some of which relate to this.
 

Rain
I might try to find some time and do some testing for you as I too use a Scarlett.
 
I didn't rely on amp sims as extensively since I got my Scarlett because I had a bunch of other options - real amps, the direct out on my Spider IV, a POD HD...
 
Most of my work with amp sims I tried to do using my old M-Audio Fast Track, either direct, either going through a preamp, or a combination of devices. But as far as I can recall, I wasn't happier with the Scarlett in that regard.
 
It always left me with the impression that the amp sim was adding a coat of distortion on top of my otherwise very, very flat and lifeless guitar track - no matter how hot the signal I fed the amp sim.
 
The Hi Z switch was a surprise because for the first time, it sounded as if the guitar was biting into the amp - it was not simply dressed in overdrive, it was overdriving, punching through.
 
 

That would be cool... very cool. Since I last posted I've been searching the tubes and making some calls about the Z-Box and other alternatives to this issue. The one thing that is kind of annoying is that Focusrite doesn't seem to list the impedance (I think that's what we're talking about) for the Instr. input/setting. It's got some other electronic gobbledygook that I don't understand but not the 1Kohm designation that I have learned is what is needed and what the ZBox, a proper guitar preamp and other devices for guitar supposedly provide (at first I thought it was 1ohm but I guess it's 1kilo ohm... or something). I was talking to my usual retailer and they started prattling on about Radial and Neutrik solutions. Neutrik seems to just be cables and adapters so I'm not sure how that would help (unless there is a resister built in or something). The Radial boxes look like regular old DI boxes but their site has a special chart to show which of their boxes should be used for which sources (bass, acoustic, electric... the bass and electric are the ones I am interested in and they have boxes that cover both). So that's good to know and might be more versatile because of the standard DI function (for splitting out to an amp and the mixer/interface). Those of course cost more and I am not quite certain they would provide the same results as the Zbox.
 
The infuriatingly hilarious part is I can't find the Zbox ANYWHERE up here in Canada except on Amazon.ca and they are charging over TWICE as much (over $80... ugh). I'm almost thinking I could wire one up for myself if I can figure out the right parts. Maybe I could use one of my old burnt out pedals as the housing... lol.
 

tlw
Guitar pickups are very sensitive to input impedances. They like to see the 1M ohms a valve preamp or well designed solid state pre or buffer provides. Otherwise you lose shedloads of treble and quite a bit of output as well.

Hence the issues around effects pedal bypasses that began a couple of decades or so ago. An unmodified vintage crybaby or MXR pedal for example can really wipe out your tone and volume when bypassed because the input side of the effect circuit is still connected to the guitar (the switch just disconnects the output of the circuit) with the result you're now connected to a low impedance crybaby in parallel with whatever comes after it.

If you google "Pete Cornish" and "bypass" he has an interesting article on his site about input impedances and guitars.

Very informative as always, tlw. Thanks... and I guess I was mistaken about the 1kilo ohm if you are saying mega ohm. I intend to take an electronics course in a year or so if I can swing it so I can get out of this fog of confusion which always overtakes me when trying to learn about these things. I also figure I could save a hell of a lot of money if I can just wire up some of these simpler devices as I need them. It would also be fun to try out some of my own little creations. I've got some ideas for little mini mixer/DI/HiZ/splitter/preamp thingies to handle these type of input issues. It would be REALLY nice if I could wire up my own tube preamp for vocals or even see if I could build a little 5watt tube amp for guitar so I can drive it without blasting out my neighbors. I'd have to do some other educational upgrading first though. I started working far too young so I've got a lot of catching up to do. D'oh.
 
Cheers.