Mackie S408

[sabianq]

Anybody ever audtion the Mackie S408?
http://www.mackie.com/products/s408/
http://www.directproaudio.com/images/products/mackie-s408.jpg

I am thinking about purchasing a pair of these.

the specs are impressive
133 spl program
137 spl peak

Sensitivity: 99dB SPL (1W/1m)
600W RMS power handling at 8 Ohms
Frequency Response: 60Hz-22kHz

[Audiodude]

I've listened to them. It wasn't what I'd call a really critical listening test, but I was impressed nonetheless.

[sabianq]

yea?

are they as loud as the spec say they are?

did you think they were pretty clear?

thanks

[Audiodude]

Yes, and yes.

[sabianq]

Yes, and yes.

A man of many words, eh?

lol

Thanks, I think I will go ahead with the purchase.

:D

[Bops2000]

well at least I could grate Romano cheese with them...

[Audiodude]

Be sure to report back once you've got these up and running. Like I said I heard a demonstration of them, but I haven't used them in any sort of real-world scenario yet, and they seem fascinating.

I've always been a big fan of studio monitors that employed a D'Appolito-type design with multiple small woofers. The S408's take a similar approach by using 4 small 8" drivers along with a huge waveguide to combine the accuracy of a small speaker with the low-end response of a larger woofer, and a smoother response through the crossover range.

Are you arraying them, or will you just have two seperate boxes? Are you using the matching Mackie sub?

[sabianq]

Actually, I purchased them on Thursday and they should be here this week, I am excited.

I am only using them alone right now, and will driving them with the qsc 1602 plx amp..

the Band i will be working for is the "great expectations band" in D.C.
the first venue is in Baltimore in April.
It should be fun. I am replacing my old Yamaha 15 cabs.
I will not be using the sub box right away because of $ constraints. but that will change.

I think the Freq response of the mackies will be more than adequate for the job.

I will write a full critique in the review section when I have had a chance to play them.

[sabianq]

Guess what came!
They sound very nice, crisp, super clear and very loud!
Now I just need an open place to play them, my small studio room dosent let them "breathe".

I cant wait to actually use them!

:D

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s252/sabianq/DSC03533.jpg

[sabianq]

Any body want to buy some great sounding, used, 15 inch, high sensitivity Yamaha cab's?

[sabianq]

I will be posting Frequency Analysis Graphs soon.

[sabianq]

well here are some frequency response curves
the first one is pretty much straight through my mixer,
I used the NCH tone generator
http://www.nch.com.au/tonegen/index.html
to produce a white-noise sample and it seem pretty flat when running it directly through my Mackie 16X8 from my Internet computer to my LX6 connected to my audio computer.

The dip in the front up to and past the 100 Hz range may be either the tone generator, my mixer, or the LX6.
But I am using it as my calibration set so the changes will be relative to my "calibrated" sample
(regardless, the Mixer, LX6 and the tone generator DATA is pretty flat. It might be helpful if other people post samples of the white noise generated by the NCH tone generator)

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s252/sabianq/whitenoise_nch_mackie.jpg

the next curve is the same tone generator but this time run through the Mackie S408 picked up by a SM58 dynamic microphone.
you can see the sensitivity curve is close to the published microphones response curve, this leads me to think that the speaker is pretty flat.
I am convinced that the dip in the low end under 100 Hz is due to the poor acoustics of the studio space, I would need to do a linear tone sweep of the space to find out the resonance of the room. (however, ironically, white-noise by nature produces little standing waves in a space which makes it an ideal sample for equipment testing.)
At the same time, it would be nice to have access to a calibrated microphone.

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s252/sabianq/whitenoise_nch_SM58.jpg

http://www.shure.com/stellent/groups/public/@gms_gmi_web_us/documents/web_resource/site_img_us_rc_sm58_large.gif

the next two curves were done using AKG condenser microphones the C451E and the C353 respectively
I just cant find the response curves of the AKG microphones,
but the Condenser microphones should be flatter than the curve below represents.
this response curve could be related to microphone positioning as both AKG microphones were placed the same distance and location near the S408.


http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s252/sabianq/whitenoise_nch_AKGC451E.jpg

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s252/sabianq/whitenoise_nch_AKGC353.jpg

the two AKG microphones are very close in response sensitivity.