There have been several posting on Synthzone about these two personal monitors/mini-pa amps. Many have praised the Roland for its fuller sound and bigger bass and have stated that two Rolands together would make a good small room (50 people) PA.

I was looking for a personal monitor that I could use with my Tyros 2, the output going to house mains. I talked to the keyboard manager at my local Guitar Center (Langhorne, PA) and asked if they could get both the Mackie and the Roland in. They did.

I spent an hour+ A/B’ing them with a PSR-S700. What everyone said about the Roland is true. It does have a bigger sound and a much better bass. The Roland does have a bigger speaker and is in a bigger cabinet. It is taller than the Mackie, but it is still relatively small. Especially for the sound that comes out of it. The Mackie is smaller and lighter. As for volume and specs (Roland is 30 amps, Mackie is 150 amps). There is some marketing mumbo jumbo going on. Both were plenty loud. The Roland got about as loud as the Mackie but at high volumes the Roland distorted a little where the Mackie stayed cleaner. The Mackie had a very nice clean sound throughout its volume range. The Mackie did not have as full a tone or rich a bass as the Roland , but the Mackie was a very good tone and the 3 band EQ gave a better control of the tone than the Roland.

Yes, I did like the sound of the Roland better. Yes, I did buy the Mackie. Why? I went back to what I was looking to get, a personal monitor, not a personal monitor that would serve as a small PA. I find that a personal monitor needs to be in your face to be heard by you and not necessary bleed out to others too much. The Mackie was able to do that with less visual impact and it angles up a little (you can’t tell that from the pictures of it) where the Roland does not. That places the Mackie at a better listening angle. The Mackie has an XLR output to connect to the house system with no directbox, hi/low adaptor (less stuff is always better). The Mackie also allows for two mic inputs without adaptors and had phantom power. Finally the Mackie had better tone control. Many times I find wanting to control the mids and highs of a personal monitor, not get more bass. So ultimately the Mackie sounded good too and was a better fit for my application of personal monitor.

I may in the future consider getting a second Mackie (you can daisy-chain them like the Rolands) or maybe even two Rolands to replace my Logitech z5500 which I generally have found works OK but as Donny said, and I agree, is really not built for the rigors of playing out. But that’s the topic of another email.

Other observations. The Roland has the mic stand threads built in. The Mackie uses an adaptor. The adaptor is something to loss. The Mackie has the ability to have a mic boom attached to the top. That may be convenient, I wonder about feedback though. Will have to see how well that works. Both have a built in handle. Mackie’s inputs are on the front, with the connectors to main or other amps in the back as XLR only All Roland connectors are on the back, outputs are ¼”. Mackie is designed to be mono in/out. Roland has stereo in/out options. I tend to run mono. But that’s the topic of still yet another email.

I plan on using the on-stage stand adaptor to mount the Mackie onto my double-braced X-Stand.

Both of the Roland and the Mackie were very impressive. Either would have worked well. It was a tough call. Roland had a fuller sound, would have been better as a small PA and cost $120 less. Mackie was just a better fit for my application.

Hope my rambling helps somebody. Although it will probably muddy the waters for some.

That's a very good review, Robert. Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's. You made some very good points for yout choice of the Mackie over the Roland. I believe the Mackie to be every bit as good as the Roland. I bought the Rolands because I ran into an unbelieveable deal. Luckily, I like them. Good luck with your new personal monitor.

------------------
www.cassponline.com/

Robert nice review.....

What I did when I A/B'd them was close my eyes stand back 25 feet and that's all I needed to hear.... I bought 2 CM30's.
My needs are different then yours regarding a monitor vs a small PA for small gigs....
I wanted to love the SRM 150's but MY ears wouldn't let me buy them. You did whats right FOR YOU & that's all that matters. That Wattage rating stuff is all malarkey IMO!

Bottom line about volume... You STOP turning it up the minute you hear ANY distortion. So, marketing mumbo jumbo aside, if you have to push the Roland's into clipping to get the same volume as a Mackie gets while still clean, that means that the Mackie is FAR more powerful (as 150 watts versus 30 make obvious).

The fact that anyone is even able to listen to a system with distortion is scary! This is the main thing that works against the Roland's, IMO. It may very well sound good, but only up to a certain point, and truth be told, if you use these as a main PA, you will have a VERY limited volume ceiling if you have no sub. Sure, they CAN go loud, but I guarantee you are introducing quite some distortion by the time they are dance-floor loud...

Me, I like clean. At ALL volumes...

What doesnt anyone understand about the CM30's & using them as always stated for very small gigs? or for home use....they do the job quite well for a mini PA. You want quality loud buy quality loud...no way around it.

About power ratings.............
I no longer sell mackie products because I sell Behringer instead and both are now made in China. Back when I did sell Mackie I was always explaining to my customers that Mackie rates everything in the PA line at 2OHMS which is just not accurate when using 8 ohm or 4ohm load speakers. They rated their powered 808S mixer at somthing like 600 watts rms per channel, but in an 8 ohm speaker cabinet (which everyone uses) the power is really 150watts per channel. If you even tried running three 8 ohm cabinets on one poweramp, which would bring you down to a 2OHM load, you would probably overheat the power amp and the powere amp would shut down. My guess is that this little monitor is rated into a 2OHM load. If it were 8 ohms, it would be 37 watts, which is more like it. Would someone please look at your spec sheet and see what it's rated into 8 ohms.


------------------
George Kaye
Kaye's Music Scene
Reseda, California
818-881-5566
www.kayesmusicscene.com

George: I had mentioned the same point in another post about the CM-30.
http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/016357-2.html

Peavey used to play the extact same game (listing power ratings at 2 OHM instead of 8). Looking at the SRM150 specs they list the amp at 100 watts continuous, 150 peak. The speaker is listed at 8 ohms but they don't say they are driving it at 8, they could be driving it at 2. Hearing both the Roland and the Mackie I agree that the 37 watt at 8 ohms is probably more on target. I also have an older TOA that is 25 watts. The Mackie is louder but not 4X more.

It's a shame that Mackie thinks it gives them an advantage in the market place by playing games with specs.

I really dont care what they rate this stuff at or what brand it is because in the end result .... what I do care about mostly is ...What I hear with My Own ears when I buy and play through a PA system...
bottom line, my ears tell me EVERTHING not some packaging hype.