Xone 92 vs Vestax CX - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- Xone 92 vs Vestax CX
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by beats and beeps on Mar-17-2005 20:39:

quote:
Originally posted by A83
You just bash me whenever I say anything. I know i'm correct and you know i'm correct also. You just like to say Pioneer will suck because it's not as 'pretty' and doesn't have pretty led lights on it.

First of all I own two pioneer cdj 800s, so I in no way say anything pioneer puts out sucks. Also, the CX has alot less leds on it than the djm1000 does. If anything I would say the djm1000 is one of the "prettiest" mixers out there.

^ Doesnt have many pretty lights compared to the djm1000.

And again, I own 2 cdjs, and have owned a djm300, so dont say I'm biased against pioneer, they are fine manufacturers.

Now, I think many people on this board would appreciate it if you would make another thread like this one. Except on this board.
http://www.pioneerprodjforums.com/u...sb=5&o=&fpart=1

Posted by A83 on Mar-17-2005 20:48:

quote:
Originally posted by beats and beeps
Now, I think many people on this board would appreciate it if you would make another thread like this one. Except on this board.
http://www.pioneerprodjforums.com/u...sb=5&o=&fpart=1

I didn't make this. If you posted it on the ppdj forum. I know they'll say it is the best mixer, because it indeed is. When all the really big clubs have a DJM 1000, free free to pm me to tell me that I was correct.

Posted by SUNWmsf on Mar-17-2005 21:05:

My personal opinion is that a high end analog system would blow away a high end digital system in the club environment. Just can't beat that analog sound.... I just don't think digital is ready to take over analog (audiophile-wise). But that's just my opinion.

(hope I don't get flamed for saying that analog sound is superior to digital sound.)

Posted by beats and beeps on Mar-17-2005 21:19:

quote:
Originally posted by A83
I didn't make this. If you posted it on the ppdj forum. I know they'll say it is the best mixer, because it indeed is. When all the really big clubs have a DJM 1000, free free to pm me to tell me that I was correct.

First of all its not going to be the best mixer, sound quality isnt everything, cant you grasp that concept? The cx is heaven for me because I mix techno on 3 Sources, The djm1000 would be hell for this. If I'm using 3 sources I want 3 channels not 6, they are just going to fuck me up. The eq knobs are too small to be fooling with, not to mention touch faders are too cumbersome to be mixing from 3 sources with.

Besides, so what if all the big clubs have the DJM 1000, thats because its made by pioneer. Pioneer always works its gear into clubs. The djm600 is in "all the big clubs" does that make it the best mixer?

The best mixer isnt proven by a list of specs you can rip off of another source.

Btw, you seem to fail to grasp what I was trying to say, I was not refering to this thread, I was saying I wish you would post a thread like this one ---> Yes, thats right this thread. <---
Except on tranceaddict.com

Posted by djtrinity on Mar-17-2005 21:37:

quote:
Originally posted by SUNWmsf
My personal opinion is that a high end analog system would blow away a high end digital system in the club environment. Just can't beat that analog sound.... I just don't think digital is ready to take over analog (audiophile-wise). But that's just my opinion.

(hope I don't get flamed for saying that analog sound is superior to digital sound.)

for anyway curious on the subject:

http://www.wavemusic.com/community/...=&threadid=3891

Posted by DannyO on Mar-17-2005 22:44:

quote:
Originally posted by A83
If the V6 didn't have rotaries, nobody would buy it. By Karls post, I know 100%, it'll be better than the v6 and any urei mixer.

Why should anybody believe what you say? You an alcoholic...why believe you. TA is just a bunch of drunk blazed people running around arguing with eachother and starting a bunch of crap.

Yea, your really showing your intelligence in a post like this.

As for the mixer, it won't be crap, but what things say on paper and how they perform in the real world are 2 different things, the DJX700 looked awesome on paper, in really life, well umm NO.

This mixer WILL make its way into clubs as that Pioneers strategy, they will give them to the big clubs for free, so why wouldn't the big clubs have them.

This mixer being the best is YOUR OPINION, its not fact, to most Audiophiles who are all about sound, I guarentee they wouldn't want to touch this, they would all be about the Bozak or Urei as it keeps the original signal fromt he vinyl as close to the original as possible, not like a digital mixer that will convert and chance the singal in all sorts of ways.

IMO this mixer is really all about being great with its sound, but I still don't think it will beat the heavy weight analog mixers, and as for features, its nice if your into video stuff with DVJs or the like, but in every other department it is just average, and looks wise it looks like crap to me.

Posted by Zild on Mar-17-2005 22:56:

Posted by Derivative on Mar-17-2005 22:57:

quote:
Why should anybody believe what you say? You an alcoholic...why believe you. TA is just a bunch of drunk blazed people running around arguing with eachother and starting a bunch of crap.

Posted by A83 on Mar-18-2005 01:11:

The 1000 can mix in digital or analog

Posted by ESMdjm600 on Mar-18-2005 14:23:

guys come on now... name calling is just an excuse for lack of intellectual substance

Posted by ESMdjm600 on Mar-21-2005 12:32:

i dunno i personally felt that anyone that was loyal to pioneer and decided to wait for the next update so to speak of the djm600, really got fucked in the ass by pioneer.... its like they decided to go exclusive club version that no one one for home use would consider to buy based on price range, its as if they said to themselves "lets stop trying to directly compete with those 4 ch. mixers in the 1000-1500 dollar range cuz we cant seem to do it... i mean look at it, denon brought their shit on, so did ecler, and so did a&h as of late, everyone was expecting pioneers next 1000 dollar 4 ch. mixer to see how well it would compete with the 92, the 1500 and the nuo5.... it seems pioneers strategy was to do watever they could to avoid those comparisons, and they did it by making their next mixer of a different class than those mixers...

Posted by ESMdjm600 on Mar-21-2005 12:34:

OH! and one last thing, someone said something about pioneer mixers being ugly or something, well i actually give them alot of respect for that, i mean u should let your sound quality match how you look

Posted by Zild on Mar-21-2005 17:59:

They were pissed off because noboby would buy their 707 @ the price they released it at and now it sells for $300 instead of $700. That would piss me off too.

Posted by A83 on Mar-21-2005 19:46:

Now they need to lower the price of the 909. The 909 is the EXACT same thing as the 707 with the EFX unit

Posted by Zild on Mar-21-2005 22:28:

If they did lower the price on the 909 I would probably buy one but don't tell anyone else I said that.

Posted by ESMdjm600 on Mar-27-2005 13:54:

so then essentially the fx are worth hundreds more than the actual mixer.... sounds like bad priority on pios part

Posted by Psiweaver on Mar-28-2005 06:30:

Most pioneer mixers are all about the effects that they offer. I would say that the 92 can probably come close to the DJM1000 as far as the V6, Urei and Bozak there not even in the same league. A truly analog signal path means less analog to digital conversions which means less signal degradation and hence better sound quality. The pioneer will always do at least 1 A to D conversion.

Posted by Greedy on Mar-28-2005 16:15:

quote:
Originally posted by SUNWmsf
My personal opinion is that a high end analog system would blow away a high end digital system in the club environment. Just can't beat that analog sound.... I just don't think digital is ready to take over analog (audiophile-wise). But that's just my opinion.

(hope I don't get flamed for saying that analog sound is superior to digital sound.)

the difference of sound quality that is actually noticable between analog and digital in the club and even in your bedroom assuming you dont have high end monitors is VERY small. I would pass up on that slim difference for new innovative technology and pioneer has been known to do just that.

Posted by Nemesis44 on Mar-28-2005 22:08:

Heads up guys,

The Vestax is an awesome mixer and to be fair why the hell anyone could hands down say that one is better than the other in this thread is beyond me. Half of you have probably never played on either of them!

Vestax make some seriously good mixers and this one is a monster for control freaks.

Two very solid lush sounding mixers I wouldn't turn either of them down, but favour the vestax because it looks less like a toy.

I have played on both (in the last month in fact) and like both.

There is no wrong answer with this comparison other than the style of DJing he has and what your friend prefers.

Cheers
Nem

Posted by ESMdjm600 on Mar-29-2005 19:20:

well put nem

Posted by Freak on Mar-29-2005 19:47:

Im sure i posted on this thread in reply to someone... where'd it go?

didnt like the pioneer 600 when i used it. didnt feel nice. Never had any issues with vestax stuff tho- look stunning and tend to sound and feel it too.

Posted by Derivative on Mar-29-2005 21:07:

quote:
Digital never will have the total accuracy of a pure analog recording or manipulation systems. It will sound different from the original, although slightly in this case.

yea, only if your ears are more sensitive than a fucking dog's. bottom line - that thing has 24 bit 92 khz converters. it might even be 192khz. i cant remember. either way, even if it is the lower one that yields a pretty insane frequency response of about 46,000hz which is more than double the limits of human hearing and more than accurate enough for any producer at 24 bit resolution - i mean you are hardly gonna hear the quantization noise from that are you? maybe if you are dumbo. you will never notice the difference beyond 23,000hz either. the only reason why most monitors and soundsystems are responsive up to about 50,000hz is to correct phasing problems at lower frequencies caused by listening off axis. since this isnt an issue in club - you can forget about that one.

Pages (2): « 1 [2]