Pioneer CDJ 1000 MK2 upgrade? - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- Pioneer CDJ 1000 MK2 upgrade?
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by T-Soma on Oct-08-2005 01:51:

No it wont make it better quality because you cant add something back into a song that just realy isnt there. Anyway, who can tell the difference between 320kbps and wave!?

Posted by Spirit5 on Oct-08-2005 01:59:

But if I were to download a wave would there be a huge difference? I mean i don't personally see a huge difference when I converted a few, but would downloading it be different? Hell if it is a big difference then I just wasted alot of money these past few months downloading 320 Kbps MP3s, thinking those would be the best quality you can get, considering no digital store offered Wave files for download (only BeatPort did...but not for download).

Posted by fr3sh on Oct-08-2005 03:58:

quote:
Originally posted by ieko
Eh? How's that elitest, I don't like them... it's a personal preference. Has nothing to do with me thinking I'm better or anything...

You can convert mp3 to wav, it won't hurt it at all. Although I think you might lose some volume? I'm not sure.

Friend... i am with you on this... i was accused of being an elitist by omega blue for requiring nothing but wavs in my digital collection and yes the sound is better

at home i have pretty decently loud speakers.... the mackie srm 350s and when i mix a wav or vinyl with an mp3 when the speakers are cranked i can tell the difference

i did another test with a wav file i bought... had the wav version playing on one channel and a compressed (320kb) version of the same track on the other channel playing at exactly the same time and i set the gains and eq evenly on both chanels and went back and forth with the crossfader

the mp3 was a little bit louder and harsher and slightly thinner in sound
also on my meters on the mixer... the mp3 was going slightly above 0db
and the wav file did not... remember the gains were exactly the same etc... all control factors held constant

i have nothing against people using mp3s

but personally I (and my fellow "elitist" friend ieko...lol) prefer the wavs

Posted by ieko on Oct-08-2005 09:04:

lol alright, no hard feelings :P

Posted by Allied Nations on Oct-08-2005 09:22:

Surf's up! Ride the wav.

Posted by T-Soma on Oct-08-2005 09:59:

quote:
Originally posted by dinoXpress
Surf's up! Ride the wav.

Di dum tsss.

Posted by fr3sh on Oct-08-2005 10:48:

quote:
Originally posted by dinoXpress
Surf's up! Ride the wav.

im adding that one to my repertoire of lines... nice one

Posted by dj_lane on Oct-10-2005 02:43:

ive played out 3-4 times with 320k mp3s, and they sound fine

Posted by djshtr on Oct-10-2005 04:57:

so back on topic...

so back on topic..

You guys think that the CDJ 1000s wont be replaced soon with units that have mp3 capability, right? So its not silly to buy a CDJ in the next few months without fear or a newer unit replacing it?

I'm at a crossroads.. do I care more about the convience of 80 tracks on a single disc with the CDJ200, or the added features and universality of the CDJ1000?

Posted by ieko on Oct-10-2005 05:02:

Re: so back on topic...

quote:
Originally posted by djshtr
so back on topic..

You guys think that the CDJ 1000s wont be replaced soon with units that have mp3 capability, right? So its not silly to buy a CDJ in the next few months without fear or a newer unit replacing it?

I'm at a crossroads.. do I care more about the convience of 80 tracks on a single disc with the CDJ200, or the added features and universality of the CDJ1000?

I doubt 80 tracks on a CD with be a convience. But yeah for now it doesn't seem like they're going to release an MK3 in the next few months. We'd probably already know about it.

Posted by Allied Nations on Oct-10-2005 05:20:

I would find 80 mp3s on 1 cd annoying. i prefer when u look at the tracklist u wrote or printed seeing less than 10 tracks.. makes it easier for my to decide what to play.

Posted by djshtr on Oct-10-2005 05:29:

benefit of 80 tracks on a CD

The benefit is apparent especially with ID3..

On my CDJ200 it takes a few seconds to find a track that I want.. i can sort by artist, filename, etc. And i just use the jog wheel to get the track that I want. There is even a fast-jog option if you hold down one of teh search buttons while you wheel to the track you want.

Its convienient because i dotn need to write tracknames on the CD.. i just have cds labelled: classic trance, new trance, house, etc. Just make two copies of each MP3 cds and i'm set.

Then every few weeks when I get enough tracks to fill a CD, i make another CD, or add more tracks to the existing CD.

Posted by abnorm on Oct-10-2005 06:03:

quote:
Originally posted by fr3sh
i did another test with a wav file i bought... had the wav version playing on one channel and a compressed (320kb) version of the same track on the other channel playing at exactly the same time and i set the gains and eq evenly on both chanels and went back and forth with the crossfader

the mp3 was a little bit louder and harsher and slightly thinner in sound
also on my meters on the mixer... the mp3 was going slightly above 0db
and the wav file did not... remember the gains were exactly the same etc... all control factors held constant

Which sources were the MP3 and WAV files played back from? The true test would be to take an original CD and rip one file to WAV, the other to 320kbps MP3 and compare the two. I would find it very hard to believe that you'd be able to tell the difference especially using SRM-350 which are nowhere near studio quality monitors. Not to say they are not great club dj monitors.

Posted by Spirit5 on Oct-10-2005 14:53:

quote:
Originally posted by dinoXpress
I would find 80 mp3s on 1 cd annoying. i prefer when u look at the tracklist u wrote or printed seeing less than 10 tracks.. makes it easier for my to decide what to play.

I agree. I just put anywhere between 2 (if the artist only has two tracks released) on one cd, to about 10, if they have many releases, and either write down each track on the CD, if there is only say 2 to 5 tracks, or just the artist's name with some of the basic releases on the CD. This way I have in mind what songs are on the CD, and try to memorize to the best of my ability...whats on the CD. It's not hard to do if your know your music, and if you have the id3 tags, which both the CDJ 200 and 1000 have. Don't know why the CDJ 800 doesn't have that....seems pretty important to me, especially if you can't memorize everything thats on the CD, or forgot whats on it.

Posted by spit_heron on Oct-10-2005 20:52:

quote:
Originally posted by abnorm
Which sources were the MP3 and WAV files played back from? The true test would be to take an original CD and rip one file to WAV, the other to 320kbps MP3 and compare the two. I would find it very hard to believe that you'd be able to tell the difference especially using SRM-350 which are nowhere near studio quality monitors. Not to say they are not great club dj monitors.

you should also make the test 'double blind' to you make sure your not imagining things.

Posted by abnorm on Oct-11-2005 05:38:

Say what now?

Posted by MR STROKE on Oct-11-2005 07:30:

wow i am even supprised you would want to put 80 tracks on one cd??
i only put 1 song per cd, maybe 2, but 80??might as well play from a laptop

Pages (2): « 1 [2]