TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- DJM-800 vs Xone:92 vs Xone:3D
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

Haha, I have MDRV-700's... mine haven't snapped in half yet, but I'm waiting!

The fader stiffness thing is preference though. They are most certainly NOT cheap faders. Never touched a 62 though... so can't comment.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT It's only the faders on the 92 that are shit, and I call them so solely because of how fucking loose they are. Honestly, they feel incredibly cheap compared to the rest of the mixer. A&H should have used the same faders they did on the 62 on the 92. And you should know by now that the "they're good enough for (big dj name here)" argument is a load of bollocks - look how many of those ******s still use the MDRV700's

Of the three I prefer the DJM800 only because of the comfort level and ease of use. Excellent EQ's and effects that if used right are magical. Ive tried the A&H, and the 4 eqs part...... thats just silly. And rotary is available on both those mixers (right?) so there really is no comparison for me. You can also add better looking as a plus for Pio!

quote:

Originally posted by Alex Barretta Of the three I prefer the DJM800 only because of the comfort level and ease of use. Excellent EQ's and effects that if used right are magical. Ive tried the A&H, and the 4 eqs part...... thats just silly. And rotary is available on both those mixers (right?) so there really is no comparison for me. You can also add better looking as a plus for Pio!

4 eq's isn't silly when you get used to them

quote:

Originally posted by agentdansmith 4 eq's isn't silly when you get used to them

Yep. My transitions are 20x more smoother with 4 eqs.

Uhh, they shouldn't be.

EQ's aren't even required to mix perfectly, pick the right tracks and learn level control.

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree Yep. My transitions are 20x more smoother with 4 eqs.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Uhh, they shouldn't be. EQ's aren't even required to mix perfectly, pick the right tracks and learn level control.

I suck, obvious.

So much that I need 4 eqs to feel like I'm a superstar DJ

Sooner or later mixers are going to be like those razors. First with 3 EQs, then 4, 5, 6..... and so on.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 You aren't biased at all with that avatar Hehe, I like the Xone's too. The build quality and solidness just isn't the same on the Pio's, though the 800/1000 is much better than their previous mixers.

I disagree, I'd even much rather play on a DJM-600 than an 800. The EQ curves on the 800 are horrible to me, and I hate the ridiculously bass-heavy sound it has. Even with sony 7506 the bass in the cans is just ridiculous. The effects are nice and the faders are smooth, but the filter is nothing like the xone's.

The 92 Rotary has to be one of the nicest mixers I've ever played on, though I heard the Rane is comparable if not even smoother.

I just love the EQing on the 92, and the cue sound setup is very nicely done too.

I was just referring to the build quality actually...

I'm gonna miss the rotaries of my 92... maybe I should just keep it

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis I disagree, I'd even much rather play on a DJM-600 than an 800. The EQ curves on the 800 are horrible to me, and I hate the ridiculously bass-heavy sound it has. Even with sony 7506 the bass in the cans is just ridiculous. The effects are nice and the faders are smooth, but the filter is nothing like the xone's. The 92 Rotary has to be one of the nicest mixers I've ever played on, though I heard the Rane is comparable if not even smoother. I just love the EQing on the 92, and the cue sound setup is very nicely done too.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis I disagree, I'd even much rather play on a DJM-600 than an 800. The EQ curves on the 800 are horrible to me, and I hate the ridiculously bass-heavy sound it has. Even with sony 7506 the bass in the cans is just ridiculous. The effects are nice and the faders are smooth, but the filter is nothing like the xone's. The 92 Rotary has to be one of the nicest mixers I've ever played on, though I heard the Rane is comparable if not even smoother. I just love the EQing on the 92, and the cue sound setup is very nicely done too.

I really, really want to get a chance to play on a rotary 92.

And Rane mixers are definitely comparable - I'd say even better in build quality than Xones.

I've played on an empath, rotary, empath rotary, and the t1-SSL (or whatever the one with Serato built in is), and all of them felt like absolute fucking tanks.

Best feeling mixers I've ever played on, for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT I really, really want to get a chance to play on a rotary 92. And Rane mixers are definitely comparable - I'd say even better in build quality than Xones. I've played on an empath, rotary, empath rotary, and the t1-SSL (or whatever the one with Serato built in is), and all of them felt like absolute fucking tanks. Best feeling mixers I've ever played on, for sure.

The best set I ever heard Lawler play was @ Avalon on an MP2016, his EQing and beatmatching that night were some of the finest I've ever heard by someone using 3 CDJs and an EFX unit.

A Rane 2016 or Urei 1620 is still a better rotary than the 92... you don't get all the features, but the feel and size/spacing of the knobs, not to mention the fader curves, are more representative of how a rotary should really be. The 92 is definately great, but not quite the same.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis I disagree, I'd even much rather play on a DJM-600 than an 800. The EQ curves on the 800 are horrible to me, and I hate the ridiculously bass-heavy sound it has. Even with sony 7506 the bass in the cans is just ridiculous. The effects are nice and the faders are smooth, but the filter is nothing like the xone's. The 92 Rotary has to be one of the nicest mixers I've ever played on, though I heard the Rane is comparable if not even smoother. I just love the EQing on the 92, and the cue sound setup is very nicely done too.

just have to say that as someone who owns the djm800 and have played on hte 600 as well, have to completely disagree with everything youve just said (except about the filters). but everyones entitled to their opinion ofcourse.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Uhh, they shouldn't be. EQ's aren't even required to mix perfectly, pick the right tracks and learn level control.

I know what you're saying but, I find that the faders on my 92 feel so loose and light that it's difficult to get a slow and smooth fade on them without a sudden level drop.

However, I love the feel of the eq's and filter knobs on the 92 so enjoy using them to mix with

800 has a analogue dsp processor

pioneer wins

quote:

Originally posted by agentdansmith I know what you're saying but, I find that the faders on my 92 feel so loose and light that it's difficult to get a slow and smooth fade on them without a sudden level drop. However, I love the feel of the eq's and filter knobs on the 92 so enjoy using them to mix with

Exactly. There is quite literally no resistance at all on the 92's upfaders. Drives me nuts.

quote:

Originally posted by Andr�meda 800 has a analogue dsp processor pioneer wins

that makes no sense.....

how can it have an analogue digital signal processor?

Umm that doesn't make any sense.

The DJM-800 has a DSP in it.

It also has ADC's (analog digital converters) which convert sound from analog decks (either CDJ's not using SPDIF, TT's, or the mic) to digital before dumping the signal to the DSP. The mixer also has DAC's (digital to analog converters) to convert the sound back to analog on the way out of the mixer (if you aren't using the SPDIF out, but at some point, you have to convert the sound to analog anyway before you can amplify it).

The 800 has a very clean signal path, but they doesn't mean it sounds "better" than the 92 or any other high end mixer (Rane, Urei, Bozak). They all sound a little "different", but it's a lot of preference. Any mixer over $1000 better sound damn good

Digital is not necessarily better than analog and vice versa.

Oh, the V6's valves are intended to "warm up" digitally sourced material.

quote:

Originally posted by DJPaulino2 well it supports signals up to 92 kHz, far superior in audio quality to any allen and heath mixer except for the V6 because it has Valve tubes.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Umm that doesn't make any sense. The DJM-800 has a DSP in it. It also has ADC's (analog digital converters) which convert sound from analog decks (either CDJ's not using SPDIF, TT's, or the mic) to digital before dumping the signal to the DSP. The mixer also has DAC's (digital to analog converters) to convert the sound back to analog on the way out of the mixer (if you aren't using the SPDIF out, but at some point, you have to convert the sound to analog anyway before you can amplify it). The 800 has a very clean signal path, but they doesn't mean it sounds "better" than the 92 or any other high end mixer (Rane, Urei, Bozak). They all sound a little "different", but it's a lot of preference. Any mixer over $1000 better sound damn good Digital is not necessarily better than analog and vice versa. Oh, the V6's valves are intended to "warm up" digitally sourced material.

you never stop do you? you and your mumbo jumbo, doesn't even know what i'm talking about. You got owned on the Tech 12 vs Cdj1000 thread, now its my turn for this thread.

The DJM 800 Has a DSP 96 kHz Signal processor, meaning it supports audio up to that quality, the other mixers do not. Every mixer has a an ADC, Every computer has an ADC.

Edit-also the valve tube amps does warm not only digital but also analogue and beam sound and ultra sonar sound, hell any sound.

goodbye

Umm, not every mixer has and ADC. The Xone's are ANALOG mixers. They do not have any digital components in them, except the MIDI clock in the 92.

You are a complete and utter idiot. Stop spouting this nonsense because there are lots of beginners on this forum who will take it as fact, when clearly you are uneducated on the ins and outs of technology.

And you need to read up more on the V6. The valves are optional, in fact they originally were supplied only on 4 channels, the latest model it comes on all channels. The Xone S6 is essentially a V6 minus the valve pre-amps. The intended use of the pre-amps is to warm up sound coming from CD decks, which is why they didn't include them on all channels originally (assuming the users would use the other two channels for analog turntables).

FYI: I'm a 31 year old senior software engineer with an engineering background and education. This is all pretty basic stuff, you need to learn a lot more and lose the attitude if you intend on making it anywhere in life. And oh, I've actually DJ'd in clubs.

quote:

Originally posted by DJPaulino4 you never stop do you? you and your mumbo jumbo, doesn't even know what i'm talking about. You got owned on the Tech 12 vs Cdj1000 thread, now its my turn for this thread. The DJM 800 Has a DSP 96 kHz Signal processor, meaning it supports audio up to that quality, the other mixers do not. Every mixer has a an ADC, Every computer has an ADC. Edit-also the valve tube amps does warm not only digital but also analogue and beam sound and ultra sonar sound, hell any sound. goodbye

quote:

Originally posted by djpaulino3 and plus only channels 5-6 have tubes on the V6, and i know that by memory not research like you. THERE FINETO

I rather believe someone who knows their stuff from research rather than memory to be honest mate

From the allen and heath website:

http://www.xone.co.uk/v6/
Valve [Tube] Section
All channels each have a stereo valve [tube] preamplifier - ideal for mellowing harsh digital music sources

Are you doing this to be funny?

From Pioneer site:
High Quality Audio
The analog signal from the player passes through the shortest signal route, first digitized at 24bit/96kHz through a pro A/D converter where it reaches the digital mixing stage with the best sound possible. The mixing is carried out by 32bit DSP with minimal deterioration of sound quality. A highly rigid chassis minimizes unnecessary vibration, which could adversely affect sound quality. The mixer also incorporates a dual-shield structure for eliminating entry of digital noise and a high performance power supply for noise-free power.

You clearly don't know the difference between an ADC and a DSP. Or much of anything really.

quote:

Originally posted by djpaulino3 i siad that out of anger cuz you always find a weakness in my post, i destyoed your post dealing with 92 kHz signal and i made a mistake by saying every mixer has an adc, no, every computer has adc and plus only channels 5-6 have tubes on the V6, and i know that by memory not research like you. the only way you can counter this is with the research part and don't even try it cuz you take 20 mins to post and i only take a few seconds. THERE FINETO

Umm, I said that in my post. V6 valves, S6 no valves.

quote:

Originally posted by djpaulino3 and another piece of evidence, only the V6 has tubes and the S6 doesn;t, your wrong again ryan, i'm at the site right now

Wow. This is fun.

quote:

Originally posted by djpaulino3 again with your nonsense, you just copy and paste and just throw it in here without knowing what i said or what you wrote means

That's out of date, on the US A+H site, not the Xone site in the UK, where the mixers are actually built (the V6/S6/3D are still made in the UK, the other mixers in China).

I just posted the link to the current info, A+H added the pre-amps to all channels about 1-2 years ago I think. Should I lookup the press-release?

quote:

Originally posted by djpaulino3 owned again now shut your mouth http://www.allen-heath.com/US/Displ...p=Xone:V6&id=38

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.