TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- Is there much of a difference?
Is there much of a difference?
Im set on buying 2 Pioneer CDJ 1000Mk2's but am still pondering over which mixer to get the DJM 500 or 600. If i go for the 600 then my account will be completly empty, but if i buy the 500 then ill still have a bit left. Honestly, is there much of a difference between the two (effects) or am i just imagining it? My friend has the 600 so ive been using those for a while now so should i just buy the same ones?
Look at the Denon X-1500.
It has similar features (ie, sampler, effects, four channel etc). People here give it amazing reviews, and here its a coupla hundred bucks cheaper than the 600.
(I'm just saying look)
I don't think the 500 has a sampler, but I'm not sure, i could be wrong
if it's effects you want, the djm 600 is the better of the 2 (500 vs 600)
it has a sampler and selector buttons to choose your effect frequency
(so you're not sitting there spinning that little knob for a half hour)
i believe it also has the cue/pan function which comes in handy
now between the djm 600 and the denon...
i still haven't much time on the denon to figure it out totally, but one thing i do like is the matrix channel selectors, meaning you can assign any input to any channel as well as one source to multiple channels
after being used to the layout of the djm, the denon has taken some getting used to
but until more and more clubs start installing another mixer i would have to suggest the djm simply for the sake of being familiar with something you'll encounter quite often
www.pioneerprodj.com
www.denondj.com
The DN-X1500 owns both Pioneers Hands Down. I have one and i love the damn thign to death. DJM-600 is a waste of money if you compare it to buying a Denon or mostly 80% of the new mixers out there.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jupiterone The DN-X1500 owns both Pioneers Hands Down. I have one and i love the damn thign to death. DJM-600 is a waste of money if you compare it to buying a Denon or mostly 80% of the new mixers out there. |
Dont tell me you think the DJM-600 is overall a better choice then the DNX1500....and basically because times change...technology grows. compare the djm to a lot of its competitors.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jupiterone Dont tell me you think the DJM-600 is overall a better choice then the DNX1500....and basically because times change...technology grows. compare the djm to a lot of its competitors. |
having played on both, i'd say there really isn't much more i can add to my previous post
the denon is a nice mixer but in no way does it "win hands down"
sure the djm is older but it's tried and tested and for what you get, it's a damn good mixer
well ofcourse i was exagurating about the HANDS DOWN part but overall it is greater. the sound is much more clearer and warmer compared to the pioneer, the mixer just feels a lot more comfortable IMO. But this varies amongst many TA's. The pioneer still does stand its ground very well when you think about how old it is.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jupiterone well ofcourse i was exagurating about the HANDS DOWN part but overall it is greater. the sound is much more clearer and warmer compared to the pioneer, the mixer just feels a lot more comfortable IMO. But this varies amongst many TA's. The pioneer still does stand its ground very well when you think about how old it is. |
I'll start with some reasons then.
1. Pioneers faders and EQs suck ass
2. The sound quality is questionable
3. The effects are tired
4. Can we say overpriced?
I'm sure we can keep the list going...
The only thing the DJM has going for it against the Denon is the fact that they're installed at a lot of venues whereas the Denon isn't. DJMs do get the job done.
If you asked me five years ago what mixer to buy I would have said the DJM for sure, but this isn't five years ago. There are a lot more mixers on the market now, and if you look around you can find better for about the same price, maybe even less.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Zild I'll start with some reasons then. 1. Pioneers faders and EQs suck ass 2. The sound quality is questionable 3. The effects are tired 4. Can we say overpriced? I'm sure we can keep the list going... The only thing the DJM has going for it against the Denon is the fact that they're installed at a lot of venues whereas the Denon isn't. DJMs do get the job done. If you asked me five years ago what mixer to buy I would have said the DJM for sure, but this isn't five years ago. There are a lot more mixers on the market now, and if you look around you can find better for about the same price, maybe even less. |
Ecler Nou5, Tascam X-9 or the denon. all a way better bang for the buck as far as quality. As people said before DJM effects are tired sound quality is sub par the eq's are garbage and its not like you can update the software like you can on the denon to provide for new software advances or change your effects like you can on the Nou5. In this price range the DJM600 really can't compete because pioneer has kept the price sky high when there are a lot of better mixers for less money.
One thing u might want to consider is do the cdj's have digital out? if so, a digital mixer like the x-9 or denon 1500 (at least i think it is) with digital ins could be handy. I've heard differing opinions about the sound from digital mixers. On one hand, the sound is "lossless" but on the other "it lacks warmth". U can make of it what u will altho i'd steer clear of the X-9 tho, at least until it gets some more positive feedback over at Future Producers. Apparently there's a delay in the EQs and the bpm counters don't work (making the midi out useless).
I too am looking for a new 4 channel mixer. I'm considering the Ecler smac 40 pro or nuo 4. I wouldn't mind the denon, but the prices are too steep here in japan. Anyway, good luck on getting your nex box.
i just read thru my post and realized i didn't answer your original question in anyway. doh.
I have a djm 500 which i owned since 1998( i got it about a week after they were first released) and which i've been using until now. It's true, the sound quality compared to newer mixers could be better and the build quality is fairly solid. My mixer only has one problem and that is one of the channels don't work now. I know the price has come down quite alot with second hand 500s and that's where I would lean if i had a small budget. If effects are a concern, u can always attach a third party effects box(like the efx500) to the send/return and get better control/effects than the ones that come with most mixers. just my 2 cents.
I own a 600 and a Ecler Nuo-5 now.
Personally I like the 600. It doesnt matter in the club since everyting is loud anyways.
Why I like the 600? The EFX-500 just WORKS with it. hahaha
If your not planning to use the EFX just buy the Nuo. Thinking on ebaying mine soon.
wow thanks for all the feedback guys. Taking into aCCOUNT MY BUDGET THOUGH THE DENNON X1500 OR THE djm 600 are prolly gonna be too much to afford. I basically need a three channel mixer at the most but dont want something which im gonna regret buying later. I mainly spin trance and breaks and therefore wont need that many built in effects (i can always buy an effects pad later on). So far im still looking at the 500 but based on your expoeriences, whats the next best thing below that, taking in to account the most money ill spend on a mixer would be for the 500.
The Denon DN-X1500 does not have Digital In's, and I doubt the Tascam does as well. Although they are digital mixers, no mixer that I know of comes with digital inputs (odd, yes). The mixers take the standard analog inputs and convert the sound to digital internally... all controls on the mixer (faders, eq's, etc) simply send control signals to the DSP's in the mixer, which modify the sound however necessary (the audio itself doesn't pass through any of those components).
| quote: |
| Originally posted by spiralhelix One thing u might want to consider is do the cdj's have digital out? if so, a digital mixer like the x-9 or denon 1500 (at least i think it is) with digital ins could be handy. I've heard differing opinions about the sound from digital mixers. On one hand, the sound is "lossless" but on the other "it lacks warmth". U can make of it what u will altho i'd steer clear of the X-9 tho, at least until it gets some more positive feedback over at Future Producers. Apparently there's a delay in the EQs and the bpm counters don't work (making the midi out useless). I too am looking for a new 4 channel mixer. I'm considering the Ecler smac 40 pro or nuo 4. I wouldn't mind the denon, but the prices are too steep here in japan. Anyway, good luck on getting your nex box. |
ah, i didn't know that. shows u how much i know. = )
Has anyone tried the dxm09, that looks like a pretty good 3 channel mixer.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Ryan0751 The Denon DN-X1500 does not have Digital In's, and I doubt the Tascam does as well. Although they are digital mixers, no mixer that I know of comes with digital inputs (odd, yes). The mixers take the standard analog inputs and convert the sound to digital internally... all controls on the mixer (faders, eq's, etc) simply send control signals to the DSP's in the mixer, which modify the sound however necessary (the audio itself doesn't pass through any of those components). |
The Denon DN-X1500 DOES have a digital (coaxial) OUTPUT, but no digital INPUTS.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Rikki Really? I was curious myself. My old mixer was Gemini 626 and obviously completely analog. My DJM707 has digital faders but I didnt know VCA stuff meant the analog signal was converted to digital, processed then back to analog. If that was the case it would make sense to have a digital output so we could record direct to SPDIF on the PC and improve sound quality of our mixes instead of CD (digital to analog) to mixer (analog to digital to analog) to PC (analog to digital). R. |
I currently own a 600 but had the pleasure of playing on the denon 1500.. Although it was a bit wierd (the layout), I quickly adapted to it and would definitly buy one if given the chance. One thing i heard (not to sure as i didnt experience it) is that there is a lag if doing fast cuts on the xfader.. can anyone confirm this?
*edit
Also heard that there was a fix for it .. i think i may of even read it somewhere on thsi board.. *shrug*
Jay
Before I begin, I just would like to start out by saying, unless you are going to be very specific about why a product is "Hands down" the best, or state "the faders and EQ sucks ass," don't even bother making a comment--we want critical reviews here, not ignorant opinions about equipment. People are relying on us to help them make informed desicions about equipment that isn't always very affordable. So without rambling, please think about the effects of posting your unhelpful and unspecific opinions to those who are going to invest a serious amount of cash.
I used to post on this board a LOT and I have a lot of old posts that are worth reposting when the topics come up. Almost 3 years ago, I made a complete and extensive comparison between the DJM-500 and the DJM-600. In short, my conclusion was that the 500 is not worth spending the money on, or rather the 600 is definitly worth the extra money. (Edit: Also, for those who don't get to the bottom of the post, the X1500 is better than the DJM-500) Here is the post in its entirety, with just a few modifications to help clarity:
There are a lot of differences between the two, and as a DJM-600 owner and user of (some of) the functions that make it different, I will explain them here.
The DJM-600 has an extra line input, though the 500 still has two CD inputs, so you can hook up two cd decks to both. (ie 3 cd players for the 600 and only 2 for the 500.)
You can select the resistance levels of your crossfader on the 600, which is useful depending on if you use the crossfader vs the volume sliders to mix with. The different selections has helped me make the transition of the bass much smoother than without this function.
The effects processor on the 600 has a sampler etc, which you can listen to in the headphones (what the effect sounds like with the track before you play it live). You can take loops and beats from other tracks and use them in the tracks you are playing live to crudely "remix" live.
The 600 also has two effects, auto trans and auto filter which can be used for some wiked effects, if used properly! IMO these two are not overused because few know how to use them properly.
Direct beat select allows you, in conjuntion with pioneer cd players, to have the disc start as soon as you start moving the crossfader over to the other side. This is otherwise known as fader start (I believe these things are the same, though I am not absolutely positive). I don't use this myself and see marginal value in its addition.
The DJM-600 has a VERY useful effects depth level knob. If you use flanging, wah, etc. You may notice that it makes the volume spike a bit. You can controle this with the depth level knob. It it a great way to fade in and out of your effects too to make them more subtle!
(one of my favorite features).
The cut off on the eq knobs are a full 6dB lower on the DJM-600
I think that the most important feature that the 600 has over the 500 is that you cannot control the cue/master ratio on the 500! This means that on the 600 you can adjust between 100% cue and 100% master and everywherer in between in your headphones, including effects that you may wish to test out before you go live! The 500 cannot do this, you can only hear 100% cue OR 100% master, there is NO inbetween. I've used a 500 a couple times and it is a big pain in the ass when you have two bass beats that are really similar and you can't fade between master and cue to see if the cue beat is slower or faster. This above any other single reason, is the reason to get the 600 over the 500! Those who have a 600 know what I'm talking about and probably couldn't even imagine using a mixer without this function!
The 600 has a talkover button (which is in a very bad place--for me anyway) that silences the music quite a bit to allow the microphone to be used while the music is still playing. I inadvertantly hit it occassionly while I'm recording and it sucks! Though this is not that big of a deal once you learn not to hit it.
The 600 does NOT have a headphone eq, which in my opinion is not really that useful because you can always use the cue channel eq to add or subtract the frequency ranges that you want.
The 500 has a 1/4" TRS master output (as opposed to RCA in the 600), which you may need and adaptor for if you take your mixer to a club with you. This isn't even more convienent for those hooking it up to their computers (since most computers are 1/8" TRS), but you can always buy a $2 connector at radio shack etc.
The 600 has RCA record outs, so that you can hook up booth monitors to one output, the main speakers to another output, and a third source to record your set. The nice thing about the record out is that it isn't affected by things like the master volume or balance. Only the two line/cd/phone volume sliders that you are using and the crossfader.
Anyway, I hope that I summed it up pretty well here. I would say that the price for the 600 is well worth it, and as liquid said, it looks better too! Being that the price differece is about $400 MSRP, I'm sure that you can close that gap a bit. I bought mine for $1050 USD almost 1.5 years ago from www.pssl.com (note, this would be close to 4.5 years ago from the date of THIS post 13 July 2005) [End of original post]
Some comments on the crossfaders of the Pioneer, I have owned my mixer for quite some time, yet have not had a single problem with any of my faders. I do not take especially good care of them, but I do not abuse them either. I clean them thoroughly with an air gun a few times a year and always protect them when I move the equipment. Until someone can comment on precisely WHY they "suck ass" I say they are good crossfaders--and remember, it is a replaceable part too, so if you've had one for a while and it doesn't perform well, it was MEANT to be replaced several times over the live of the mixer.
So then it still comes down to which is better the DJM-600 or the Denon X1500. I'll do my best to review and compare both of them, but I have not personally used the Denon.
So here are the "Main Features" that Denon taughts on their spec sheet:
8 input sources that are freely assignable to any channel. The DJM-600 also has 8 inputs, though they are hardlined. I take the "freely assignable" to mean that you can change your inputs to any of the 4 channels (up/down faders) with only a flip of a switch or a press of a button. This mean that there is no wire changing. I woulud see this as being a plus if it is a club mixer, though in your own bedroom it is of marginal utility. Also, the more wires in your mixer the worse sound quality you can expect. I'm not saying that you will be able to hear this difference, but from a theoretical audiophile perspective, you don't want more wires and switches than absolutely necessary.
The next is the 45mm Penny-Giles crosfader with contour function (the 600 also has the contour function as noted above). So, other than the actual mechanical performance of the crossfader and the materials from which it is made, I think that the DJM-600 excels in this area. Before I get into why I think Pioneer's 70 mm crossfader is better let me state that I cannot find enough information (nor will I spend too many hours finding out about this one single piece of unimportant information) on the performance of the cross fader to compare the two. Pioneer doesn't have a spec sheet for which cross fader they use (if they do and I missed it, I'll take a look) and Penny Giles does have a bit of information, but it looks like other than the quality of metal used etc, there is nothing major about a cross fader that would indicate to me that one can be SO MUCH better than another as long as it is made with quality materials.
*deep breat* Sorry, I digress. Anyway, I think that the longer the crossfader is (for trance mixing) the better since it gives the cross fader LESS sensitivity to movement. Again, I have posted EXTENSIVELY about this in the past, but on another site. The link to a detailed explaination of why you want faders and platters to be as wide, long etc as possible (within reason) can be found within the depths of this post: (warning: This linked-post is best read after you finish THIS thread. The link leads you to a post that will probably take about 45min to an hour to read both Dj Lithium's (of DI.FM) post and my retort--though it is VERY worth while.)
http://www.globaldjbroadcast.com/fo...php?threadid=52
The main points of difference with the sampler/effects are a couple different effects and the sampler allows you to use pitch control on the samples. This feature surpasses the DJM-600, which does not allow pitch control on samples that are taken. Honestly though, in either mixer's case, these samplers suck and if you are going to really use them extensively, you'll want an off-board sampler/effects processor.
The autostart and auto/manual BPM functions are the same or near same on both mixers.
The X1500 has an SPDIF out (Sony/Panasonic Digital InterFace) connection which allows pure digital recording to occur on the basis that you have a digital input and music source to start with. The kicker is that even though everything starts off digital on a CD, it has no digital connection from the CD player to the Mixer--therefore I wouldn't base its digital ability as a reason to buy this mixer over others. You ALWAYS have to ask yourself where the weakest connection is. If having everything completely digital is important to you, this mixer cannot hold up its end of the bargin. Now, to be fair, neither can the DJM-600, and in fact its internal wiring and outputs are analog, not digital--but the question comes to be: Can your ears really tell the difference? Can anyone elses? One last comment on digital circuitry: Having digital circuitry will help reduce noise, but this will only apply when you are spining with well-mastered CD audio. The noise floor from a vinyl input is way higher (ie more audible) than any noise ever coming off of an even mediocre piece of electronics.
The EQs on the X1500 allow for parametric control (ie non-linear, which is good and has been an industry standard since well before I got into Djing years and years ago.
One neat thing about the X1500 is that you can save you custom settings to the mixer via internal memory. Now, what exact settings you can save, I'm not sure, but it's probably along the lines of which channels you designate for inputs (ie you always like the channel 1 to be CD player 1 and channel 2 to be CD player 2 etc.)
The headphone output is a split cue, just like DJM-600 and is honestly the only type of cue that I find acceptable to mix with when under non-club conditions.
The frequency response of both mixers is 20Hz to 20,000Hz and is standard CD quality frequency response. Other mixers such as Allen&Heath and Raine put out mixers that are much more capable of reproducing wider frequencies, but you have to ask yourself if you mixer is your limiting factor in your system. I won't go into depth on this in this post...
So now we come down to the hardcore electronics of the mixer.
For the most part, the CD/Line, Mic and phono connection are equivalent. The phono on the pioneer has a slight advantage, which would be for turntables only. The SNR (signal to noise ratio) is better by several dB (decibels) on every connection for the Pioneer. Now, since the X1500 has all digital internal circuitry, they are probably about even.
The channel equalizers are a big area of difference. The Pioneer can pump up to +12dB on each frequency range (high/mid/low) as opposed to Denon's +10dB/+10db/+6dB (high/mid/low). This equates to being able to adjust the bass, which is THE most important factor in DJ EQing, much more loudly than the Denon allows. Now, then Denon can adjust much quieter than the Pioneer (Pioneer is -26/-26/-26dB where as Denon is -33/-40/-40dB for high/mid/low. While this means that you can get quite quiet with the Denon, when the hell would you want such absolute silence for a specific frequency? If you are in a club, -26dB is plenty to lower the silence of a specific frequency--remember, if you want complete silence in all frequencies you would use the channel fader, not the channel EQs. And for mixing, anything that you can't do on your mixer, you can do using post-production software to master your mix if you are really that concerned about it (or are such an audiophile that you can actually distinguish it!).
Also the Pioneer selects a better high frequency to adjust (13kHz, 1kHz and 70Hz versus Denon's 15KHz, 1kHz and 60Hz) then Denon, but Denon selects a better low frequency range. (This difference is pretty minor IMO.)
To comment on the effects and importance of the decibel levels, let me itterate for those of you who do not understand the decibel rating. Decibels are like how we rate earthquakes. Each decible means a 10-fold increase or decrease in sound. This means that it is logrithmic, not linear. The difference between 80 dB and 81 dB is 10-fold, though the difference between 80 dB and 82 dB is 100-fold!
So there you have it, the complete story of the differences between the two mixers. So what is MY conclusion? I personally like the DJM-600 better because of the few minor differences in sound quality. To include price in the argument, one must account for the price per performance of each mixer. Here is what I found the best prices to be (really quickly from www.pssl.com) DJM-600 = $1100 and the Denon-X1500 = $900 the DJM-500 = $900. The Denon is priced accordingly to its slightly inferiority to the DJM-600. I paid $1050 4.5 years ago and this attests to the high quality of the mixer! I'm sure you can find a better price if you search deep enough. Now, one thing that I would certainly do is purchase the X1500 over the DJM-500. The sound qualities that you give up (if you are trained enough to notice them) are not worth some of the better functions of the Denon, especially the split cueing.
Anyway, I think I'm done! (Finally!) I'd appreciate your comments, though I'd be suprised if more than a few read this post in its entirety! If you did, Kudos!
I read the posts. I realize I didn't explain why I dislike Pioneer's faders and EQs. First off, the build quality is fairly shoddy, the EQs and faders feel like they're coming off of a toy mixer not a professional mixer. I hate the sensitivity on the EQs. They're way too sensitive, a little touch and the volume jumps up or cuts out. I like less sensitivity on my EQs. In addition, scratching on the DJM is a huge chore, the crossfader is absolutely terrible for scratching. One click flares are a bitch, two click flares are almost out of the question. Those are some major issues I have with the Pioneer. If I showed up in a club and they had a Pioneer I'd mix the hell out of some records on it, but there are much better mixers in the price range.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.