TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- I'm in a beautiful dilemma
Pages (2): [1] 2 »
I'm in a beautiful dilemma
I've decided its time for me to upgrade my mixer from a DJM-600 to either a DJM-800 or a Xone92. can't make up my mind on which to get really. they're both great on paper and aestetically(sp?) pleasing. lookin at the Xone i am worried about the curve of the channel faders - i know they are logarmetic but can they be adjusted so they are simply linear? if not i will probably go with the DJM-800.
also im selling 2 Numark TTXs and my DJM600 (all in mint condition) for �650 - does this sound like a fair deal?
Whats wrong with the DJM 600? I can see selling TTXs, as they suck, but DJM 600? There's a lot of people and clubs that still use this mixer and it's solid, I really don't see why you really need to upgrade unless it gets so worn out or breaks and would rather just buy a new mixer then get it repaired...but don't see why u would need to upgrade from this thing. It's still quite expensive....
first off i think the TTXs are great decks and secondly i agree with your opinion on the DJM600. its a great mixer, a real work horse but there are better mixers on the market which give better sound quality. the club i DJ in uses a 500 but its very unreliable (lots of drinks spilled on it) so i tend to bring my own mixer out. while i cant fault the quality of the sound it produces it tends to give more emphasis to the lower frequency and not enough to the mids and highs
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Basstard first off i think the TTXs are great decks and secondly i agree with your opinion on the DJM600. its a great mixer, a real work horse but there are better mixers on the market which give better sound quality. the club i DJ in uses a 500 but its very unreliable (lots of drinks spilled on it) so i tend to bring my own mixer out. while i cant fault the quality of the sound it produces it tends to give more emphasis to the lower frequency and not enough to the mids and highs |
92 Rotary would be my choice!
if i can save enough cash after ibiza i think il invest in one and sell my nuo 5!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Spirit5 Ok thats fine then. I just hate the TTXs, i owned them for 2 years, one started acting up around 6 months, and I just used it in my room, didn't transport it that often. And the other was starting to act up before I sold them. I only got $400 out of them. Only really worth $200 each used...They don't hold up quite as nice as a Technics does. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Never had any problems with mine, and I've used them more or less every day for 2 years now. |
it is a beautiful dillema indeed and i am in the same one as you over those 2 exact mixers!
those 2 mixers make me go gah gah
BUT I would wait until you have the chance to try out and hear the djm 800 first
how much you want for just the djm-600? pm me if you're interested
I recently upgraded to a Xone92. I can tell you one thing..you definitely won't be sorry you paid for it.
This is a great debate.. I would say this, if you have the capability to hook up your CDJ's digitally, then definately go with the DJM-800. You will get the best sound quality that way. Also, if you use any kind of effects, the 800 blows the 92 away. Otherwise, the 92 is a fantastic mixer. The faders are amazing to play with and it sounds great. I will have the 800 as soon as it is released, hopefully end of the week. Once I get it, I will post a review about it.
being torn between the two myself i know that i like the idea of being able to hook up my 1000's digitally and record my mixes digitally with the the 800... as well you can assign pretty much everything (including the upfaders) to midi on the 800... the thing is...
I hear so many people swear by the "colouring" of the sound that the x92 provides that i am extremely tempted to go that route
both mixers are extremely well built and reliability wise... there is pretty much no issue here
tough tough decision
i guess its a win win decision to be honest lol.
still nobody has mentioned - is the channel faders on the 92 adjustable? can they be switched from logarithmetic to linear?
omega: im gonna try and get them sold all as one as its very hard to get some1 to buy just a pair of turntables and no mixer if its not technics. if i cant get em sold then i'll set something up with you but im gonna give it a month or two
edit: oh yea, I was gonna put these on ebay to sell but ive never sold / or bought anything using the service. i take it i have no chance in hell of getting them sold on that?
might end up just sellin them directly using paypal. im sure n3lly will back me up in sayin im not a snitch 
The A&H docs claim either "linear or rotary" channel faders are available - I would assume this indicates the slide channel faders are linear... but ive never played on a 92.
What do you see yourself getting out of the upgrade to the DJM800? I couldn't see myself upgrading my DJM3000 to a DJM800.. but then again, the DJM3000 has been sitting around since a few days after I picked it up. The A&H xone:32 went back up on the bench in quick order -- i missed it too much. maybe i could pull off a good set on the DJM, but the a&h just makes it alot more fun.
I think you'll find the A&H stuff (even the little xone32) has better build quality and a hell of alot nicer feel. Ever notice how DJM knobs feel a little wobbly, especially after a year of hard use? my xone32 is nearing 4 years in service now, and the knobs STILL feel like they are anchored in concrete. and yes, it's been gigged.
another vote for a&h... even the xone32 is an upgrade from the DJM600 if you dont need the extra channels.
oh, and i noticed pioneer FINALLY figured out +12db EQs are pointless, and went to +6db on the DJM800. like everyone else did years ago. now, i wonder if they finally figured out XLR's are pin 2 hot, rather than pin 3 hot as pioneer has been doing for too long!
I own a xone:92r and i strongly recommend getting allen and heath. Realisticly the pionneer isn't going to last nearly as long as the a and h and also you have the wonderful vcf faders that are often imitaded but never duplicated. The mixer itself is rock solid and i would strongly recommend it.
Does the 800 have a high pass?
not that im aware of...
anyone else notice the digital output of the DJM800 is 48k or 96k only?
no 44.1k? this reminds me of the days of DAT decks. i remember that no consumer dat deck did much with 44.1K, because it made transfering digital audio to/from CDs via a DAT deck way too easy. it was a piracy concern, so they limited most the consumer DAT decks to 48k. they did the same thing with consumer soundcards, like the sound blaster -- all 48k, 44.1k supported only by sample rate conversion.
no big deal you say?
lets say you hooked up your CDJ's via digital out to the pioneer DJM800 and you wanted to connect your tascam CDRW700 to the digital output to capture the perfect, full digital mix. good luck, because since the DJM800 doesnt support 44.1k, your CD deck is not going to get a S/PDIF lock and your going nowhere.
so you say, ok, ill use the computer instead of a CD deck. then, you have to do a freaking sample rate conversion on the digital audio before you can ever make it into a mix disc. sample rate conversions are horrible, and should never take place unless its absolutly neccessary. the end result: you might as well just stick with the analog outputs.
pioneer fu�ks the DJ again, and still takes all thier money.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by nrjizer Does the 800 have a high pass? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MERiDiAN5i2 anyone else notice the digital output of the DJM800 is 48k or 96k only? no 44.1k? this reminds me of the days of DAT decks. i remember that no consumer dat deck did much with 44.1K, because it made transfering digital audio to/from CDs via a DAT deck way too easy. it was a piracy concern, so they limited most the consumer DAT decks to 48k. they did the same thing with consumer soundcards, like the sound blaster -- all 48k, 44.1k supported only by sample rate conversion. no big deal you say? lets say you hooked up your CDJ's via digital out to the pioneer DJM800 and you wanted to connect your tascam CDRW700 to the digital output to capture the perfect, full digital mix. good luck, because since the DJM800 doesnt support 44.1k, your CD deck is not going to get a S/PDIF lock and your going nowhere. so you say, ok, ill use the computer instead of a CD deck. then, you have to do a freaking sample rate conversion on the digital audio before you can ever make it into a mix disc. sample rate conversions are horrible, and should never take place unless its absolutly neccessary. the end result: you might as well just stick with the analog outputs. pioneer fu�ks the DJ again, and still takes all thier money. |
what i was really getting at... is that just about anyone who spins, makes mix discs. CDs are 44.1k _only_.
so one could say the primary function of a digital out on a DJ mixer is to directly cut a mix disc, such that you should be able to directly connect a CD writer to a mixer's digital out, lay down a set and come up with a mix disc. seems simple enough, right?
the djm3000 and denon mixers with digital outs, et al, do this wonderfully.
but, according to pioneer's page on the DJM800, there is no 44.1k digital output, only "switchable 48k or 96k"
makes as much sense as the flintstonemobile's square wheels.
so even if i can record at 48 with my sound card, i need to do a conversion to 44.1 to burn a cd right? and this conversion can degrade the recording? (beyond the obvious reduction in sampling rate)
thanks, im interested because the digital out was a selling point for me on the 800
CDs are 44.1k only, unlike DATs which can (on most decks, atleast) handle 32k, 44.1k and 48k. so yes, you must convert, if needed, any audio for CD to 44.1k
i think i figured out why pioneer did this: DVD-Audio -- DVD audio discs are very slow to become popular, but if the DJM800 becomes the next mixer standard replacing the DJM600, possibly the high-rate digital output will encourage people to use DVD-Audio instead of CD-Audio? DVDAudio (id just call it DVDA, but thats way too dirty) supports 44.1k to 192k sample rates, making it the ideal cantidate for a hardware medium that will interface directly with the mixer.
obviously pioneer has no trouble providing a 44.1k digital output. my DJM3000 has two of them, although they are just about useless as there is no level control on them... which is horrible. with these silly DJM boxes you have to keep the channel and master levels down so it wont distort, so you end up with a -15db recording on the DAT, which totally kills the signal to noise ratio and dynamic range. again, might as well just use analog.
think im just gonna go with a Xone92 to be honest..
i mean the DJM-800 looks pretty identical to the 600 in looks - i'm ready for something new and exciting
also - the 92 is �945 whereas the 800 is �999
didnt realize the 800 was so expensive... $1500 USD seems to be a good deal!
thats crazy. i guess thats what happens when you pile on useless features like MIDI support, automatic harmonic matching, and as much digital jazz as the average computer of a few years ago.
i've also read this is a fully digital mixer? meaning that if you connect two turntables, and hook up the XLR connectors to your soundrig, the mixer is STILL converting the turntable signal to 24/96 digital, mixing it digitally, and then reconverting it back to analog to send out?
is that true, or a load of crap? cuz if that is true, i think i'd rather have a numark.
just my 2 cent on your dilemma...
honestly i'd say go with the xone92, just becasue its such a solid mixer with no problems, you never know how the djm-800 is going to be. its not even released yet. if your in a hurry, id say get the 92 and you wont regret it. but if you need MIDI, and all that other stuff then go with the 800.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Basstard im sure n3lly will back me up in sayin im not a snitch |
So grateful!
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.