TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- digital in vs line in

digital in vs line in

is there much of a sound quality difference between the two? i was reading the cdj1000 mk3 manual, and it has a diagram showing the cdjs connected to the djm800's digital ins. are these digital ins superior to the standard line in on most mixers?

yes

the sound doesn't need to be converted to an analog signal to get to the mixer because it's digital

no audio conversion = little to no sound quality loss going from component to component

interesting...i'm surprised more mixers don't incorporate this. do any other high-end mixers other than the djm800 have it? i know the xone 92 doesn't...

quote:

Originally posted by Tegu interesting...i'm surprised more mixers don't incorporate this. do any other high-end mixers other than the djm800 have it? i know the xone 92 doesn't...

It works when the mixer is digital(like the medium, CDs in this case). The DJM-800 is digital, the CDs are digital, so no conversion makes sense. The Xone is an analogue mixer so it works the best when there is no conversion(analogue turntable to analogue mixer). In the case of CD players, it makes sense to have the lowest number of conversions, so the CD players convert the digital signal into an analogue signal, and send it to the analogue mixer. If the Xone had digital inputs it would have to convert it back to analogue anyways since it is an analogue mixer.

It would be nice if the DJM400 had digital in/outs. I mean the 800 does, but I don't really need a four channel mixer, all I have is two CDJs and I wouldn't want to spend all that extra money for it. It would be nice if they included this with the DJM400, but I guess it would be more money if they did. I would think a mixer like the Xone 92 would have this feature as well, heck I would think more mixers nowadays would, esp with the rise of CDJs...

Question...would there be any difference between say a Vestax PCV 275 that I own now, and a DJM 400, as far as sound quality is concerned??

there shouldn't be a whole lot of difference

the vestax has decent SQ and the pioneer was just released so you would assume it has decent SQ as well

i have yet to play on the new pioneer mixers

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 I would think a mixer like the Xone 92 would have this feature as well, heck I would think more mixers nowadays would, esp with the rise of CDJs...

The problem is that the Xone:92 isn't a digital mixer, so it has to be converted to an analog signal regardless. There is really no point to digital ins on a mixer like that. You buy a Xone for the analog, colored sound.

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 Question...would there be any difference between say a Vestax PCV 275 that I own now, and a DJM 400, as far as sound quality is concerned??

Yeah, there is a huge difference in sound quality. The 400 sounds way better.

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor The problem is that the Xone:92 isn't a digital mixer, so it has to be converted to an analog signal regardless. There is really no point to digital ins on a mixer like that. You buy a Xone for the analog, colored sound. Yeah, there is a huge difference in sound quality. The 400 sounds way better.

I understand about that I would just think that a mixer that expensive would be digital nowadays.

So would you suggest getting a DJM400 or waiting for a less expensive mixer with digital ins? I really would like a mixer with digital ins, but not spend all that extra money on a 4 channel mixer with a bunch of features I don't need. Just need a simple 2 channel mixer, since I don't plan on adding a TT or another CDJ. Two CDJs is enough for me...

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor There is really no point to digital ins on a mixer like that. You buy a Xone for the analog, colored sound.

true. the v6 even has special analog tubing on 2 of its lines to add color to flat line in sound. maybe there's a reason high end mixers avoid digital ins.

There are many factors here.
A high end mixer may have digital outs so that way the sound quality is more related to the mixer instead of whatever a/d converter you are using.
Ofcourse it would still have analouge outs but where is the downfall if once the coloring is applied it leaves through a digital line.
Im going to get digital for sure when i buy my new mixer.
Instead of the dnx500 im buyin the dnx900.
Digital is the way, there are more and more things to emulate warm analogue sound. Even though its not perfect they will get there.

My main point is if your using something like cd players or computers use digital where you can because if you can make a complete digital path with no analogue conversions the sound clarity will be boosted.

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 I understand about that I would just think that a mixer that expensive would be digital nowadays. So would you suggest getting a DJM400 or waiting for a less expensive mixer with digital ins? I really would like a mixer with digital ins, but not spend all that extra money on a 4 channel mixer with a bunch of features I don't need. Just need a simple 2 channel mixer, since I don't plan on adding a TT or another CDJ. Two CDJs is enough for me...

just buy the 400 and use the line ins.

The sound quality difference will be negligble.

quote:

Originally posted by Trance Nutter just buy the 400 and use the line ins. The sound quality difference will be negligble.

Yeah thats what I am thinking about doing, either with birthday money or Christmas money later...I just think having a Pioneer mixer with a Pioneer CDJ makes more sense, to make use of the features...like the fader start thing. But I have to play around with it first at Guitar Center to see if I like the feel, because it MAY be too small for me, esp because they recommend using it with the CDJ 200s, and I own the 1000s.

only wedding djs use fader start

quote:

Originally posted by Max Thomson only wedding djs use fader start

Haha it just sounds cool I dunno if it's worth it. Just the idea of having a Pioneer mixer with Pioneer CDJs...sounds cool to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 I understand about that I would just think that a mixer that expensive would be digital nowadays.

It's expensive because it's NOT digital. The high-quality analog components are why it's expensive. Once again, there it NO advantage to digital ins on a mixer like the Xone:92.

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 So would you suggest getting a DJM400 or waiting for a less expensive mixer with digital ins? I really would like a mixer with digital ins, but not spend all that extra money on a 4 channel mixer with a bunch of features I don't need. Just need a simple 2 channel mixer, since I don't plan on adding a TT or another CDJ. Two CDJs is enough for me...

The DJM-400 doesn't have digital ins.

It's a nice mixer, though, and probably worth the upgrade for the sound quality, good eqs, curve adjust (and more importantly, the ability to turn off the crossfader), sampler and effects.

There's no real advantage to using a Pioneer mixer with Pioneer CDJs. Fader start is pretty useless, unless, like Max Thompson said, you're a wedding DJ. If you want a less expensive, high quality two-channel mixer, the Ecler Nuo2 is definitely worth a look.

quote:

Originally posted by Tegu true. the v6 even has special analog tubing on 2 of its lines to add color to flat line in sound. maybe there's a reason high end mixers avoid digital ins.

Now, the V6 has valves on all six channels.

bottomline: it's better to pair cdjs with digital mixer? or not?

yes, digital source with a digital mixer connected with digital coax will be better

How do I recognise whether a mixer is digital or analog from the specs?

It will often say digital mixer.
Check the specs for what inputs it has. It was say digital in or not.

quote:

Originally posted by Plastick How do I recognise whether a mixer is digital or analog from the specs?

just look at the back of the mixer.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ 00 Tommy It will often say digital mixer. Check the specs for what inputs it has. It was say digital in or not.

The DN-X1500 only has digital out, not in, but it's still digital.

Well, the 92 doesn't "color" the sound per se. The V6 does, because of the valve style inputs.

The intent of these high end analog mixers is to provide the shortest signal path through the mixer, therby providing the best possible sound quality.

In digital mixers, the length of the signal path doesn't matter because it's just bits being passed around.

There are tradeoffs by converting the signal to digital, however. The newer 24/96khz mixers do sound great (DJM-800/1000). But then again, nobody has ever complained about the sound of a Bozak/Urei 1620 (vintage analog mixers).

quote:

Originally posted by Tegu true. the v6 even has special analog tubing on 2 of its lines to add color to flat line in sound. maybe there's a reason high end mixers avoid digital ins.

Hehe, yeah don't worry about fader-start AT ALL. I had it connected for a while to my DN-X1500 (before I bought a Xone 92), and didn't find it useful whatsover.

And yes, the Denon mixers with fader starts work with the Pioneer CDJ's. No need to match the mixer to the CDJ's, there's not much "coupling" going on there.

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 Haha it just sounds cool I dunno if it's worth it. Just the idea of having a Pioneer mixer with Pioneer CDJs...sounds cool to me.

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