TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- CDJ-400's
Pages (2): [1] 2 »


Posted by 1drp4fn on Aug-13-2008 22:34:

CDJ-400's

So Im finally able to afford a real set of tables (after being held down by a cheap Gemini intro combo) and Im lookin at the CDJ-400's and Im absolutley in love with them! as well as the the DJM400 mixer...Saw some basic reviews but I wanted to hear specifics from an owner on how they like 'em....


Posted by nchs09 on Aug-14-2008 02:15:

Never used them but the 200s seem like a better deal.


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-14-2008 13:21:

I've used both, and the 400's are really quite nice. The HUGE improvement over the 200's is the platter... the platter is great. I have 1000's, and would have no qualms about using the 400's.

The 200's on the other hand, have kind of a cheap feeling platter with no vinyl emulation. But they do work well...

Plus you gain:

1. USB playback
2. MIDI control
3. Native Serato support
4. Integrated sound cards

So they are really pretty flexible.

The DJM-400 I don't love. It's a nice layout, and the effects seem nice at first, but I'm sure those will wear thing. The real problem with the DJM-400 is:

1. No separate booth output. This is a pain if you ever want to use the mixer anywhere other than your bedroom.
2. No balanced outputs.
3. No record output, makes it a pain to record your sets. You can split the master out, but then you can't use the volume control on the mixer or the recording will be messed up.
4. No extern effects send/return.
5. It's overpriced.

In that same class (and actually it's quite a bit cheaper), I'm a big fan of the new Ecler 2.0. It doesn't have effects... but it's an Ecler (great build and sound), and it has all of the above plus a third input for whatever you like. Check it out:

http://www.eclerdjdivision.com/prod...p=2&sub=1&id=34


Posted by bigsnail on Aug-14-2008 13:35:

i have a set of cdj400s and im very happy w/ them. but for the $$$ or just a little bit more you could get a better mixer. good luck!


Posted by Zild on Aug-14-2008 13:40:

I like that USB playback feature but wouldn't you need two hard drives to use two of them?


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-14-2008 13:42:

Unfortunately YES. Two USB hard drives, or thumbdrives, or what not. A big oversight on Pioneers part.

Although I haven't seen them in person yet (though I used to own the DN-S1000's), the new Denon DN-S1200's offer a similar feature set to the CDJ-400 (and they've made the platter much much better than the older DN-S1000).

But on the Denon's, they have a cable which links the two players so they can both share a single USB device.

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
I like that USB playback feature but wouldn't you need two hard drives to use two of them?


Posted by Zild on Aug-14-2008 14:26:

Damn I was hoping it would share somehow.


Posted by nemesis8722 on Aug-14-2008 20:36:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
But on the Denon's, they have a cable which links the two players so they can both share a single USB device.

The DN-S1200 DOES NOT have this feature. The cable is only used to share cue points between two players. The DN-S5500, however, does share music files between two players.


Posted by Speactra on Aug-15-2008 08:45:

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
I like that USB playback feature but wouldn't you need two hard drives to use two of them?

Hard drives is too big to be used, the loading time becomes longer with big sized hd's. Usb-drives with around 2 gb works really good, but over that you have to wait for it to load up, and it's a pain to scroll through so many songs.. Hopefully pioneer is releasing a firmware that fixes the loading times.

But however, i'm really happy with my 400's. One problem has occured tough.. The pitch bend wheel under the platter pops off sometimes when i use the platter, making the platter to lock itself. It happend on both of my players, and i'm not using them in a rough way. If that happends when you play out it's a disaster.. I managed to stuck it back again but it takes a while. Anyone had this problem?


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 11:29:

I guess the Denon's build a catalog of all the tracks when you first plug in the drives, so that it's faster for subsequent uses.

Too bad nobody even considers them. It's all "pioneer mania".

Maybe now that Pioneer just INCREASED it's prices, people will consider other players. It boggles my mind that a CD player that came out in 2001 for $1100 is now $1500. Like, what?


Posted by Zild on Aug-15-2008 12:36:

quote:
Originally posted by Speactra
Hard drives is too big to be used, the loading time becomes longer with big sized hd's. Usb-drives with around 2 gb works really good, but over that you have to wait for it to load up, and it's a pain to scroll through so many songs.. Hopefully pioneer is releasing a firmware that fixes the loading times.

But however, i'm really happy with my 400's. One problem has occured tough.. The pitch bend wheel under the platter pops off sometimes when i use the platter, making the platter to lock itself. It happend on both of my players, and i'm not using them in a rough way. If that happends when you play out it's a disaster.. I managed to stuck it back again but it takes a while. Anyone had this problem?


Ahh good to know because thats useless to me then.


Posted by bigsnail on Aug-15-2008 13:52:

quote:
Originally posted by Speactra
Hard drives is too big to be used, the loading time becomes longer with big sized hd's. Usb-drives with around 2 gb works really good, but over that you have to wait for it to load up, and it's a pain to scroll through so many songs.. Hopefully pioneer is releasing a firmware that fixes the loading times.

But however, i'm really happy with my 400's. One problem has occured tough.. The pitch bend wheel under the platter pops off sometimes when i use the platter, making the platter to lock itself. It happend on both of my players, and i'm not using them in a rough way. If that happends when you play out it's a disaster.. I managed to stuck it back again but it takes a while. Anyone had this problem?


wow, i havent had any problems like that.....yet. was it easy to fix the platter/wheel?


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 13:54:

Yeah, the idea is nice for a small amount of music, but for a whole hard drive it's terrible. The browsing interface on the CDJ-400 isn't good enough to look through thousands of songs.

The MEP-7000 looks freaking awesome though. I just hope this sort of interface gets brought to a CDJ-1000 style player.

http://www.pioneer.eu/eur/campaign/...ts/mep7000.html


quote:
Originally posted by Zild
Ahh good to know because thats useless to me then.


Posted by jayxthekoolest on Aug-15-2008 16:09:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
I've used both, and the 400's are really quite nice. The HUGE improvement over the 200's is the platter... the platter is great. I have 1000's, and would have no qualms about using the 400's.

The 200's on the other hand, have kind of a cheap feeling platter with no vinyl emulation. But they do work well...

Plus you gain:

1. USB playback
2. MIDI control
3. Native Serato support
4. Integrated sound cards

So they are really pretty flexible.

The DJM-400 I don't love. It's a nice layout, and the effects seem nice at first, but I'm sure those will wear thing. The real problem with the DJM-400 is:

1. No separate booth output. This is a pain if you ever want to use the mixer anywhere other than your bedroom.
2. No balanced outputs.
3. No record output, makes it a pain to record your sets. You can split the master out, but then you can't use the volume control on the mixer or the recording will be messed up.
4. No extern effects send/return.
5. It's overpriced.

In that same class (and actually it's quite a bit cheaper), I'm a big fan of the new Ecler 2.0. It doesn't have effects... but it's an Ecler (great build and sound), and it has all of the above plus a third input for whatever you like. Check it out:

http://www.eclerdjdivision.com/prod...p=2&sub=1&id=34


Doesn't the DJM-400 have two master outputs? This would enable booth out or record out in addition to master out but not all three.

http://www.skratchworx.com/images/Pioneer/djm400/djm400_back.jpg


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 16:52:

It does. BUT:

1. That would mean you still can't control your booth and master independently.

2. If you use one as a record out, and you change the master volume pot on the mixer, the recording will be affected (which is bad). So everytime you go to record, you'd have to set the master out level for your recorder, then adjust your master volume on the amp or speakers. Totally lame.

quote:
Originally posted by jayxthekoolest
Doesn't the DJM-400 have two master outputs? This would enable booth out or record out in addition to master out but not all three.

http://www.skratchworx.com/images/P...djm400_back.jpg


Posted by jayxthekoolest on Aug-15-2008 19:15:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
It does. BUT:

1. That would mean you still can't control your booth and master independently.

2. If you use one as a record out, and you change the master volume pot on the mixer, the recording will be affected (which is bad). So everytime you go to record, you'd have to set the master out level for your recorder, then adjust your master volume on the amp or speakers. Totally lame.


Thanks for the info.

Your first point certainly is a problem with the mixer. But I don't think too many people will be using this mixer in a club environment, nor is it intended to be used in one. I mean this is why, as you mentioned before, it doesn't have balanced outputs or the booth output.

As for your second comment, I have a hard time understanding why that would ever be a problem. Perhaps I'm missing something? Let me know.


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 19:22:

How can you not see a problem with number 2? If you go to record a mix, you should NEVER touch the master volume control on the mixer for fear of messing up your mix? That's ridiculous! Even if your playing a house party, over the course of the night you'll slowly increase the volume. That will in turn completely mess up your recording. I like to record everything I do.

For $500, there are many many other mixers on the market that have these BASIC mixer features. If you ignore the effects included with the DJM-400, it's really a crappy mixer. You are just paying for the effects unit.

Effects are superfluous in a mixer. Sound quality and connectivity are why you buy a mixer. Which is why I suggested the Ecler Nuo 2.0. For nearly the same price (ok maybe a tad more) of the DJM-400, you could pick up that little gem of a mixer and an EFX-500.

And have a record out... an effects loop... and booth output... and balance outputs... and Ecler sound quality.

The DJM-400 is strictly a bedroom DJ mixer. If you never have intentions of using it at parties, or any sort of venue, then maybe it'll work. But I'm quite certain that when the luster of the cheesy effects unit wears off, you'll realize you got stuck with a crappy overpriced mixer. Which is too bad... if Pioneer had included these simple things, I would think very differently of the unit.

quote:
Originally posted by jayxthekoolest
Thanks for the info.

Your first point certainly is a problem with the mixer. But I don't think too many people will be using this mixer in a club environment, nor is it intended to be used in one. I mean this is why, as you mentioned before, it doesn't have balanced outputs or the booth output. Then again, I can't think of a professional club mixer that costs $500. They usually cost at least twice that, thus you get more features for the club environment.

As for your second comment, I have a hard time understanding why that would ever be a problem. Perhaps I'm missing something? Let me know.


Posted by jayxthekoolest on Aug-15-2008 19:26:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
How can you not see a problem with number 2? If you go to record a mix, you should NEVER touch the master volume control on the mixer for fear of messing up your mix? That's ridiculous! Even if your playing a house party, over the course of the night you'll slowly increase the volume. That will in turn completely mess up your recording. I like to record everything I do.

For $500, there are many many other mixers on the market that have these BASIC mixer features. If you ignore the effects included with the DJM-400, it's really a crappy mixer. You are just paying for the effects unit.

Effects are superfluous in a mixer. Sound quality and connectivity are why you buy a mixer. Which is why I suggested the Ecler Nuo 2.0. For nearly the same price (ok maybe a tad more) of the DJM-400, you could pick up that little gem of a mixer and an EFX-500.

And have a record out... an effects loop... and booth output... and balance outputs... and Ecler sound quality.

The DJM-400 is strictly a bedroom DJ mixer. If you never have intentions of using it at parties, or any sort of venue, then maybe it'll work. But I'm quite certain that when the luster of the cheesy effects unit wears off, you'll realize you got stuck with a crappy overpriced mixer. Which is too bad... if Pioneer had included these simple things, I would think very differently of the unit.


Good to know.

I'm currently saving up for a high end mixer (around $2000), I was wondering which ones you think are the best.


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 19:30:

What are you looking for? High end analog? Digital? Rotary? Integrated effects? Integrated sound card and MIDI?

Do you mix primarily: CDJ's, vinyl, or DVS? Or Ableton?


quote:
Originally posted by jayxthekoolest
Good to know.

I'm currently saving up for a high end mixer (around $2000), I was wondering which ones you think are the best.


Posted by jayxthekoolest on Aug-15-2008 19:32:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
What are you looking for? High end analog? Digital? Rotary? Integrated effects? Integrated sound card and MIDI?

Do you mix primarily: CDJ's, vinyl, or DVS? Or Ableton?


primarily vinyl

btw, thanks for the help thus far


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 19:38:

Xone 92.

Or if you want to go old school like me: Rane 2016a + XP2016a.

But probably Xone 92

quote:
Originally posted by jayxthekoolest
primarily vinyl

btw, thanks for the help thus far


Posted by jayxthekoolest on Aug-15-2008 19:40:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
Xone 92.

Or if you want to go old school like me: Rane 2016a + XP2016a.

But probably Xone 92


Which one of the xone-92s? there are two different versions, correct?


Posted by Ryan0751 on Aug-15-2008 19:53:

Linear faders or rotary faders... that's a preference thing.

quote:
Originally posted by jayxthekoolest
Which one of the xone-92s? there are two different versions, correct?


Posted by jayxthekoolest on Aug-15-2008 19:55:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
Linear faders or rotary faders... that's a preference thing.


Cool, thanks for the advice. I'm just getting into DJing and trying to build a vinyl collection already (love vinyl for some reason). Your advice is much appreciated.


Posted by nemesis8722 on Aug-15-2008 20:56:

quote:
Originally posted by Ryan0751
I guess the Denon's build a catalog of all the tracks when you first plug in the drives, so that it's faster for subsequent uses.

You build the database on your PC using Denon's software.


Pages (2): [1] 2 »

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