TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- Cdj1000mk3 vs cdj900?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Cdj1000mk3 vs cdj900?
It's obvious that the cdj1000 > cdj800. And the cdj2000 > cdj900. I think the 2000 is awsome but I'm not going nuts over the new features. I use serato. I think it's the best and I'm not switching. I owned cdj1000mk3s and sold them. I mix mostly hip hop and wanted to use vinyl. However, I do miss the cdjs when I'm mixing edm at my house or some clubs... I'm gonna buy some cdjs. I'm not buying the 800 or the 2000. My decision will be between the 900 and 1000. Which one is better? I could deff tell the difference in build quality between the 800 and 1000. How do u think the 900 will compare to the 1000 in terms of build quality, precision, etc... I saw the 900 on a website for $999 and the 1000mk3 is def going for more than that. Input will be greatly appreciated 
Thanks in advance!
I doubt many people here have been able to mess with the 900 to state how the build quality is on them, but on paper I'd go with the 900 over the 1000. Cheaper, better screen, more options of media, and the same functionality for the most part as the 1000.
Plus the all important 0.02% pitch resolution.
it might be a little early to make a call on this. There should be growing pains with the firmware of the 900, but we shall see.
lets have a poll
discobiscuit you read my mind. I've been thinking about getting back into the scene and am looking at those decks (I quit playing out and DJ'ing entirely back in 2008 for a brief stint as a skydiver...200+ jumps and a year later and I miss the muzak!)...I think comparing the 1000mk3 and the cdj900 has merit, mainly to compare the 2 paradigms that each of those models represents.
So I'd second a poll!
no wave form on cdj900
way too overpriced
first generation (which always means big headache until its perfected)
id wait for user reviews of the 900 before buying anything
i'm not interested in waveforms. i plan on using it with serato. plus if i did need to throw in a cd or other medium, seeing the waveform isnt that important to me. i'm interested in build quality and precision. bells and wistles (spelling?) arent important to me. i rearely use effects, cues, or anything like that.
there is a waveform on the 900, it's small but it's there
its blockish... the 2000 is an actual waveform ... when i discovered that i was rly bummed lol
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Marcus007 its blockish... the 2000 is an actual waveform ... when i discovered that i was rly bummed lol |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by SPAWNmaster discobiscuit you read my mind. I've been thinking about getting back into the scene and am looking at those decks (I quit playing out and DJ'ing entirely back in 2008 for a brief stint as a skydiver...200+ jumps and a year later and I miss the muzak!)...I think comparing the 1000mk3 and the cdj900 has merit, mainly to compare the 2 paradigms that each of those models represents. So I'd second a poll! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by miamitranceman Welcome back dude! Edit: Amazing skydiving vids! |
CDJ900's are only $999 at DJ Deals. That's way cheaper than the CDJ1000MK3. The CDJ2000 is $1699 at ProSound. That's $300 more than a CDJ1000MK3.
CDJ900 - $999
http://djdeals.com/pioneerCDJ900.htm
CDJ2000 - $1699
http://www.pssl.com/Pioneer-CDJ-200...i-Format-Player
| quote: |
| Originally posted by SPAWNmaster Thanks man Trying to get caught up on gear at the moment before I invest (a lot's changed in just a few years!). Was looking at the Evo 5 but may start off with a Xone 3/4D with Ableton and invest in a pair of 1000mk2/mk3's with Traktor with another paycheck. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Tony Morello there is a waveform on the 900, it's small but it's there |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Marcus007 http://www.pioneer.eu/images/eur/cdj900_small.jpg doesnt look very big at all... VERY blockish |
nah man, think about it: it's one of the products most important features, they would surely advertise it wouldn't they?
*oh yeah it has waveform display we just decided not to show it?*
do you really need a waveform though?
how about you just know your music, the beats go in multiples of 4, it's not hard
Proof there's not the same waveform on the 900 than the 2000
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDrWpDB-Iv0&feature=related
not the end of the world tony but think about it, why not make the 900 a full waveform, why a blocky old shitty cdj waveform?
very good music moves in intervals of 4... but this is supposed to be the future of cdjs... not the past
it's still the level down version, they want you to buy the 2000, why make the little bother more appealing than the flagship?
you go for the cheaper deck, you're going to have to accept that it's not going to have all the bells and whistles of the main one
is the CDJ 900 going to drive down the price of MK3?
Just curious, shouldn't the CDJ 400s be all you need? I know they don't quite have the same CDJ 1000 MK3 like feel and look that the CDJ 900s have, but they seem to have all that would be needed for a home setup to run Serato or other programs with.
If you are using dvs software, why would you opt for the more expensive deck? The 900 with .02% pitch resolution should be all you need because, with DVS software, you can't use the features of the more expensive decks. In fact, you can probably get away with just the 800mk2 because Serato isn't accurate enough to pick up .02% pitch changes (or at least my 1.7 version can't).
As for the response with suggesting the cdj-400s, I don't see it as being feasible considering that its hard to manipulate serato without a real platter for cueing songs...maybe its just me.
Well I can't speak from experience as I have neither, but I was just saying that at the expense that a CDJ 900 is, it seems like the CDJ 400 have a lot of nice features for the price and the feel is closer to the CDJ 800 or 900 vs the CDJ 200, but it isn't really as big as the one on the CDJ 2000 or 1000 MK3. It's definitely closer to the feel of a real one than the jog-wheel on a CDJ 200.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.