TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- pioneer to A&H or vice versa

pioneer to A&H or vice versa

hey guys, im thinking of trying something new and maybe switching up mixers.... ive had a djm-400 and currently have the 700.....im thinking of selling the 700 and getting the xone 92 would.....I just need some influence on my decision on if its a good or bad idea and why.... maybe your own experiences can help me since I never used and allen and heath mixer

thanks

let the flaming begin..lol

there is tons of these threads on here already, and pretty much they get nowhere...it becomes a pioneer vs a&h fanboy war...lol

Cant compare since i've never used the djm-700/800 but i do have the Xone 92 rotary and it is TITS

*cough* Pioneer...*cough* Pioneer...

seriously though, yeah theres alot of threads like this already haha.

I guess it really comes down to personal preference and what your doing.

Ive heard alot of all digital guys say the xone is way better for all digital. Personally i have a DJM-800 and its the best thing ive ever played on. I love it, and i know why i've seen it used at 90% of the events i have ever been to since it came out.

but as i said i guess it comes down to personal preference

I just swapped my DJM800 for a Xone92.

Took a few days go get tused to - and initially I was a bit concerned I'd made the wrong decision, but now i wouldn't swap back.

I hear elements in tracks I've been listening to for three or four years that I couldn't hear through the 800!

Read about my views here: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...8201&forumid=8&

ok wicked ill def just keep my 700 then lol

quote:

Originally posted by darouge11 ok wicked ill def just keep my 700 then lol

Hmmmmkay...?!!?

quote:

Originally posted by darouge11 ok wicked ill def just keep my 700 then lol

t
o
o
l
.

i used to be a pioneer fanboy, the djm-600 was a workhorse of a mixer, but after having used the xone 92 on a few shows as well as the 800, i've gone to the allen & heath side

i don't like the 800 at all, the sound is crap and the new color effects blow nuts (plus i don't use the effects all that much anyway)

i like to keep my headphones on when i mix, one cup off to the side kinda half on my ear and when i switch the cue over to master i notice a sound change even though the channels and master are at the same volume

but anyway, it all comes down to personal preference, and after playing on both the 92 and 800, my preference is the 92

i dont know....once you try out the 4 eqs on a xone instead of the 3 on a djm....its hard to switch back lol

quote:

Originally posted by djsaekone i dont know....once you try out the 4 eqs on a xone instead of the 3 on a djm....its hard to switch back lol

that was the other thing, i love the 4 band eq, you can work the mix so well, it's like butter

quote:

Originally posted by n3lly t o o l .

yea your cool

quote:

Originally posted by darouge11 yea your cool

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Jarvmeister I just swapped my DJM800 for a Xone92. Took a few days go get tused to - and initially I was a bit concerned I'd made the wrong decision, but now i wouldn't swap back. I hear elements in tracks I've been listening to for three or four years that I couldn't hear through the 800! Read about my views here: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...8201&forumid=8&

yup same here. sold my djm 800 for a xone 92. one thing i like about the 92 is theres an option of hearing the eq changes in the headphones or not when you're cueing up the track. on the 800 thats not an option.

sound the eq isolation is far superior on the xone too

I used to own a djm3000, then went to a 4d. last night I spent about 3 hours playing on a djm700. main thing I noticed was how short the faders felt. problem forgot this as I swapped over to rotary for the last 18 months I had the 3000. and whilst the A&H cueing system (press 2 channel cues at the same time) seemed odd when I first started, going back to pioneer, I miss the A&H method.
and the 1 filter on the djm is nowhere near as useful or nice sounding as the A&H filters.

For me the most important DJ tool is the EQ, and the Pioneer EQ can't compete with the A&H and that holds true for the other A&H mixers too.

A&H used made Studio mixing desks long before DJ mixers and their stuff has always been expensive but top notch.

I have a Xone 464 at home and appart from it being huge it's the best mixer I have ever owned.

To put it into context, over the years I have owned stacks of mixers from GLI, Vestax and Pioneer just to mention a few. Not to mention that I use quite a few Pioneers quire regularly.

The A&H just has a nice and rich sound quality about it.

Cheers
Nem

quote:

Originally posted by tubby whilst the A&H cueing system (press 2 channel cues at the same time) seemed odd when I first started, going back to pioneer, I miss the A&H method.

I never really understood why people do this.??

The way I cue a track is just press "cue" for the channel I am cueing, and then just turn the "add mix" knob to hear the current track playing.

If you press to channel cues at the same time then you just hear both of the tracks right away, and don't need to turn the "add mix" knob. But I don't see an advantage to is..

Maybe I am misunderstanding

quote:

Originally posted by Cro_Addict I never really understood why people do this.?? The way I cue a track is just press "cue" for the channel I am cueing, and then just turn the "add mix" knob to hear the current track playing. If you press to channel cues at the same time then you just hear both of the tracks right away, and don't need to turn the "add mix" knob. But I don't see an advantage to is.. Maybe I am misunderstanding

This.

I used to cue on my old vestax by cueing both tracks as there wasn't an add mix feature. But with the Xone i use the method you described about and absolutely love it. Saves my ears quite a bit as well as i find i don't turn it up as much.

i never really felt the need to use the cue mix knobs, not that fussed about hearing just a little of the live channel, press both and you get the same 50/50 split of the two channels, i find it better for hearing clashes, and to save my ears just turn down the headphone volume. each to their own i guess.

and on an 800 - where the mix volume when you use split cue is defined by the master out, you can be a little stuck if the master volume is low

Definitely comes down to personal preference. Both have their plus and minuses.

For me there are certain things that the A&H does very well. BUT the mixer also dosent feel as "substantial" ill say. Everything on the A&H seems very small/flimsy to the touch.

Id say youd be very happy with either or. Wouldnt hurt to be familiar with both (a Halloween party I went to the DJ could not figure out how to change the upfader's curve on the A&H) and hell even with the Rane mixer if you have a chance. After all not every club is going to have your home setup.

I started on Pioneer. Im still on Pioneer. Really dont see a need to switch at the current time.

quote:

Originally posted by Imagin Definitely comes down to personal preference. Both have their plus and minuses. For me there are certain things that the A&H does very well. BUT the mixer also dosent feel as "substantial" ill say. Everything on the A&H seems very small/flimsy to the touch. Id say youd be very happy with either or. Wouldnt hurt to be familiar with both (a Halloween party I went to the DJ could not figure out how to change the upfader's curve on the A&H) and hell even with the Rane mixer if you have a chance. After all not every club is going to have your home setup. I started on Pioneer. Im still on Pioneer. Really dont see a need to switch at the current time.

Which xone lets you switch the upfaders curve? Sounds cool...

Im very A&H stupid for the most part. He was basically having the problem of he would get no sound til almost the top of the upfaders motion and when it kicked in it kicked in full volume instead of a gradual increase. Just left him with one less tool in the box so does speak.

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