quote:

I mean, Technics is part of Panasonic (Panasonic right?)

Almost
Technics and Panasonic are parts of the Matsushita corporation
( #1 worldwide for electronics )

I'm gonna get flamed for that, but anyway..
Technics made an industry standard, then didn't improve it for 25+ years. The result : this year, the Numark TTX won as best turntable...
And it's well deserved IMHO..

___________________
My SoundCloud ______________________
My MixCloud___________
_____________My Youtube
"Wrong speed, we've got it on the wrong speed. For those of you who are recovering from a hangover, that's gonna sound just right. "
- Robin Williams

Also don't forget that when Technics created the 1200, they had NO intention of it being used for DJ purposes. The unit was created for the audiophile market!

I can think of a few ways to beat the CDJ-1000:

1. PRICE - The 1000 is WAY overpriced, by at least $400 per deck. It's ridiculous that you can buy a laptop for less money than a CDJ-1000.

2. Durability - The 1000's aren't bad, but make something a little more rugged please. Denon decks actually have a nicer feel to them (with the exception of the buttons). They actually use metal in their product. And yes, I HAVE seen broken CDJ-1000's, just like any other gear.

3. Digital integration - Why are people using timecode cd's? It just doesn't make sense. Either integrate MIDI or some other digital control system to use with SW applications like Torq/Serato/etc.

4. USB drive support. Hook 2 or more CDJ-1000's together with USB (to share cue points/loops/etc). Then allow the whole chain to connect to a USB storage device full of MP3's/wavs/etc.

5. High resolution audio support. If CDJ's are replacing vinyl, use 24/96 please.

6. Effects. The basic 200 has effects, so why not throw a few on the 1000's? Sure they are available using effects processors, but some effects really "fit" on the deck side of things, especially with their large conrol surfaces.

quote:

Originally posted by Inertia not to mention, the team of thinkers that made the 1200s is probably long gone by now. the thing is quite old. i don't think anyone CAN beat the CDJ1000s. how? the only way wold be to produce something just as good (there's not much room for improvement) at a considerably lower price. and don't give me all that about Denon being a good alternative... Denon is NOWHERE near as reliable, i have seen their CD playes break down months after purchase. perhaps this only happens to the lower-end models, but it speaks loudly on the brand's general outlook on quality and how much they care about their consumers. meanwhile, Pioneer has all the bases covered. the CDJ-200 is perfect for just about anyone who doesn't need vinyl control. it has the industry's MOST ACCURATE pitch, on par with the 1000 series. so i can mix as smoothly as i want with it. it has mp3 support, so if i'm a DJ who also plays weddings and bday parties, i can burn a couple mp3 CDs with commercial tracks and even link the units up to autoplay. if i'm a scratch/hip-hop DJ who doesn't need to make long mixes, there is the CDJ-800. second most accurate pitch, vinyl control which is quite easy to master, and mp3 support so i can burn just about as much music or scratch samples as i need. and, finally, if you are a DJ who just has to have everything, a club who needs to cater to the widest range of styles with their equipment, or someone who has too much money on them, there is the CDJ-1000 series. it has gotten to the point that to pamper everyone, you can even adjust jogwheel resistance. HOW can you beat it?

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Also don't forget that when Technics created the 1200, they had NO intention of it being used for DJ purposes. The unit was created for the audiophile market! I can think of a few ways to beat the CDJ-1000: 1. PRICE - The 1000 is WAY overpriced, by at least $400 per deck. It's ridiculous that you can buy a laptop for less money than a CDJ-1000. 2. Durability - The 1000's aren't bad, but make something a little more rugged please. Denon decks actually have a nicer feel to them (with the exception of the buttons). They actually use metal in their product. And yes, I HAVE seen broken CDJ-1000's, just like any other gear. 3. Digital integration - Why are people using timecode cd's? It just doesn't make sense. Either integrate MIDI or some other digital control system to use with SW applications like Torq/Serato/etc. 4. USB drive support. Hook 2 or more CDJ-1000's together with USB (to share cue points/loops/etc). Then allow the whole chain to connect to a USB storage device full of MP3's/wavs/etc. 5. High resolution audio support. If CDJ's are replacing vinyl, use 24/96 please. 6. Effects. The basic 200 has effects, so why not throw a few on the 1000's? Sure they are available using effects processors, but some effects really "fit" on the deck side of things, especially with their large conrol surfaces.

1. we're on the same page on that one.

2. say whatever you want about the feel, but i don't trust Denon decks after i saw my friend pamper his for months, just to have them start fucking up for no reason. and yeah, CDJ-1000s break, but its the odd event that they do if you treat them right. i've seen Tech12s fuck up as well.

3. i think the problem with that is that there is no standardized timecode. i don't think you can swap Serato and FS timecode vinyl/CDs, can you? if there is just 1 universal timecode, then integrating it could be a lot easier. otherwise, i doubt Stanton or Rane will be happy sharing their standards/codes. or perhaps they will. in any case, it's not all up to Pioneer on this one.

4. i don't think a USB device exists that has the speed to transfer information fast enough for track mapping without some load time. maybe i'm talking out of my ass here, but i think for this to work it would need to be firewire at least.

5. valid point, i guess, tho it will be used by very few. don't they have digital outs tho, for improved SQ?

6. i see the effects on the 100/200 as a nice little toy to perk up the sale. they're not that useful, albeit fun a time or two. i guess you could maybe put some effects on the deck, though this probably complicates things a bit/deters sound quality.

___________________
check out my guest mix for OndaSonora Podcast (aug.2009)

quote:

Originally posted by Soundwerks I think Technics is outta the DJ game. Theyre producing the 1200's, which is good for them, and an easy sale, and theyre happy with that. They dont put much marketing effort into anything anymore (they werent even at NAMM last year!), and I dont think they really care.

No Technics at the NAMM show??? I went a few years ago and they had one of biggest most expensive looking setups of the whole show!

It looks like they're raising the white flag to Pioneer...

2. I wasn't saying specifically that Denon was better or what not, just that the FEEL is closer to what I expect in this class of product.

3. The timecode output could either be the MIDI time clock, or if that doesn't have a high enough resolution, use some other control mechanism. As you'd already have a USB connection to a PC in this application, use a fully digital signal, not a timecoded audio signal. This would obviously break compatability with existing applications, but that could be fixed by release an open API for it.

4. USB is most definately fast enough for this. USB 2.0 is 400Mbps, not quite as good as firewire (which has less overhead), but still more than fast enough to transfer audio files from a storage device into the player. Firewire is certainly the better option, and might actually be required as with USB you usually need a "host" to handle the bus (aka, a PC).

5. You do NOT need digital outs for better sound quality Think about vinyl... no digital outs, and it CAN sound better than CD's. Some of the best sound systems in the world are all analog. Encoding music at the resolution of a CD DOES cause information to be lost. With 24/96, you end up with a much better representation of the sound. And yes, it wouldn't be overly useful at first, but it wouldn't be expensive to implement and it would provide a reason for DJ's to think about upgrading their sources.

6. Effects only hinder sound quality when they are engaged, so that's not a problem. Personally I don't find ANY effects really that useful, but at the price range we are talking about, throwing a few in really doesn't hurt.

quote:

Originally posted by Inertia 1. we're on the same page on that one. 2. say whatever you want about the feel, but i don't trust Denon decks after i saw my friend pamper his for months, just to have them start fucking up for no reason. and yeah, CDJ-1000s break, but its the odd event that they do if you treat them right. i've seen Tech12s fuck up as well. 3. i think the problem with that is that there is no standardized timecode. i don't think you can swap Serato and FS timecode vinyl/CDs, can you? if there is just 1 universal timecode, then integrating it could be a lot easier. otherwise, i doubt Stanton or Rane will be happy sharing their standards/codes. or perhaps they will. in any case, it's not all up to Pioneer on this one. 4. i don't think a USB device exists that has the speed to transfer information fast enough for track mapping without some load time. maybe i'm talking out of my ass here, but i think for this to work it would need to be firewire at least. 5. valid point, i guess, tho it will be used by very few. don't they have digital outs tho, for improved SQ? 6. i see the effects on the 100/200 as a nice little toy to perk up the sale. they're not that useful, albeit fun a time or two. i guess you could maybe put some effects on the deck, though this probably complicates things a bit/deters sound quality.

I was just reading a review of the opening of G-Spot in shanghai... the sound engineers were complaining that they spent so much time and effort suspending the turnables and ensuring they were isolated properly, and then not one of the opening nights DJ's played a single record. And of those DJ's was Digweed. (who we know doesn't play vinyl anymore, but still).

quote:

Originally posted by Stealth No Technics at the NAMM show??? I went a few years ago and they had one of biggest most expensive looking setups of the whole show! It looks like they're raising the white flag to Pioneer...

Make for interesting reading guys.

Technics got complaicent. Simple as that, they have time and power for a long time to literally own the dj world. But didnt.

Pioneer and numark etc thought outside the box, and as a result have taken over.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 5. You do NOT need digital outs for better sound quality Think about vinyl... no digital outs, and it CAN sound better than CD's. Some of the best sound systems in the world are all analog. Encoding music at the resolution of a CD DOES cause information to be lost. With 24/96, you end up with a much better representation of the sound. And yes, it wouldn't be overly useful at first, but it wouldn't be expensive to implement and it would provide a reason for DJ's to think about upgrading their sources.

that's obvious, but a whole other mess as well. vinyl sounding 'better' is also a large conjunction of factors. if you define 'better' as true to its source, then, CD would be better, given the CD is made from an original master sound file of a digital track, as most tracks are made from software these days, and have their master files in digital format, i (THINK, i'm not expert here) that CD would be a closer etching.

regardless, my point on the digital outs was that since CDs are digital, digital outs make sense. of course turntables don't use digital outs for the most part, because they are analog. however, if the CD is digital, the output is digital, and the mixer is digital, i will have unchanged sound basically, as opposed to the mixe rbeing analog/any other change. in the end, it really does come down to personal preference, in the analog vs. digital sound debate.

___________________
check out my guest mix for OndaSonora Podcast (aug.2009)

Sure CD is made from the digital file created via software, but when you render a track to disk it always gets "downconverted" to 16bit audio for use on a CD. If it were rendered as 24/96, you'd most certainly get better sound.

Digital outs on CDJ's make sense when you have a digital mixer. Analog outs make sense when you have an analog mixer. The digital to analog conversion has to take place SOMEWHERE, and there's nothing wrong with having it happen at the deck. If you are feeding a high quality analog mixer (A+H, Urei, Rane), it will sound fantastic.

If you feed a high quality digital mixer (DJM-800/DJM-1000), it will also sound great. The DJM-800 and DJM-1000 support 24/96 audio, yet there are no sources for it.

quote:

Originally posted by Inertia that's obvious, but a whole other mess as well. vinyl sounding 'better' is also a large conjunction of factors. if you define 'better' as true to its source, then, CD would be better, given the CD is made from an original master sound file of a digital track, as most tracks are made from software these days, and have their master files in digital format, i (THINK, i'm not expert here) that CD would be a closer etching. regardless, my point on the digital outs was that since CDs are digital, digital outs make sense. of course turntables don't use digital outs for the most part, because they are analog. however, if the CD is digital, the output is digital, and the mixer is digital, i will have unchanged sound basically, as opposed to the mixe rbeing analog/any other change. in the end, it really does come down to personal preference, in the analog vs. digital sound debate.

they need to adopt blu ray disc, it supports lossless audio at 24bit/96khz and multichannel , much better sound quality. You'll hear it in ps3 soon , not to mention 50GB capacity, makes cd at 0.7GB look archaic

Nah, DVD audio already support 24/96 lossless, as does Super Audio CD. Both have been around for YEARS at this point.

BlueRay is still unproven, VERY expensive (which is why the PS3 is going to retail for at least $600), and competes with HD-DVD (which ALSO supports 24/96).

There's no reason to not throw in DVD audio support at this point, the cost would be minimal.

quote:

Originally posted by erdega they need to adopt blu ray disc, it supports lossless audio at 24bit/96khz and multichannel , much better sound quality. You'll hear it in ps3 soon , not to mention 50GB capacity, makes cd at 0.7GB look archaic

Nah, DVD audio already support 24/96 lossless, as does Super Audio CD. Both have been around for YEARS at this point.

BlueRay is still unproven, VERY expensive (which is why the PS3 is going to retail for at least $600), and competes with HD-DVD (which ALSO supports 24/96).

There's no reason to not throw in DVD audio support at this point, the cost would be minimal.

quote:

Originally posted by erdega they need to adopt blu ray disc, it supports lossless audio at 24bit/96khz and multichannel , much better sound quality. You'll hear it in ps3 soon , not to mention 50GB capacity, makes cd at 0.7GB look archaic