1200's have THEORETICALLY limitless pitch resolution since the control is analog, but due to physical limitations (like the length of the slider, etc.) they actually aren't even as good as CDJ-1000's.

The physical length of the slider is the same on a CDJ-1000 and a Technics SL-1200. With CDJ-1000's in ".02" increment mode, you get a range of +/- 6%. With the SL-1200's, you are always dealing with a range of +/- 8%. Therefore it's physically harder to move a 1200's pitch slider "just a tad" to get that .02% or less of change.

You can see this clearly with a DVS like Traktor Pro. The latest version shows pitch to two decimal places (128.23, 128.34) for example).

When using my CDJ-1000 (with timecode CD), you can very easily make tiny adjustments to adjust the pitch very accurately.

Using timecode vinyl with my 1200's, even the smallest amount I can move the slider causes a much larger change in speed.

But in the end it doesn't matter, as I mix differently on both. With CDJ's I lock the tracks and during the mix use the platter if necessary (or to get the mix started). On 1200's I get as close as I can up front, but when mixing the track in live I just ride the pitch a teeny amount.

I do find a difference using .02 and .05 on the 1000's, but it's not really a problem to have to use .05.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 1200's have THEORETICALLY limitless pitch resolution since the control is analog, but due to physical limitations (like the length of the slider, etc.) they actually aren't even as good as CDJ-1000's. The physical length of the slider is the same on a CDJ-1000 and a Technics SL-1200. With CDJ-1000's in ".02" increment mode, you get a range of +/- 6%. With the SL-1200's, you are always dealing with a range of +/- 8%. Therefore it's physically harder to move a 1200's pitch slider "just a tad" to get that .02% or less of change. You can see this clearly with a DVS like Traktor Pro. The latest version shows pitch to two decimal places (128.23, 128.34) for example). When using my CDJ-1000 (with timecode CD), you can very easily make tiny adjustments to adjust the pitch very accurately. Using timecode vinyl with my 1200's, even the smallest amount I can move the slider causes a much larger change in speed. But in the end it doesn't matter, as I mix differently on both. With CDJ's I lock the tracks and during the mix use the platter if necessary (or to get the mix started). On 1200's I get as close as I can up front, but when mixing the track in live I just ride the pitch a teeny amount. I do find a difference using .02 and .05 on the 1000's, but it's not really a problem to have to use .05.

thanks for that...that was actually the type of answer i was looking for cheers!

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 1200's have THEORETICALLY limitless pitch resolution since the control is analog, but due to physical limitations (like the length of the slider, etc.) they actually aren't even as good as CDJ-1000's. The physical length of the slider is the same on a CDJ-1000 and a Technics SL-1200. With CDJ-1000's in ".02" increment mode, you get a range of +/- 6%. With the SL-1200's, you are always dealing with a range of +/- 8%. Therefore it's physically harder to move a 1200's pitch slider "just a tad" to get that .02% or less of change. You can see this clearly with a DVS like Traktor Pro. The latest version shows pitch to two decimal places (128.23, 128.34) for example). When using my CDJ-1000 (with timecode CD), you can very easily make tiny adjustments to adjust the pitch very accurately. Using timecode vinyl with my 1200's, even the smallest amount I can move the slider causes a much larger change in speed. But in the end it doesn't matter, as I mix differently on both. With CDJ's I lock the tracks and during the mix use the platter if necessary (or to get the mix started). On 1200's I get as close as I can up front, but when mixing the track in live I just ride the pitch a teeny amount. I do find a difference using .02 and .05 on the 1000's, but it's not really a problem to have to use .05.

Excellent post.

Been a while....haven't seen you post here recently? Or maybe I haven't been in the right places?

I've been around

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN Excellent post. Been a while....haven't seen you post here recently? Or maybe I haven't been in the right places?

if only the cdj1000 wasn't discontinued, i'd buy one and see which one feels better

cdj1000 is discontinued? when did this happen? somehow i dont see that happening, but i could be wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by i got big pants cdj1000 is discontinued? when did this happen? somehow i dont see that happening, but i could be wrong.

the very first one, mk1

Oh why does that make a difference? They are all similar, I've played on all 3. The only weird thing about the MK1 is the platter is a bit tighter.

quote:

Originally posted by orTofønChiLd the very first one, mk1

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Oh why does that make a difference? They are all similar, I've played on all 3. The only weird thing about the MK1 is the platter is a bit tighter.

cuz of the price, usually the mk1 would be the cheapest

The mk1 also lags a bit more when cueing in stutter mode...at least the ones I used did.

___________________
Click the link below to stream all of my mixes past and present. New mixes go up about once a month. Enjoy!

www.mixcloud.com/jluger

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 1200's have THEORETICALLY limitless pitch resolution since the control is analog, but due to physical limitations (like the length of the slider, etc.) they actually aren't even as good as CDJ-1000's.

Exactly!