If you don't care much for vinyl emulation then don't bother with the 800s.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquarian If you don't care much for vinyl emulation then don't bother with the 800s.

Thanks for your reply

quote:

Originally posted by harriz I am thinking of getting me a pair of cdj200s

me 2, please give some input about them!

___________________
Tunes @ the moment:
1.Bebop pres Batista - Tally Ho [Future Favorite]
2.Bebop pres Batista - M I N I R A C E
3.Andrew Bennett Pres. Memento - No Return

I own a pair of cdj-1000s and my buddy has a cdj-200...and Ive played with the cdj-800 at a local shop.

First off the cdj-200 sounds just as good as any other cd deck, starts instantly with no lag (im still confused to what you define as lag in playback terms). The onboard effects sound EXCELLENT and the coolest part is that they are really tiny decks so they won't get in the way much. However since i started on cdj-1000s, i found that cueing with the 200 is rather limiting...as the 1000 and 800 allow you to cue to an exact moment just like vinyl as you move the platter, cueing with the 200 is hard to explain, instead of just moving it around like you would vinyl...it plays like half a second of the point you are cueing OVER AND OVER as you move the dial, on top of that its damn annoying. Other than queing, the cdj-200 can't be a bad buy, but honestly if i was going to spend 300 bucks on a cdj-200, i would go with the extra $150-$200 bucks on a CDJ-800 (mk1) because of the vinyl mode and easy queing.

quote:

Originally posted by xenoaxe i found that cueing with the 200 is rather limiting...as the 1000 and 800 allow you to cue to an exact moment just like vinyl as you move the platter, cueing with the 200 is hard to explain, instead of just moving it around like you would vinyl...it plays like half a second of the point you are cueing OVER AND OVER as you move the dial, on top of that its damn annoying.

It's not complicated. You just move the platter slowly until you go from hearing "tsss-tsss-tsss-tsss" to "toc-toc-toc-toc-toc-toc". I can see how it can be confusing if you're used to something else, but it takes just a few minutes to get used to.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquarian It's not complicated. You just move the platter slowly until you go from hearing "tsss-tsss-tsss-tsss" to "toc-toc-toc-toc-toc-toc". I can see how it can be confusing if you're used to something else, but it takes just a few minutes to get used to.

By the way I think the cdj-200 has an autocue function which automatically cues the first beat of the track. All you have to do is hit play on time.
You would only have to cue it like that if you wanted to cue a different part of the track.

quote:

Originally posted by xenoaxe I own a pair of cdj-1000s and my buddy has a cdj-200...and Ive played with the cdj-800 at a local shop. First off the cdj-200 sounds just as good as any other cd deck, starts instantly with no lag (im still confused to what you define as lag in playback terms). The onboard effects sound EXCELLENT and the coolest part is that they are really tiny decks so they won't get in the way much. However since i started on cdj-1000s, i found that cueing with the 200 is rather limiting...as the 1000 and 800 allow you to cue to an exact moment just like vinyl as you move the platter, cueing with the 200 is hard to explain, instead of just moving it around like you would vinyl...it plays like half a second of the point you are cueing OVER AND OVER as you move the dial, on top of that its damn annoying. Other than queing, the cdj-200 can't be a bad buy, but honestly if i was going to spend 300 bucks on a cdj-200, i would go with the extra $150-$200 bucks on a CDJ-800 (mk1) because of the vinyl mode and easy queing.

The 1000s are class but I dont want to pay 2400 for a pair for the scratch/backcue feature.
Right now I am leaning towards the 200's.

I have had my CDJ-200's for a week now. Absolutely love them

They have nice onboard effects, seamless look and you can adjust the loop on the fly.

___________________
Dan K

The autocue function isn't always accurate, and sometimes it's completely off, especially when tracks don't start directly on beat (and most don't). So it's not all that practical really.

pitch incement on the 800's is only .05% The 200 and 1000 have .02%

The loop function on the 200 has an autoloop unlike the 1000's I think. Also the 200's have onboard fx which neither the 1000's or the 800's have.

The 200 lacks the vinyl mode which is useless unless your scratching or retarded and cant figure out how to cue in stutter mode.

Considering the price difference, I would say the 200's are a better buy.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Axolotyl pitch incement on the 800's is only .05% The 200 and 1000 have .02% The loop function on the 200 has an autoloop unlike the 1000's I think. Also the 200's have onboard fx which neither the 1000's or the 800's have. The 200 lacks the vinyl mode which is useless unless your scratching or retarded and cant figure out how to cue in stutter mode. Considering the price difference, I would say the 200's are a better buy.

Completely agree with this with this statement.. That is exactly how I saw it when I was buying my 200's.