A simple Google will answer your question about rotary vs. regular faders.

IMO the 92 is just too much mixer for a beginner setup, a 42 or even a 32 should suit you just fine. In fact, there are plenty of awesome mixers out there priced way below the Allen and Heaths, have you considered an Ecler, Vestax, Rane, Pioneer, etc?

Have you ever set hands on any of these units? You might want to before you go spending 3 grand.

Don't forget about proper headphones and DJ monitors if applicable, a desk, etc.

Are you familar with Serato, Traktor, or Torq. Google the ******s, they are great programs to learn on.

I guess I'd just slow down a bit, make sure you really want to learn to DJ. Even if you are committed you don't need to spend 3 grand for a beginner setup. There are tons of different configurations out there, find the one that's right for you, not the one that's right for the people in the DJ Booth forum.

I would get a xone 92 + 2 cdj-200 by far.
with that setup you probably won't need to upgrade in 10 years.

___________________
Here are my latest mixes:
Pepa - Pure Bliss (June 2007 Promo)
Pepa - Visual Thoughts (March 2007 Promo)
Pepa - Trippin' Again

Mash-ups:
Perasma Vs BT - Swing 2 Gravity (Pepa Live Mash-up)
I Trance You!

I would go for the 42 + CDJ 800's. The CDJ 800's are far more powerful than the 200's as they have vinyl emulation and they feel very close to the 1000's so you'll be able to play on a high end professional setup with no time for adjustment.

Both of those mixers are pretty much "end game," and you won't really need to upgrade them ever, but you might find yourself getting tired of the cdj 200's at some point.

Either way you can't go wrong.

___________________
My Soundcloud

cdj 800s and xone 62,

no fancy effects, just simple bare boned goodness

Don't write off the CDJ-400's just yet either, they are quite nice. Personally I'd take them over the 800's.

The jog is smaller, but it's still got vinyl emulation. Going from 1000's->800's->400's jog wheels is not an issue.

You also get better pitch precision with the CDJ-400, plus effects, MIDI, USB playback support, and it's native mode support in Serato is freaking GREAT. I have the 1000's, and after playing on my friends 400's/Serato setup I was very impressed.

I think the Xone 42 is great as well. And you get the integrated sound card in it for recording your sets. Pretty nice. And the effects loop on the 42 stomps all over the 92's.

quote:

Originally posted by Sadface I would go for the 42 + CDJ 800's. The CDJ 800's are far more powerful than the 200's as they have vinyl emulation and they feel very close to the 1000's so you'll be able to play on a high end professional setup with no time for adjustment.

Not with Mk1s. Mk2 does have better jog wheel than mk1

___________________
Latest mix: Yohan - Full Spectrum (Fall 14 promo)
Like my stuff? Join my FB group here!

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon not true. i say "ugh" but i am a tranny.

quote:

Originally posted by kotsy lol colour me retarded

Tough choice. I would always recommend getting a better mixer first as that is where the actual mixing will happen. With the 200's +/-6% you will have 1000 style accuracy, you'll just have to deal with the crap interface.

CDJs lose value quickly, every time new models come out, I just sold 2 1000mk2 for a grand.

The mixer will keep its value far longer.


In all though, the 42 is a solid choice and you should be fine with that for a while also.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.

I think you have it backwards.. industry standard CDJ's will hold value. Mixers drop value.

My CDJ 200's + ecler nuo 2 mixer sold for $1000. Shit loads of PM's / emails (from craigslist) wanting my "outdated" cdj's.. all would have paid $750.

*shrug*

Jay

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis I just sold 2 1000mk2 for a grand.

fuck, you got gypped

I don't get why people are still talking about CDJ-200s. The CDJ-400s are far better and are even preferred over the current CDJ-800s by some people (unless of course you want a massive jog wheel ). They don't cost that much more than the 200s anyway so I would recommend the 400s.

As far as mixer goes, if you have the money go for it but I do agree that 92 is overkill to start off with, especially since you can't be sure what you will really want until later.

I bought a brand DXM 06 for $279 (below cost) when it retails for $600 over in Aus but I got lucky
Even if I had the money I wouldn't have got anything better because I simply can't say right now whether I would want a 92, DJM800, Zero8 or even a 3D.

___________________
Like Progressive and Deep House? Grab my latest mix below
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...s=#.UAv1rbRo3h4

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz I don't get why people are still talking about CDJ-200s. The CDJ-400s are far better and are even preferred over the current CDJ-800s by some people (unless of course you want a massive jog wheel ). They don't cost that much more than the 200s anyway so I would recommend the 400s. As far as mixer goes, if you have the money go for it but I do agree that 92 is overkill to start off with, especially since you can't be sure what you will really want until later. I bought a brand DXM 06 for $279 (below cost) when it retails for $600 over in Aus but I got lucky Even if I had the money I wouldn't have got anything better because I simply can't say right now whether I would want a 92, DJM800, Zero8 or even a 3D.

I bought my cdj 200's at the time when there were no cdj 400's. Back then and still to this day, I don't think I need anything more as I don't scratch and the efx on any cdj are tired and boring. If I were to buy another cdj, sure it would probably be the 400 only cause of the serato compatibility, price , and the great pitch resolution in comparison to the big boys.

With that being said, the 200's are "talked" about still, because for the price, you can't get another cdj that matches the build quality.



Jay