|
Denon DNX-1500 Vs. DJM-600 (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| acar |
| webbie u work at denon ? :D |
|
|
| webbie |
haha, no, i wouldnt mind tho. ;)
We all read up on things and get a favourite, min is the 1500 altho as written, the Nuo5 looks really sharp too. |
|
|
| Max Thomson |
| I have used both and own the X1500. Its a great mixer for a great price thar really can't be beat. Buy it. |
|
|
| ste_johnstone |
I have a DJM 600 and have had it about a month and I love it to bits, was a descision between the xone 62 and this for me. The Denons just dont seem to be as popular here in the UK - the NUO-5 was recommended more highly than X1500 when I came to buying mine.
If you can read up on them all much as you can this will help, but you need to try them out for yourself. Heres a good shop with reviews of mixers and they are from people who actually bought and own the mixers-
DJM 600
DJM 600S
DNX 1500 |
|
|
| Max Thomson |
| quote: | Originally posted by zizack
ok, well I'm gonna have to disagree with everyone so far. I used to have a DJM 600 and loved it. People keep commenting on the sound quality, but I honestly don't think that most people can tell a difference, especially considering most peopel only get to hear how certain mixers perform in bedrooms. Like you can tell that the Denon sounds better than the Pioneer on boom box speakers or affordable monitors. I own a Xone 92 and can't tell the difference in soudn between it and the DJM. And it ain't liek you can compated club installed versions of each, because no clubs use the Denon as a main mixer like they do the Pioneer all over the world. In terms of the Denon, I played with it and remember there being a considerable delay on the up faders which is annoying. And I don't really find much use for half the effects and the nifty little "tube display" that it boasts. The Pioneer, IMO is much better laid out, and has a much more comfortable feel to it. I think the Denon feels and looks kinds of cheap to tell you the truth....with that two tone black finish and bright ass flashing lights and buttons. My vote goes for the DJM. |
The update fixed the delay. And the X1500 has a digital out, which sounds loads cleaner than the shoddy Pioneer mixer. |
|
|
| Ste |
my mate gibbo recently bought the 1500 and i have to admit it pisses all over the djm.
only faults to the djm are:
no fast increase/decrease of effect timings (or at least we have foudn it)
non-chunking eq knobs
otherwise its mint, my fave things are
lots of effects, controllable filters
loose volume faders, like crossfader loose so u can cut etc. |
|
|
| Ste |
| quote: | Originally posted by zizack
ok, well I'm gonna have to disagree with everyone so far. I used to have a DJM 600 and loved it. People keep commenting on the sound quality, but I honestly don't think that most people can tell a difference, especially considering most peopel only get to hear how certain mixers perform in bedrooms. Like you can tell that the Denon sounds better than the Pioneer on boom box speakers or affordable monitors. I own a Xone 92 and can't tell the difference in soudn between it and the DJM. And it ain't liek you can compated club installed versions of each, because no clubs use the Denon as a main mixer like they do the Pioneer all over the world. In terms of the Denon, I played with it and remember there being a considerable delay on the up faders which is annoying. And I don't really find much use for half the effects and the nifty little "tube display" that it boasts. The Pioneer, IMO is much better laid out, and has a much more comfortable feel to it. I think the Denon feels and looks kinds of cheap to tell you the truth....with that two tone black finish and bright ass flashing lights and buttons. My vote goes for the DJM. |
i always thought this was bull when i used both an allen and heath 62 and a djm 600 and they just sounded the same to me, but when you use a denon you hear a much much cleaner sound coming through your headphones |
|
|
| mattspence |
| Having played on both extensively I would seriously recommend going for the Denon. The Pioneer is a superb mixer and has had its day, but it is now starting to look a little long in the teeth. The Denon is superb and has an array of unique features which allow for massive creativity in the mix. |
|
|
| dinoXpress |
| quote: | Originally posted by webbie
Really, if you could choose between a mixer that is known for bad sound quality OR a mixer with good sound quality, would you
take the one with the suckier quality?
Just becuase its in clubs? |
everyone still buys techs right? |
|
|
| jupiterone |
| i would believe technics are just a bit of a difference then mixers. But in reality its more of what the media tells and shows us to buy. For instance,all the clubs and DJ interviews. Their choices for favorite mixer. People dont look at quality now and dont take the time to research things. Its more of a popularity choice for people now. I mean clubs dont really take the time to choose different equip. because of what they have now. Denon is still my choice,a lot more comfortable than the pioneer. The digital screen does add in to the heating, but its a lot more organized in my opinion. A digital out also adds into the clearer sound quality, Two tone colors..always a plus. Better pricetag for a better product. My two cents. |
|
|
| webbie |
| quote: | Originally posted by dinoXpress
everyone still buys techs right? |
Well that would be more accurate if the Techs came with preinstalled and not exchangeable stylus cartridges.
But they dont, you can switch that as you wish and therefor changing and enhancing the way your music sounds.
But with a mixer you cant do that, you cant alter the way it outputs it sound. |
|
|
| dinoXpress |
| i suppose, but there a tables out there which are a lot better than the techs in so many ways, and i bet if they were given the abuse a tech was, a lot of them would last a while, namely the stantons. |
|
|
|
|
