|
pio djm 400 vs 600
|
View this Thread in Original format
| JD8180 |
besides the 2 extra channels and couple of extra effects the djm 600 has... is the djm 400 any different? i'm talking about the quality of faders/eq's/quality of the mixer in general.
i have a garbage behringer, and i played on a djm 800 the other day and it made such a difference... but i don't have that money :(
and i really don't see myself upgrading to 4 turntables/cdjs anytime soon to need all those channels... and i'm not willing to spend the extra $500 just for a couple more effects either. |
|
|
| epdarks |
Sounds like the 400 is the mixer for you. It is Pio's new technology so its going to sound better than the 600. The 600 is outdated at this point... buying it is stepping backwards.
My good mate owns the 400 and I own the 3000 which is basically the 600... I've had time on both and IMO the 400 is superior in every way.
If you don't need the channels that is... Also no rotary option on the 400... |
|
|
| JD8180 |
| ty sir... i was considering the fact of maybe upgrading eventually needing more channels... but i think i'm going to be using just my 2 cdj's for a long while first |
|
|
| latenightsex |
| quote: | Originally posted by JD8180
ty sir... i was considering the fact of maybe upgrading eventually needing more channels... but i think i'm going to be using just my 2 cdj's for a long while first |
get the djm 800, it has 92 khz signal processor. you wil need that later. |
|
|
| jupiterone |
| quote: | Originally posted by latenightsex
get the djm 800, it has 92 khz signal processor. you wil need that later. |
The DJM 800 costs a load more money. Money some people may not want to spend. Hence how you said later, when he gets around to needing it later there will be newer better more up to date products for the same amount of money. Old standards will be boosted to newer standards. Saves him a lot of money to use on newer products where the technology will be utilized to full capability. |
|
|
| latenightsex |
| quote: | Originally posted by jupiterone
The DJM 800 costs a load more money. Money some people may not want to spend. Hence how you said later, when he gets around to needing it later there will be newer better more up to date products for the same amount of money. Old standards will be boosted to newer standards. Saves him a lot of money to use on newer products where the technology will be utilized to full capability. |
do you know what a 92 kHz processor is? |
|
|
| Spoonz |
| quote: | Originally posted by latenightsex
do you know what a 92 kHz processor is? |
the relevance of that is....? |
|
|
| latenightsex |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spoonz
the relevance of that is....? |
it helps you make breakfast |
|
|
| AnomalyConcept |
Okay, I'll bite.
The 92kHz is the sample rate of the audio processor, as the DJM-800 has digital inputs (and outputs, IIRC). The mixing and the effects are all done digitally.
The DJM-400 doesn't have digital inputs, but the input is sampled digitally and mixed as so.
If you only need 2 channels and want to play with some effects, I would recommend the 400. Sure, the 800 is nice and all, but as you said, it's probably out of your price range and you won't utilize all 4 channels.
I'd like to mention that I have a 4-channel mixer (Ecler Nuo4) and only 2 CDJs, but I have two outputs from my computer routed through the other two channels, which are hooked up to a stereo system. |
|
|
| JD8180 |
| thanks everyone for the feedback :D |
|
|
| miamitranceman |
| I love my 400. You won't regret it. BIG upgrade in quality over the 600. |
|
|
| JD8180 |
| quote: | Originally posted by miamitranceman
I love my 400. You won't regret it. BIG upgrade in quality over the 600. |
if it's a "BIG" upgrade over the 600, imagine over the behringer caca i am using right now... :crazy: |
|
|
|
|
