|
Can the Pioneer CDj 1000 make beat matching easier? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Ryan0751 |
Yeah, CDJ's are much more accurate than 1200's. The "it's analog therefore infinite precision" argument is total B.S. Theoretically, maybe, but physical, definately not.
The 1200's have a +/- 8% pitch slider, the CDJ-1000 +/- 6%, and they are physically the same length. Now move the CDJ's slider just enough to make a .02% pitch change... it's a TINY movement. Try doing that with a 1200 and it's 8% pitch slider, can't do it so well.
TT's definately require significantly more pitch correction than CDJ's. Most DJ's won't admit that the technology made them better, but it did.
| quote: | Originally posted by miamitranceman
How can that be when 1000s go to .02 accuracy? There's so many other physical issues with TT such as motor Torque too. |
|
|
|
| hooj1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
Yeah, CDJ's are much more accurate than 1200's. The "it's analog therefore infinite precision" argument is total B.S. Theoretically, maybe, but physical, definately not.
The 1200's have a +/- 8% pitch slider, the CDJ-1000 +/- 6%, and they are physically the same length. Now move the CDJ's slider just enough to make a .02% pitch change... it's a TINY movement. Try doing that with a 1200 and it's 8% pitch slider, can't do it so well.
TT's definately require significantly more pitch correction than CDJ's. Most DJ's won't admit that the technology made them better, but it did. |
you're wrong and right.
cdjs move in .02 increments and yes it is a tiny movement. but for those of us that have played on TTs for years know that the pitch can be moved in much finer resolutions. that is simply because its analog.
i'm not a vnyl junkie. in fact 99 percent of what i play now is on cd, so i'm not bias on the subect. i just know that less correction is needed on TTs than cdjs, that is if the wax was pressed correctly. no increments means more precision. period. |
|
|
| Ryan0751 |
No, you can't. I play vinyl too. You can't move the pitch slider 1/2 mm and get it that accurate.
Everyone I know who's been playing for many years agrees... CDJ's are much easier.
| quote: | Originally posted by hooj1
you're wrong and right.
cdjs move in .02 increments and yes it is a tiny movement. but for those of us that have played on TTs for years know that the pitch can be moved in much finer resolutions. that is simply because its analog.
i'm not a vnyl junkie. in fact 99 percent of what i play now is on cd, so i'm not bias on the subect. i just know that less correction is needed on TTs than cdjs, that is if the wax was pressed correctly. no increments means more precision. period. |
|
|
|
| hooj1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
No, you can't. I play vinyl too. You can't move the pitch slider 1/2 mm and get it that accurate.
Everyone I know who's been playing for many years agrees... CDJ's are much easier. |
i agree, cdjs are easier by far. but i know i can move the pitch slider in tinier increments on TTs...but hey thats just me. i guess we agree to disagree. |
|
|
| FreqNasty2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by hooj1
you're wrong and right.
cdjs move in .02 increments and yes it is a tiny movement. but for those of us that have played on TTs for years know that the pitch can be moved in much finer resolutions. that is simply because its analog.
i'm not a vnyl junkie. in fact 99 percent of what i play now is on cd, so i'm not bias on the subect. i just know that less correction is needed on TTs than cdjs, that is if the wax was pressed correctly. no increments means more precision. period. |
no he's completly wrong
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
Yeah, CDJ's are much more accurate than 1200's. The "it's analog therefore infinite precision" argument is total B.S. Theoretically, maybe, but physical, definately not.
The 1200's have a +/- 8% pitch slider, the CDJ-1000 +/- 6%, and they are physically the same length. Now move the CDJ's slider just enough to make a .02% pitch change... it's a TINY movement. Try doing that with a 1200 and it's 8% pitch slider, can't do it so well.
TT's definately require significantly more pitch correction than CDJ's. Most DJ's won't admit that the technology made them better, but it did. |
Analog will always be more accurate than a digital CDJ1000, Just cuz of the .02 incertments with 6% pitch slide doesn't mean its more accurate, it means just smaller amount of pitch change DUH. And that theory mentioned above is true. I have more evidence but i wont post it hehe :D |
|
|
| Ryan0751 |
You're talking theory, I am talking reality. The CDJ's are 100% stable at any pitch, and you can ACTUALLY achieve .02% pitch increments.
You think you can with 1200's, but really, you can't.
We should find out what the M5G's have for pitch accuracy, because they use digital pitch control. I bet it's .1%.
Regardless, all these pitch arguments are usually made by people who can't beatmatch and blame the equipment for their lack of skill.
| quote: | Originally posted by FreqNasty2
no he's completly wrong
Analog will always be more accurate than a digital CDJ1000, Just cuz of the .02 incertments with 6% pitch slide doesn't mean its more accurate, it means just smaller amount of pitch change DUH. And that theory mentioned above is true. I have more evidence but i wont post it hehe :D |
|
|
|
| Ryan0751 |
You're talking theory, I am talking reality. The CDJ's are 100% stable at any pitch, and you can ACTUALLY achieve .02% pitch increments.
You think you can with 1200's, but really, you can't.
We should find out what the M5G's have for pitch accuracy, because they use digital pitch control. I bet it's .1%.
| quote: | Originally posted by FreqNasty2
no he's completly wrong
Analog will always be more accurate than a digital CDJ1000, Just cuz of the .02 incertments with 6% pitch slide doesn't mean its more accurate, it means just smaller amount of pitch change DUH. And that theory mentioned above is true. I have more evidence but i wont post it hehe :D |
|
|
|
| discobiscuit |
| i think cdj's indirectly make beatmatching easier. vinyl and cdj are both basically the same, but there are definitely differences. the cdj's to vinyl is like cell phones are to home phones. they both do the same thing, but they are different. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
1200's (and variations) use a quartz timing mechanism (like the ones found in digital watches) to reference the motor for speed. This makes them at least as accurate as a CDJ. Because the pitch is an analogue potentiometer(in terms of voltage) the "increments" can be minute (effectievly infinite.) This is why techs, seem more difficult to mix with but are in fact more precise than a CDJ as long as you have the correct technique to make this fine adjustments.
This is of course dependent on all other things being equal and set up correctly (stylus weight vs. Tonearm balance etc) as if not right they can affect playback performance.
CDJ's are "easier" to mix with, I think mainly because of the displays etc.
Also, different manufacturers and kit, use different components and software, to calculate the BPM and playback pitch functions, so some "digital" kit is more "accurate" than others.
I also get very worried when people start bringing maths in to beatmatching conversations, because you, as a "DJ" should be able to ing beatmatch, without a sodding calculator.
....and we wonder why some some DJ's sets are so boring. What next? people bringing laptops to gigs and staring at a screen fir the duration of their set? Bugger, too late.:D |
|
|
| Allied Nations |
| Yeah, and Nike's make you run faster :p |
|
|
| Allied Nations |
| quote: | Originally posted by discobiscuit
i think cdj's indirectly make beatmatching easier. vinyl and cdj are both basically the same, but there are definitely differences. the cdj's to vinyl is like cell phones are to home phones. they both do the same thing, but they are different. |
I just love the feel of the platter
 |
|
|
| Cro_Addict |
| quote: | Originally posted by Allied Nations
Yeah, and Nike's make you run faster :p |
Wasn't that Adidas's? |
|
|
|
|
