|
Cdj1000mk3 vs cdj900? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| SPAWNmaster |
| quote: | Originally posted by miamitranceman
Welcome back dude!
Edit: Amazing skydiving vids! |
Thanks man :)
Trying to get caught up on gear at the moment before I invest (a lot's changed in just a few years!). Was looking at the Evo 5 but may start off with a Xone 3/4D with Ableton and invest in a pair of 1000mk2/mk3's with Traktor with another paycheck. |
|
|
| miamitranceman |
| quote: | Originally posted by SPAWNmaster
Thanks man :)
Trying to get caught up on gear at the moment before I invest (a lot's changed in just a few years!). Was looking at the Evo 5 but may start off with a Xone 3/4D with Ableton and invest in a pair of 1000mk2/mk3's with Traktor with another paycheck. |
I've actually got an Evo 5. I'm still running Torq but I'm using the internal Evo ASIO soundcard instead of the Conectiv. For me, it's the best of both worlds. Plus, it's Traktor Scratch certified, so I can always switch over to that easily if I want to. Excellent mixer! Check on eBay for one. I got one for a little over $1000 bucks about 7 months ago went the economy was at its lowest. The guy babied it and had to get rid of it for money. |
|
|
| Jarvmeister |
That's becuase this picture isn't showing the waveform.
This picture is showing the remaining track length like the 1000 and 800 do. I suspect you'd have to turn on the waveform if you wanted to see it. |
|
|
| Marcus007 |
nah man, think about it: it's one of the products most important features, they would surely advertise it wouldn't they?
*oh yeah it has waveform display we just decided not to show it?* |
|
|
| Tony Morello |
do you really need a waveform though?
how about you just know your music, the beats go in multiples of 4, it's not hard |
|
|
| Marcus007 |
Proof there's not the same waveform on the 900 than the 2000
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDrWpDB-Iv0&feature=related
not the end of the world tony but think about it, why not make the 900 a full waveform, why a blocky old ty cdj waveform?
very good music moves in intervals of 4... but this is supposed to be the future of cdjs... not the past |
|
|
| Tony Morello |
it's still the level down version, they want you to buy the 2000, why make the little bother more appealing than the flagship?
you go for the cheaper deck, you're going to have to accept that it's not going to have all the bells and whistles of the main one |
|
|
| manatsu |
| is the CDJ 900 going to drive down the price of MK3? |
|
|
| Illusion7 |
| Just curious, shouldn't the CDJ 400s be all you need? I know they don't quite have the same CDJ 1000 MK3 like feel and look that the CDJ 900s have, but they seem to have all that would be needed for a home setup to run Serato or other programs with. |
|
|
| spdandpwr |
If you are using dvs software, why would you opt for the more expensive deck? The 900 with .02% pitch resolution should be all you need because, with DVS software, you can't use the features of the more expensive decks. In fact, you can probably get away with just the 800mk2 because Serato isn't accurate enough to pick up .02% pitch changes (or at least my 1.7 version can't).
As for the response with suggesting the cdj-400s, I don't see it as being feasible considering that its hard to manipulate serato without a real platter for cueing songs...maybe its just me. |
|
|
|
|
