The djm-800 or xone 92 (5/6)
  English Topics, DO NOT reply in other languages than English !  LOCKED 

Poll : Djm 800 or xone 92

-Pioneer Djm-800
-Allen and heath xone-92

Voting is only possible for our Members
teddyaakre    posted on 27-03-2006 11:28
PLEASE help me... i really need to know which one to buy... i cant make up my mind... and once i buy one of them there is no turning back, because of all the money that were talking about...

anyways, have any of you tried both of these mixers?
Is the xones sound a lot better? if you add a efx-1000 to the xone will it be able to do most of the things that the djm 800 does...

help anyone?

Gilles    posted on 08-06-2006 23:10
In the end, it all comes down to feel. Does the DJM make you feel happy or does the XONE make you feel happy.

This feel comes from EQ, FADERS, LAYOUT and functionality. For my way of mixing i love the xone, but that is so personal, because others hate the way i have setup my mixer.

The 1 and only true answer is a comparison before you buy. Which mixer gives you the feel you need, and THAT is the best mixer.
BillyArd    posted on 09-06-2006 09:16
quote jorrit:
quote:

maybe the djm is cleaner after measuring but that is just the fact why the xone sounds better.
 
Jorrit:You are mixing up fact and opinion, some people like the sound clean.


Billy :hahaha and your not complete , cause you had to place my last words to.
TO MY EARS ,
that says that I dont like my sound clean
so no mixin up of fact and opinion , just MY opinion
Read please
User edit by BillyArd on 09-06-2006 @ 09:18:51 (2%)
BillyArd    posted on 09-06-2006 09:18
2 Gilles:indeed it all comes down to the fact you mentioned!
Happy, laughing
Jorrit    posted on 09-06-2006 20:05
Poster: BillyArd
xone has warmth in the psychoacoustic range that the DJM hasn,t.

Both are superb, but the xone,s sound quality is beter than the djm8 to my ears .
maybe the djm is cleaner after measuring but that is just the fact why the xone sounds better.
Clean is often sterile.
Warmth is always generated by noise.
the djm 800 lacks noise and thus warmth, something i discovered right away when comparing.
 
@ BillyArd, I did read the whole post, don't worry. But I don't think dat quality is something personal, a mixer has quality or it doesn't. So it may sound better to your ears, but the sound quality isn't inmediatly better.
gethigh    posted on 09-06-2006 21:59
me personaly, i would work more with the filters than with the effects, so therefore the xone would fit me better, but probably i will never be able to buy one

i had an id recently, to connect turntable1 on channel 1 and 2, turntable2 at channel 3 and 4
use channel 2 and 3 to normally play the records and 1 and 4 i would filter so i would only have the melody, send it to an efx, put some effect on it, let it play together with the original track, and you will have an ultra cool melody
Lead    posted on 09-06-2006 22:02
An artist records a CD and it sound just the way the artist would like the track to sound. He make sure about this during the end-mix.

When played on CDJ/DJM using digital connections there is NO sound loss over this connection. The mixer receives and works with the sound that the artist put on the CD, without any distortion,  added noise or what so ever.

If you keep the signal digital, with no D/A or A/D conversions, the output of the mixer is the original signal from the CD, added with EQ/Filters/volume changes. Basically it is possible to output the signal from the mixer, just the way the artist intended it to be...

Loss of sound quality useually happens during A/D and D/A conversions so if you can skip those, there is hardly any sound quality loss.... When using analogue connections/conversions anywhere (as you would when using any analogue mixer) it is innevitable that you loose some of the original sound quality.

If you like that clean sound is a personal thing, my experience: you have to get used to it.... I've heard the difference of the DJM-800 using the analogue and digital connections in a club situation... After hearing this  A/B comparison, I knew it: no more analogue connections for me if possible...
Let the BASS be louder
DJ-Emotion    posted on 09-06-2006 23:33
Poster: Lead
If you like that clean sound is a personal thing, my experience: you have to get used to it.... I've heard the difference of the DJM-800 using the analogue and digital connections in a club situation... After hearing this  A/B comparison, I knew it: no more analogue connections for me if possible...
 

Sure we knew that already with the analog sound from the DJM600.
However, did you try this with the Xone 92?


That's a whole different Ballgame

MauriceForge    posted on 10-06-2006 10:21
2 lead : as far as cd's  goes, when you are playing a cd there is already loss of sound quality because when the track is recorded
onto cd there are already conversions made so there is already loss, the only way you can hear everything an artist has put into a track is.......the one and only vinyl.
so basically the djm800 just prevents more loss of signal.
As for the x92...an x92 add a analogue warmth to the signal, either you like it or you don't. It sounds good, but a djm 800 does also....its just what you like most.
but it is said before....endless discussion....im just happy i will have both in three weeks...djm800 for mixing....x92 for hooking up to my laptop...
Jorrit    posted on 10-06-2006 10:53
Poster: MauriceForge
2 lead : as far as cd's  goes, when you are playing a cd there is already loss of sound quality because when the track is recorded
onto cd there are already conversions made so there is already loss, the only way you can hear everything an artist has put into a track is.......the one and only vinyl.
so basically the djm800 just prevents more loss of signal.
 
I read somewere that when a vinyl is pressed extreme high and low frequencies are cut out, because they can give annoying 'noise' on vinyl. When a CD is being made this doesn't happen, and even if it would: Legato link conversion.
Mod edit by Jorrit on 10-06-2006 10:53 (1%)
Frisbee    posted on 10-06-2006 11:07
quote:
Poster: Jorrit

I read somewere that when a vinyl is pressed extreme high and low frequencies are cut out, because they can give annoying 'noise' on vinyl. When a CD is being made this doesn't happen


Conclusion: you can't play annoying noises from vinyl but you can from cd...

You can burn the biggest crap on cd and play it without any problem. Like you said extreme frequencies, bad compression or even direct current. Things that would make a needle jump and go crazy. How do you think your speakers will react? Just like the needle...

User edit by Frisbee on 10-06-2006 @ 11:08:41 (2%)
Jorrit    posted on 10-06-2006 11:10
Poster: Frisbee
Conclusion: you can't play annoying noises from vinyl but you can from cd...

You can burn the biggest crap on cd and play it without any problem. Like you said extreme frequencies, bad compression or even direct current. Things that would make a needle jump and go crazy. How do you think your speakers will react? Just like the needle...

 
What is that for a conclusion Confused
The reason vinyl is cutted is because the needle pickes up noises you dont want to hear, a laser wouldn't do that.
And i didn't mean extreme frequencies as in far above and benieth human hearing levels, i meant around the extremes (a bit unclear)
Frisbee    posted on 10-06-2006 11:33
Yes i understand, but you have to follow basic audio rules when cutting vinyl (which is done by professionals). Cd has less limitations but can be abused very easy by amateur producers for example.
User edit by Frisbee on 10-06-2006 @ 11:37:19 (2%)
MauriceForge    posted on 10-06-2006 11:36
well that might be so, but a plack of vinyl is more musical then a cd, sure you can pump up the bass a lot more on a cd cause there ain't no needle, but question is does that shitload of bass sound betterConfused cause the artist hasn't put this into his track, you do, by twisting the lo eq...cause the artist recorded his track for you to play with the eq at 0

and what does legato does? is that for artist use before he records his track on cd? cause everytime you go from analogue to digital somewhere in the process something goes lost, however few people can actually hear it. so basically it isn't an issue. i just wanted to say that this happens.
and i dont' know if you have read the internet lately that the vinyl market is going like a rocket, and not just dance music but every type of music and why do you think this isConfused?  simply because vinyl sounds better and you get a nice piece of artwork. i know vinyl-cd is another discussion but, if you want to hear everything a artist has put into it....vinyl......
Jorrit    posted on 10-06-2006 12:09
Legato regenerates the frequenties that are lost during recording and copy'ing, but for the excact details you got to ask Lead.
BillyArd    posted on 30-06-2006 14:09
2 forge :Abslolutely true what you Say

Japanese vinyl pressing of classical music are more loved bij their listeners than the same piece of music burned on CD

Quote Jorrit:@ BillyArd, I did read the whole post, don't worry. But I don't think dat quality is something personal, a mixer has quality or it doesn't. So it may sound better to your ears, but the sound quality isn't inmediatly



Billy:Xone has analogue quality which i like better then sterile digits.
what did mean to say with your last  sentence ?
that my ears are fooling me !, i know really exactly whats the issue when we are talking about soundquality .
and what things should sound like
so that cant be the problem

And as you might now i,m not the only one who likes the analogue sound beter then digital.
Analogue is the stuff , still for me an d for lost of ather people.
In the analogue domain sound mangling can go further to a next level when you talk about sonic warmth, added harmonics, distortion etc , and these are essentials which are3 hust NOT possible in the digital domain.
Oke it,s possible..................via emulations.............so......................

Why do you think that an analogue synth is more loved  then a digital synth ?
because of its superb soundquality
it also wil cost you 3 times as much
:0
But off course it,s an endless discussion.
User edit by BillyArd on 30-06-2006 @ 14:14:55 (12%)
Jorrit    posted on 30-06-2006 14:23
It's an endless discussion wich is personal:
Xone has analogue quality which i like better then sterile digits.
 
You can't argue with that.
BillyArd    posted on 30-06-2006 14:42
Hahah jorrit may i quote you again , cause you are realy full of contradictions

quote Jorrit:a mixer has quality or it doesn't. So it may sound better to your ears, but the sound quality isn't inmediatly better.

Quote Billy:
Xone has analogue quality which i like better then sterile digits.


Quote Jorrit :
It's an endless discussion wich is personal:
quote:
Xone has analogue quality which i like better then sterile digits.
 
You can't argue with that.


Winking my eye


User edit by BillyArd on 30-06-2006 @ 14:42:41 (2%)
Jorrit    posted on 30-06-2006 14:44
I was quoting you to make clear it is a personal matter.
But I still think sterile sound is better, but that should be clear now. We can discuss about this for hours, but we wouldn't get anywhere.
(and above else: The sound difference is just a tiny part of the differences between the mixers)
Mod edit by Jorrit on 30-06-2006 14:45 (50%)
BillyArd    posted on 30-06-2006 14:58
1st quote Jorrit:quote Jorrit:a mixer has quality or it doesn't. So it may sound better to your ears, but the sound quality isn't inmediatly better.

2nd Quote Jorrit:It's an endless discussion wich is personal:

You can't argue with that.
quote:

1st and 2nd quote are totaly opposites of each other.
It isn`t a big issue , but i wanted to let you no the contradiction in these two sentences.
Happy, laughing
we`,ll quit about this
Happy, laughing
BillyArd    posted on 30-06-2006 14:59
quote J: (and above else: The sound difference is just a tiny part of the differences between the mixers)


Billy :But it is the most imported one above anything else!
Happy, laughing
User edit by BillyArd on 30-06-2006 @ 14:59:24 (1%)
Jorrit    posted on 30-06-2006 15:08
Poster: BillyArd
1st quote Jorrit:quote Jorrit:a mixer has quality or it doesn't. So it may sound better to your ears, but the sound quality isn't inmediatly better.

2nd Quote Jorrit:It's an endless discussion wich is personal:

You can't argue with that.
quote:

1st and 2nd quote are totaly opposites of each other.
It isn`t a big issue , but i wanted to let you no the contradiction in these two sentences.
Happy, laughing
we`,ll quit about this
Happy, laughing
 
Ah a get the point now. I didn't understand you, with al the quotes. (Don't know what i meant back then, its a while ago, but you get the point)(either it was a mistake in my english or i was just in a bad mood?:P)

quote J: (and above else: The sound difference is just a tiny part of the differences between the mixers)


Billy :But it is the most imported one above anything else!
 
I don't think so, mixers of this quality both have superb sound quality, and other features like effects are important for me when i choose a mixer.
Mod edit by Jorrit on 30-06-2006 15:08 (8%)
Winston    posted on 01-07-2006 01:51
If you got a few tt's or CDJ-1000's and you have to choose out of only one of those two mixers and nothing else, than with the DJM-800 you would get most features for your money in your set up.

If you already have one or two Pioneer EFX-1000 effectors, or planning to buy those, you should go for the Xone-92. That is if you want to have more features, not for the mixer only, but for your whole set up. Because the Xone 92 has 2 filters and 2 send/returns, and the DJM-800 only one of both. However I think the controls of the filter of the DJM-800 are very nice. I mean the sound colour knobs for each individual line channel. The both Xone 92 return channels also have 4 band EQ and are fader controlled. And that's a plus with regard to performance capabilities. But the whole set up becomes very expensive ofcourse.

For production purposes you should look at what sound you're looking for: clean and clear digital sound easier to accomplish with the DJM-800 or the warmth of analogue, which you can accomplish with both.

Just remember that a mixer is not the only component in the whole sound chain. So there is always room with both mixers to achieve any sound. Maybe MIDI will be in favour of one of both mixers. But I don't know that much about MIDI.

Personally I like both sounds, analogue and digital, it all depends on the mood or music style of the track if you should go for clear and crisp or warmth or maybe even distorted. I don't want a world without one of both.

That's why it is an endless discussions. What somebody likes is personal. But it is true, that with the facts and figures, you can compare both mixers with regard to sound quality.

You just have to recognize the difference between sound quality and personal sound taste.

There is really a huge difference between those two words. Just read again if you still can't see the difference.

A set up with good sound quality you can adjust pretty easily to your own taste. But a system with bad sound quality you can never adjust to your taste.

And you can adjust the original sound of the producer if you don't like the original sound. There is no law against that. And it's very hard for me to believe that you can ever hear the real original sound of an artist, except when you're in the same studio where it was recorded.

For above reasons I think the comparison of both mixers is an endless debate as I said before. It all depends on the requirements one needs to do the job, which always varies in different situations.

The DJM-800 has almost everything imaginable. But still not everyhting that exists. So there really still is no perfect mixer that has it all.
Tic Toc
User edit by Winston on 01-07-2006 @ 02:19:46 (94%)
teddyaakre    posted on 02-07-2006 01:51
This really is an endless discussion.. But when you look at the clubs that have the world's best sound systems.. They usually have the Xone..

For example Fabric which is claimed to have the world's best sound system..
This is what the main sound technician said “We love the Xone:92 because it’s got six channels on it,” urges Sanjeev....

He also said that no mixer is going to replace the Xone:92 in their main sound room or whatever i should call it :D

And yes this is a whole issue about prefrence but sound technicians seem to prefer the Xone's because of the sound.. and yes there are also a lot of clubs with Pioneer mixers.. But right now I'm talking about the ones with honored sound systems

gethigh    posted on 19-07-2006 22:21
one more thing about the xone why it is the best mixer

-in analog sound it is better than the djm, you usually dont use digital
-the xone has a midi controller, you can connect all kinds of midi controllers, you can connect midi controllers to play and produce live with ableton live, you can connect effectors, samplers, drum computers and all kinds of producing appliences
-you have the filters which I think are very handy to make your sets special, i think this is better than an effect unit, because effects will become anoying if you use them to much
-the 4eq is more sublime, you will need to get used to it i think
-faders are very good, the xfader is penny&giles
-and for the rest it has all the things you need

if you connect an efx1000 to it, i think the djm doesnt have much arguments accept that it is digital

i'm not saying the djm is a bad mixer, it is very good, but i like the xone more because i would use the functions the xone has more than the functions the djm has
Jorrit    posted on 19-07-2006 22:29
Poster: gethigh
-in analog sound it is better than the djm, you usually dont use digital
 
If you got CDJ-1000MK3's and a DJM-800 you should use digital! It's quality is superb...

-the xone has a midi controller, you can connect all kinds of midi controllers, you can connect midi controllers to play and produce live with ableton live, you can connect effectors, samplers, drum computers and all kinds of producing appliences
 
And the DJM-800 doesn't?


-you have the filters which I think are very handy to make your sets special, i think this is better than an effect unit, because effects will become anoying if you use them to much
 
IF you use them to much. The DJM-800 had the filters to...

I'm sorry, the argument of great analog sound quality is fine, but on effects and midi channels the 800 leaved the Xone in the dust! (The Xone has a advantage in their analog filters, but I don't think there wil be mutch people who notive the difference between analog filters and digital filters, with that comes the DJM-800 having LOADS of other effects and filters!)
Create your FREE ACCOUNT now !

Using an account on DJResource has a lot of advantages such as:
Adding Content, getting Notifications, Like content, Downloading and Uploading Images and much more.

 Sign Up

Create your account to get involved with the Community


78 Users online: 2 Guests (76 Unknown)*
Pages generated today : 3.002
Most users online this month : 158
Lifetime Pageviews : 188.656.608