PDA

View Full Version : DJM-909 VS Rane 62 My Personal Direct Comparison



djslik
10-10-2012, 09:49 PM
I just got my Rane 62 an hour ago and hooked up as soon as I got home. I currently own and was planning on selling my DJM-909, but wanted to do an A/B comparison of the mixers first to make sure. So here are my immediate observations so far:

1. Weight- The Rane 62 is drastically lighter than my Pioneer DJM-909. I've heard that this is due to the fact that the 909 has a true pre-amp built in.

2. Crossfader- I think the crossfader is very good on the Rane 62. I will admit that it seems to be faster in movement compared to my DJM-909. But the 909 seems to have a better curve control including gap control for the fader. My cuts seem crisper and tighter on the Rane 62, but I think I have faster/more uniform flares on the Pioneer. I will attribute this to having the gap set accurately to my scratching style. The Rane allows me to have faster/more uniform and crisp crabs. I'm still up in the air in regards to who has the better crossfader for scratching.

3. Ease of Use- The Rane 62 beats the DJM-909 in regards to ease of use in so many ways even without the Serato Integration. The grounding knob is easier to use and is well placed on top of the RCA's instead of below. It's awesome only having to run the turntable directly into the mixer instead of a serato box. The removable plug is genius compared to the 909 fixed cord.

4. Build Quality - The Pioneer Spanks the Rane 62 in terms of fit, finish, overall feeling of durabilty, and even the knobs, switches, etc feel more refined. The Rane 62 feels somewhat more less refined from the light feel of the knobs to the wide open slots for the faders with no felt protection from dust.

5. Sound Quality Analog - Now this is where I'm completely blown away by the Pioneer DJM-909. I played a jazz record through the Rane 62 and it sounded somewhat hollow, muddy, lifeless. I thought maybe the record just sounded that way. I then hooked up the Pioneer DJM-909 and played the same record and it was night and day. The sound was crisp, accurate, and dynamic. I was actually shocked that the Rane 62 didn't produce even close to the same sound as the Pioneer.

Now in most ways the Rane 62 is the mixer to have, but the one glaring issue that I personally have with it is it's lack of focus on playing vinyl records. I collect records and listen to them regularly, and for me to sell off my beloved DJM-909 would be a disaster since I would only have my Rane 62. Because of this I have pulled my for sale ad on my DJM-909 and will be testing sound quality over the weekend.

I would guess that most people would use the mixer exclusively with Serato.

Nicadraus
10-11-2012, 01:41 AM
Good decision in keeping the 909. I wouldn't sell it too if it was mine.

Congrats on the 62 by the way. :tup:

djromanj
10-11-2012, 05:24 AM
Sweet review, your post has definitely re-affirm my decision on getting the rane 62

[O/][iii][O/]
10-11-2012, 06:01 AM
Nice review. Reminds me of another one I once read where the author compared his Pontiac Aztek to his Porsche Cayenne.

djslik
10-11-2012, 12:57 PM
I've hooked up everything to my Crown Amps running on XLR's and I can confirm that the sound quality of the Rane amp when playing vinyl is not on par with the Pioneer 909, not even close.

This should matter a lot for any Vinyl Enthusiast that gives a shit about sound quality.

Now I got off the phone with Rane and spoke to someone about the crossfader lag cut adjust. It's not available period on the Rane 62 so I'm out of luck on that one. Their answer is to bend the magnetic sensor with a Pen. I don't think I'm going to risk stress fracturing a crucial component on my mixer. The pioneer does have more adjustability, but it's not a deal breaker. I'm getting used to the Rane fader and I think my cuts are getting cleaner and cleaner so it's just a matter of getting used to it.

Now the Rane 62 is the beast of all SERATO mixers with so much functionality built in it's stupid. I'm still trying to figure out how to midi map the built in serato effects, but so far this thing is the dopest mixer period to have for gigs.

The Pioneer DJM-909 is built to the same ruggedness as Technics 1200's with amazing sound quality and a well engineered design, definitely a mixer worth owning.

akswun
10-11-2012, 02:28 PM
I think there's a reason why there are such few used 909's on the market for sale compared to other mixers.

djslik
10-11-2012, 02:53 PM
Here's a quick snapshot of the mixers being tested today. The 06 is in there for good measure haha.

http://imageshack.us/a/img717/5189/mixers.jpg

djpenguin
10-11-2012, 06:23 PM
The Rane 62 is drastically lighter than my Pioneer DJM-909. I've heard that this is due to the fact that the 909 has a true pre-amp built in.

I'd recommend you not take any gear advice from whomever told you that, as it's hilariously incorrect. A solid-state stereo preamp circuit weighs no more than a few grams.

oliosky
10-11-2012, 06:37 PM
I'd recommend you not take any gear advice from whomever told you that, as it's hilariously incorrect. A solid-state stereo preamp circuit weighs no more than a few grams.

I'm sure he really appreciates the asshole tone as well as the arrogant advice.

djslik
10-11-2012, 07:01 PM
haha...he's probably right about the weight.

I read that on the serato forum while researching the Rane 62 before deciding to purchase. So I don't have a way of confirming the reason for the increased weight. The perceived benefit is that the heavier components in the Pioneer equate to better quality, or more robust components.

TheRabbitMonk
10-12-2012, 12:45 PM
so what would you advise to get?

i'm tossing up the idea of a 909 or 57sl.

djslik
10-12-2012, 12:56 PM
That's a really loaded question.

1. Do you scratch
2. Do you scratch on vinyl
3. How important is Serato Integration to you?

If vinyl isn't your forte IE you listen to vinyl, and even play out with vinyl there is no reason not to go the Rane route. With better integration in Serato it's a clearly better mixer in that regard.

The Pioneer is a great mixer as well, but moving forward it might be easier to get your Rane serviced than the pioneer if anything does go wrong with it.

TheRabbitMonk
10-12-2012, 02:19 PM
not loaded mate.
these are the 2 i'm thinking of at the moment or possibley a 800(i've still got a djm 600 and what i noticed with the pioneer mixer the cross faders and up faders are pretty crappy.) do you think it's worth getting a innofader installed on my 600? not sure if possible but keep hearing it mentioned on here.
i do scratch, i also mix dubstep and other random stuff.
I do prefer vinyl as thats what i learned on.
i also use serato, but only had it a few months.

djslik
10-12-2012, 02:23 PM
The best advice is to test out the mixers personally. I know it's tough getting your hands on them, but it's the only way to know for sure.

I just checked and didn't see the DJM-600 on that list, but maybe the universal innofader might work.

I know it's not helping any but I was never disappointed in my 909 as a mixer.

The Rane 62 is just a beast in regards to it's integration with Serato, and that is what I've been using exclusively for the last couple years.

Some more pluses for the Rane 62, might apply to the 57 as well.

1. Amazing headphone cue setup vs the pioneer. I can actually mix in headphone completely without having to use external monitors. Never really liked doing that on my pioneer.
2. Midi Mapping is a godsend for the 62
3. 2 USB is great for gigs
4. Time synched effects is magical
5. My midi map is as follows

Zone 3 Loops and loop rolls on cue buttons
Zone 4 DJ-FX

Dicers are still used for cues just cuz I like the big buttons.

TheRabbitMonk
10-12-2012, 02:28 PM
i also have a Technic SH-EX1200 i use for scratching.
i was weighing up selling that my 600, my cdj 1000. depending what i got mixer wise and my sl2.
there is a shop near me what use to be shit but new managemnet etc. it's now actually a crisp place with mixers set up etc.
so i'll bounce down there and try and get a play.

can't innofade a 600. so might need to start selling.
cheers for the help all the same.

VjQue
10-16-2012, 11:32 AM
He decided to sell his 909 after he got the right setting on the 62 from us on the serato site.

His sensitivity for phono was set low in setup should of been at 9.5 or what ever needles he was using.

The 909 can't touch the 62 .

The 62 sound is more cleaner but the 909 is louder but not a clean sound.

His review on serato site made more since cause every one that has a 62 and Rane/serato and he got the right help.

On here only a few own the 62

djslik
10-16-2012, 12:49 PM
Actually, the 909 is still for sale haha.

But just to clarify a couple of points. I have been doing extensive testing between the 2 mixers and still feel the Pioneer Edges the Rane 62 in Vinyl Performance. The Rane edges the Pioneer in all other aspects including Digital Music Playback.

I only decided to sell the 909 because I'm picking up a Budget Audiophile quality Phono Pre-Amp. ART Electronics DJPREII Phono Prem-Amp to be exact. I'm going to test that against my Pioneer and the Rane 62 and I'm hoping that this $40.00 pre-amp will blow both these mixers out the water with vinyl use.

There is no point in keeping a 909 for pure record listening, it's like using a Benz to drive down your driveway to a mailbox, pretty much overkill. The pre-amp should do me just fine for my listening room.

DJNR
10-16-2012, 12:51 PM
Don't worry about it dude, VjQue is a die hard Serato fan boy.

djslik
10-16-2012, 01:06 PM
I can understand why people love Rane and I definitely am on their side at the moment, but I don't like to bash any company based on who they are. I think it is more fair to compare apples to apples as much as possible so other people out there reading can have more unbiased information about the hardware being discussed.

There might be some people on this board that actually are audiophile types that love listening to records with higher end speakers and even tube amps and pre amps.