About the PX5.Quote:
Originally Posted by emarx
Printable View
About the PX5.Quote:
Originally Posted by emarx
There are other differences....Quote:
Originally Posted by davnav
I've owned a Xone 92 since they were released and bought a few over the years. It's a sturdy mixer with analogue sound, the knobs are not plastic feel as many pioneers are.
BUT...
Aside to what has been mentioned on this thread, no one mentioned the parametric eq's with two mids. Have you ever played on a mixer with two mids? I don't know of another branded mixer that has such a great feature and when you have a main stage, when you twist those mids magic happens! Once you play like that for a while you realize some things that are fun and sound great, and without that, you cannot do what you want. I love those two mids and Allen & Heath are a brand i trust, get the 96. I'm looking to sell the 92's I have and upgrade myself to where your headed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
I'm looking to get a mixer and had my eye on the xone 96 for the extra channels and EQ, but what happens when you play out and they have Pioneer mixers at the venue?
It must be a bit hard having to play on something you are less familiar with. If you are practicing at home with 4 band EQ and then faced with 3 band in the club it must mean changing your mixing style on the night. Plus different FX and layout?
Do you take your own mixer? or do you just adjust to what they have?
I'm looking to start DJing/performing my own tracks - with a sort of hybrid setup using Traktor and Ableton and an X1 and probably something like an apc40 or maschine jam controller but it all starts to get a bit unwieldy to carry with you and bringing your own mixer just seems like going too far. They are pretty heavy for a start.
A mixer with built in soundcard at least reduces the need to bring your own soundcard and cables but then what if the drivers are different to what you have at home.
I wouldn't worry about playing out on the Pioneer.Quote:
Originally Posted by orbita
It's painfully obvious how to mix on one. The Xone 96 is a beast in comparison.
If you really wanted to become proficient at effectively using the DJM's effects, that would be a good use case for owning one.
Otherwise, I would take the Xone 96 any day.
For anyone considering a Xone 96, I've owned one for a year now and can only say that I'm very happy with my choice. I never mixed on a 4 way EQ before, but after a while getting used to it I absolutely love it and can make blends in a way that's impossible to do with a 3 way EQ. I noticed that especially in the low mid a lot of the heart of a track lies, and I can already blend a lot of the track without touching the bass.
I wouldn't worry also about mixing on a 3 EQ afterwards, it's much easier switching from 4 to 3 than the other way around.
in personally dont like the djm 900's, i preffer different mixers like the Xones or the DJM V10 which is to be said almost perfect and gives a nice kick back for pioneer against the xones
I own a DJM-900NXS2 and have recently had the privilege to spend a good amount of time playing on the Xone 96. Here are my thoughts and some info that I could add to the previous comments:
- Using the term 900 series is misleading. The sound quality of the 900 series up to the NXS2 was objectively inferior to the sound quality of the Xone mixers. This is no longer the case. Distortion and noise levels are actually lower in the NXS2 than the 96's, someone made a Youtube video comparing them with the proper instruments. The difference is in sound character, not sound quality. Just like analog amps, the Xone has its own character. I personally like it very much, but it's not a game changer for me, both sound great. (+1 Xone)
- The 4 band EQ on the Xone is absolutely brilliant. Even better than on the 92. For electronic music, especially if you play 3-4 decks, being able to separate the mid bands to reduce overlap or just capturing a precise part of the song, it is an absolute pleasure to use. For me personally, this is the selling point of the mixer. (+1 Xone)
- The channel fader curves on the Xone are a big flaw for me. Nothing happens until 90% and then it goes up real sharp. The curve selector just has worse options. It's really uncomfortable for me to use, I have to constantly steady my hand to make minute changes to control the mix. (+1 NXS2)
- The HPF / LPF / BPF? feature on the Xone is brilliant. The sound is beautiful, the resonance on it is much more pleasant for me than the NXS2. That being said, I generally dislike the filter resonance in 90% of the cases they are being used in mixes. On the other side, the NXS2's separated color and effects features are just mega powerful, very well thought out, a pleasure to use in general. They make the mixer a far more practical and complete package for me. (+1 NXS2)
- The Xone 96 is more unique and cooler. It's a pleasure to look at, to touch, to know. The NXS2 is still an elite student, but not as cool. (+1 Xone)
In conclusion, for me the NXS2 is an evident pick for practical reasons and for a lack of real weaknesses. But I have real feelings for the Xone 96 and whenever I get to play on one, not owning it just makes it that much more special. You can't go wrong with either.
Hahaha. Team A&H Here, welcome to DjF and I'm not even surprised, good review ;)
You get used to it, the curves are longer but exponential. It's designed so you can do some sharp cuts while retaining extra smoothness when needed. That said, once again someone who got blown away by that sound quality...Quote:
- The channel fader curves on the Xone are a big flaw for me. Nothing happens until 90% and then it goes up real sharp. The curve selector just has worse options. It's really uncomfortable for me to use, I have to constantly steady my hand to make minute changes to control the mix. (+1 NXS2)
Great review, thanks for that.
I've been through a bunch of mixers.. incl Ecler Nuo, Xone 62, DJM-800.. and now I have a 900nxs. I never had an original 900 or even played on one, but the 900nxs is quite superior to the 800 sound-wise, I really find very little to complain about with it.
Certainly my Xone 62 sounded better than the 800 (we a/b'd them at the time) as did the Ecler Nuo.. but I highly doubt that if I were to a/b the 900nxs there would be more than a subtle difference. nxs2 even less so. More of a difference in character than an actual "this one's clearly better"... Especially if you're playing CDJ's and have the decks connected with s/pdif, which I always do. If you're going into the sound system's processor with s/pdif as well then it becomes even more tough to say what's better as you're not actually using any of the D/A or A/D conversions or analog stages in the mixer or decks whatsoever.
And unless you are either playing on a hifi, at least somewhat expensive monitors or a really high end PA.. not just an expensive PA but one that's set up really well.. then I question whether there's really a quality problem with any of the top mixers these days.
So yea for me it really does come down to what's more fun (and effective) to mix on so far as the EQ's mainly.
I do like playing with the four EQ's but when you have the feel of the 3 EQ's on the Pioneer they are quite useable too...
TBH the Ecler EQ's remain my favorite. Rane is also great. I only played on a Rane 68 once but it was excellent.