Xone 62 is a classic...same for the 92.
Xone 62 is a classic...same for the 92.
Really? My Denon mixer would sell for exactly the price I paid for it NIB with skin saver and some other stuff. Not sure what else you're referring to. A lot of Denon stuff costs less to begin with, though, and their older models are discontinued. Discontinued SC3900 is very long in the tooth and still seems to go for about $400 a deck, and I think those cost like $700 new originally. First CDJ2000 went for $2100 MSRP and fetches around a grand a unit. SC5000 is the new Denon/InMusic model and used ones seem to go for just a couple hundred less than new, which is comparable to what previously-owned NXS2 line appears to go for . I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference. I do think Pioneer got the minimum necessary features right earlier than Denon on the player front, and in spite of that I think that, overall, Denon users get more for their money. I also have a problem with some of Denon/InMusic's customer service and communication, but a separate issue from the value thing. If they'd make it as customizable as DJ software in some respects (like hiding and turning shit off), I'd probably move over to the new Denon stuff. Right now I suffer with Pioneer and less suffering with a mix of old Denon and super cheap & awesome Hanpin stuff. Oh, and Numark. I still have some Numark stuff. Rane & Mackie... but those are just mixers.Originally Posted by Johnny Drama
Last edited by Reticuli; 08-22-2017 at 08:51 PM.
Not with new inMusic Denon, just look at how much money is being spent on superstar DJ to change their riders and overall marketing. Not to mention how much money from each unit will be paid to Serato for SDJ support and later probably the same to NI for Traktor support (if they become permanent in booths around the world). Pioneer units are not just expensive because of Pioneer tax but also because the price includes money paid for software support to Serato & NI.
Anyway to answer, they have started spending much more on marketing and their products are simplified compared to previous generations. Money for that has to come sooner or later from pockets of consumers.
Depends where you sell them. A good condition pair of SC3900 you can get the same or higher % of original price that the equivalent Pioneer (no other moving platter single deck player in the market and not a replacement in sight from Denon). Also, the newer Denon units and marketing has increased the interest in Denon products, even the older ones. Too bad older Denon mixers did not get updated drivers for Sierra support.
Not sure what point you're making here. So what if they're paying for sponsorship and promotion? That's how Pioneer got to where they are now. Shit ton of promotion, sponsorships, and free gear to clubs (especially when the CDJ1000mk2 and DJM1000 came out). You're still getting way more for your money with even the InMusic/Denon stuff. The NXS2 and the new Denon players, for instance, aren't even in the same league. And InMusic is upping its sponsorship and promotions. Yet the SC5000 costs less than the NXS2.
Compare the price of SC2900 and SC5000. That price difference is what is paying the all the marketing, superstar DJ's, free units to festivals and the software support. Your money. What's the point of tearing down Pioneer from no.1 spot and then letting another money hungry company charge us for their overblown marketing?
When you compare it with Pioneer everything is better value for money, that's not what's questionable. I'm comparing it with previous Denon. Where they went with inovative features and high build quality to gain customers.
Maybe, but impossible to quantify on the outside and basically a moot point. Denon didn't have a proper carefree network link or quad core processor before. So they've met and exceeded prior Pioneer stuff and at a lower price point. They could be forced to charge more for all this promo stuff they're doing, but they often overly focused on features that were not core stuff that met minimum necessary feature sets. I mean, all that fancy LED ring stuff on the SC2900 and you still couldn't have more than one USB drive shared over the network at once. Their top line mixer was also a particular exception on their MSRPs. Not cheap, though it's still advanced and feature-rich. I understand now what you mean, but the Denon DJ branding isn't going to last and their products aren't going to gain market share if they don't promote. It's possible they're passing on this cost to customers, but it also wouldn't entirely surprise me if InMusic is using Denon DJ as a kind of marquee branding and absorbing some of this additional cost... especially with what happened to Akai and M-Audio reputations under them. That's what I'd do. Considering the x1800 appears to be a souped-up version of the X7 prototype, I suspect this new line from them was in the works at Numark and larger InMusic for some time and they just needed to give these products a new label. More speculation, though.
I'm sorry but the biggest complaint about previous Denon players was the small screen. You know, the thing that is "core stuff that meet minimum neccessary feature". For the price difference between it and Pioneer every user could have bought a wi-fi router and a ipad to get that big touchscreen for browsing (you know, that thing with SC5000 that inMusic now heavily advertises). Not sure why the LED ring troubles you, it's a fucking neccessity and since Pioneer puts theirs inside the platter, the outside was a logical placement for Denon.
I think you are the only person that thinks X1800 is a finished X7. It's literally a simplified X1700 (utility features) with logical upgrades from previous generation of Denon mixers. I understand that the overall aesthetics appear very inMusic-like but you seem like a person that can look beside the paint and curved sides, I really don't know what points you to the Numark X7 more than the X1700. Maybe you have no experience with previous Denon mixers?
The small screens without the moving waveform never bothered me. Maybe the big screens with the moving waveform is what helped Pioneer convince producers who don't know how to DJ to pretend to be DJs, and may have also helped with the recent trend of lazy big name DJs getting paid a lot of money just to hit play.
I have a dn-x1700. You're saying the x1800 is SHARC inside, with discrete design mic, phono, and headphone sections and twin power supplies? That would be great. My favorite aspect to it, though, is the optional resampling frequencies of the DSP and how it's resampling. Definitely resamples different than other mixers.
The problem with a mixer like the DB4, all technical considerations aside, is that it's going right up against Pioneer in the club style digital effects mixer category.. and it's from a company who's main supporters are analog guys. Like it or not, Pioneer is the standard mixer that clubs and sound companies are going to look at first for that type of mixer.. it's about rider friendliness more than anything. If you look at other mixers that have made a real dent in the market, you'll see that they are selling to different demographics, eg:
Allen & Heath traditional xone series appeals to the analog guys who want a club style mixer.
Rane for turntablists and for the rotary.
Denon mainly sells to cost conscious mobile DJs, home setups, and smaller places that are not concerned about what their DJs want.
Actually Rane is the only company that's managed to break out of their niche somewhat.. the Rane 64 and 68 seem to be keeping a buzz going, how many they are selling is another story. But I think that they managed to leverage their turntablist appeal by selling a really great Traktor Scratch solution...
I think Denon became the cost conscious choice with stripped down models like the 1600 and the SC2900 player. They should have just stuck to their guns with the 1700 and come out with an SC3900 successor. Oh well. Competition is good and there's more of it now even if there are promo costs and some cost conscious DJs are miffed at either that or ruining the spirit of the brand. Low cost, high cost... I want customization and great sound, which is why the DB4 appeals to me. DB2 sounded very nice, and DB4 has tons of options. I just think it's a bit of a letdown being the last generation iLive internals from their pro line. I wanna DB3 with dLive inside.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks