Which mixer for a bedroom DJ: Xone 92 or Xone DB2?

[Ever]

I record a podcast once in a blue moon that typically vary from deep house to techno and tech house. I'm not an audiophile but would prefer use an "ideal" setup if that makes sense.

I use a pair of CDJ-900's, a Rane mixer from the 90's and two studio monitors. I currently record using 1/4-to-1/8th into the headphone jack and finally into Audacity, but I'd like to revisit this if it would give me better quality. I'd say the most important thing is sound quality - something that will give my sets the best opportunity to shine.

Some thoughts:

• The DB2 would allow me to keep things digital throughout the entire chain. How much better is this than having to use analog (RCA etc) on the 92?
  
• The DB2 has a built-in soundcard. Will this be any better or worse than a buying external soundcard with the 92?
  
• I'll probably never use more than two channels, but I do have two 1200's that I might use one day
  
• Are these the two mixers I should be looking at? I've eyed the Xone 42

[SlvrDragon50]

TBH, you can't go wrong with either one... Both are fantastic.

I loved my Xone 42, but I really like my DJM800. That said, I use my RMX-1000 as my effector now and never really use my DJM800 effects much besides channel FX.

External vs internal soundcard isn't going to make that much of a diff.

[Ever]

Thanks SlvrDragon.

I actually eyed the 42 as well. Any thoughts on it versus the other two, at least in relation to what I'd be using it for?

[Kwal]

42 if on a budget

92 if you have money to spend and want pure quality

DB2 is dope too, but I personally favor the 92.

[SlvrDragon50]

I've never used the 92 so I can't really comment on it. Or the DB2.

That said, I imagine the 42 isn't that different from the 92 other than 3 vs 4-band EQ. DB FX are supposed to be amazing as well.

[Thumper]

92 has a lovely sound. Wish I had the time to use it more often. Also, the filters are just lush.

[Ever]

Thanks all. It sounds pretty down the middle. At least for my personal needs.

My final thought has to do with sound quality. I'm curious if recording from a fully-digital setup would yield a higher-quality mix than an analog recording.

For example, here are two possible signal paths. I'm curious if the DB2 would sound better:

• DB2: CDJ-900 digital out -> DB2 digital in -> DB2 usb to computer -> Audacity
• 92: CDJ-900 rca out -> DB2 rca in -> DB2 rca or 1/4" out to an external soundcard -> usb to computer

What's more is that some people say the 92 naturally sounds better than the DB2. But on the flipside, the DB2 can stay digital. So when it comes to recording from either of these setups, which one would win?

[Kwal]

I don't think the difference between recording will be very drastic. Probably won't even be noticeable.

[Thumper]

Thanks all. It sounds pretty down the middle. At least for my personal needs.

My final thought has to do with sound quality. I'm curious if recording from a fully-digital setup would yield a higher-quality mix than an analog recording.

For example, here are two possible signal paths. I'm curious if the DB2 would sound better:

• DB2: CDJ-900 digital out -> DB2 digital in -> DB2 usb to computer -> Audacity
• 92: CDJ-900 rca out -> DB2 rca in -> DB2 rca or 1/4" out to an external soundcard -> usb to computer

What's more is that some people say the 92 naturally sounds better than the DB2. But on the flipside, the DB2 can stay digital. So when it comes to recording from either of these setups, which one would win?

My current set up (when I have the time and space to actually set it up) is two SC2900s into a 92, which goes into my MOTU Ultralite Mk3 and then recorded into Audacity or Ableton, usually Ableton.

The sound is absolutely spot on so don't worry about that. It's about a thousand times nicer sounding than if I played the same tracks with Traktor.

Either mixer will be good. To be honest, I doubt you will notice much audible difference in quality either way so it really comes down to what one you fancy the look of most. I'll just say this: There is a reason so many DJs love the 92. Nothing wrong with the DB2 from what I've heard (never used one myself, just seen it in action) but the Xone 92 is one of the best DJ mixers ever made. It's made its bones a million times over and it's still going strong.

[SlvrDragon50]

I think you just need to figure out how much you want effects. That'll be the real decision maker there.

If you can't live without FX besides your filter, go with the DB2. Otherwise, go with the 92. If you feel you need FX later on down the road, pick up a RMX-1000.