Xone 22 vs xone 23 - wich should I buy?

I read all the information about this two mixers (including the topics in this great forum) and i just cant decide.
The intended use is vinyl mixing (no timecode).

This are the things i like about the 23:
- filter/cue bottons placement, seems more comfy (and the actual presence of the cue botton in each channel btw, in the 22 is just a knob for both of them)
- line/phono knobs instead of bottons
- resonance knob
- mic imput and knobs on top
- the placement of the fx loop on/off botton, which i think i'm gonna use, but not a 100% sure
- the possibility of purchasing it new
- its black (as my turntables)
- on/off botton

Things i like about the 22:
- cheaper (but only available used)
- longer faders (can someone confirm this? I speak for what I saw on photos)
- general construction quality seems to be better (once again, speaking only by the photos I saw)
- no fucking wings
- did i said cheaper?
- did i said no wings?

The fx loop on/off botton on the 22 is way to close to the master gain knob and it's a botton I tend to press very quickly and may be violently

I don't like the overall look of neither of the two, the 23 at least is black and has all the controls on top but the 22 has no wings. Audio-quality-wise I cant tell because i couldnt test them and also i cant figure out if in the future the x2 series (22, 42, 92) is going to be "hyped" or is going to be seen as the old/worse version (this matter because of the resale possibilities and i know is an entry level-cheap mixer but i want to take all matters in consideration). I forgot to mention that the overall quality construction seems to be better on 22, specially im worried about the "sides" of the mixer or "the walls" so to speak that seems to be very thin on the 23.

If someone tested both of them and can tell me if there is any good reason not to buy the 23 or viceversa i would be very glad! Sorry if there are mistakes, english is my second language.

If you have the money buy the 23. The only thing I don't like on it is the short upfaders and small eq knobs (who the fuck has such small hands?).

the 23 is weak compared to the 22 in my opinion. i had the 22, bought a 23 and sold the 23 a month later..

the only downfall to the 22 is the filter pop. the 23 has small faders, the vu meters are set up differently, its cramped. the headphone cues were set up better on the 22 also allowing you to measure in on how you wanted the balance of the signal to flow in your headphones instead of just having an on/off cue per channel which doesnt let you dial it in exactly how you want it.

the only advantage the 23 has in my opinion besides no filter pop is the on/off switch.. the 22 doesnt have one and i have to unplug it when im done

thanks guys, the choice became easier when a great deal for a 23 showed up, i'll meet the seller tomorrow and if every thing is ok we are gonna trade his 23 for an old behringer mixer of mine. i'll let you know mi opinion of the 23 after some testing, thanks again!

Is the vu meter on the 23 showing master level only and no channel levels?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by electroshock

Is the vu meter on the 23 showing master level only and no channel levels?

---

Mine does that. Not sure why.

Maybe when you press the channel cue the meter switches to channel level?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by electroshock

Maybe when you press the channel cue the meter switches to channel level?

---

I tested my unit very quickly and i noticed the vu meters act as a stereo vumeter for the master channel indeed, i didn't thought of this, but i found it very probably (because of the "cue" sign below the meters) , gonna test that later when i get home.

Some of the things i like, in case someone is in the same doubt i was:
- the overall feeling of the knobs is great, same as all the other allen heath mixers and controllers i used
- filter super fun (although almost the same filter in the 22)
- the two imput knobs per channel, super handy, although they could have labeld them as "phono-line" instead of "imput 1 - imput 2" and "imput 3 - imput 4", since the imputs are not switchable between phono-line and line-line configuration there is no point in labeling that way. Im gonna put some tape in that part and write it with a marker or something like that.
- the layout for all the knobs and buttons is great
- the bulding quality is great, all my fears where unfounded

I dont like the look of the mixer but i dont like the 22 either, although im getting used to it. And the faders are very tight, i like them much more loose but that is a personal thing, i like them almost as loose as a crossfader (the xone k2 faders work this way and i love it).

The send return seems to be useless as I read elsewhere. Can't be used well with Traktor fx or Pio rmx box.

It doesnt have a D/W knob, that would be very usefull, but for the price range its a good thing to have a fx loop at all, and to be fair, almost every FX unit has a dedicated D/W knob or some kind of level control. As for the rest its just a standard FX loop, i tested with a guitar pedal and worked well, i didnt try with traktor because im using it with vinyl, but can test it as well.

edit: i just read a topic in the allen heath forum about this (i assume the same topic you read) and now understand the problem. The pedal i use can be set to deliver only wet signal and then i use the level knob to control the amount of FX, working this way i dont have any unwanted dry signal leaking through the FX return. But if your fx unit cant be set to "only wet signal mode" then you'll have to put the D/W knob in the unit to a 100% in order to preserve your dry signal (track) volumen, but then you dont have any D/W knob to control your FX amount i.e. you dont have any way to engage your fx in a subtle manner or to control the fx amount in any way, as said in the AH forum. This depends on your unit, luckily its not a problem to me and im pretty sure that there is a way around this in traktor, but cant speak for the pioneer unit. Gonna test in traktor later.

Please do test it. I think of the Audio A6 send return routing. I'm considering this mixer in combination with X1, but maybe the Ecler Nuo 2.0 is better?

Ok, so i did some testing and its not that bad at all, in fact it can be done. Im gonna try to explain my process but be patient because as i said before english is my second language and this is very technical.
I'm not familiar with the audio 6, but I tried to replicate a similar setup to yours and for your gear I can assume you're gonna use traktor 2 decks, so i setup my motu ultralite mk3 and used the deck A and B in traktor for tracks (no TT's) and the controller doesn't really matter for this example.
To get this going you need to have two stereo outputs in your audio interface to send the track decks into the mixer, an available stereo imput where you are gonna plug in the FX send of the mixer and one more stereo output in the interface where you are gonna plug in your FX return of the mixer (i don't know if the A6 has that many imputs and outputs, you tell me).
Then comes the configuration in traktor, i'm sure there is a better and simpler way to do this since i'm no traktor expert, but for the purpouse of demonstrate that the audio routing in the mixer is ok, this works.
As said before, deck A and B are track decks, then I set the deck C in traktor as a live imput deck and in the imput routing of traktor you set to deck C the imputs of your interface that are receiving audio from the FX send of the mixer and then in the output routing you set deck A and A as you would do normally and you set in deck C the channels of the interface that send audio to the FX return of the mixer.
That done, you assign one FX unit in traktor only to the deck C and you set that unit to a 100% wet.
That solves the problem of having dry signal leaking through the FX return of the mixer (cause you are in 100% wet mode, of corse), now you only have to controll the amount of FX that you want in the mix and you cant do this with the cannel C fader since traktor is set into external mixing mode but you still have the deck gain knob that is a full kill when fully counterclockwise, so there you have it, if you are using a controller-based setup you can map that knob anywhere you like and this works perfectly. This done you can hide back deck C and D and it's ready to go. This done there is cero dry signal leaking, no volume bump of any king and there aren't unwanted effects.
Must say again that im sure there is a simpler way to do this, I did cero reserch and this was what i could pull out from my memory, but traktor has to have a way to set up a FX unit to process audio from an external source and in that mode it would be logical that you could set it as a unit that only delivers the wet/affected by the effect signal and in that case "D/W knob" should be just a level knob.
I say traktor has to have this because this is something that in hardware world exists and its known as a parallel FX loop (i.e. a FX loop that treats dry signal and wet signal separately), if it doesnt have it, you can always do as i did. And if it doesnt take for ever, im gonna try to upload a demonstration video, but my internet connection it's not the best.

For last, this was maybe what got confused the guy on AH forum in the first place (at least it got me confused for a while): in the mixer, the way to assign the channels to the FX loop is hitting the filter button on each channel, the thing is that the filter doesnt have an off button, so the only way to bypass the filter is to have it set as a low pass and the cutoff freq in 20kHz or to have it set as high pass and the cutoff freq in 20hz. What happens is that if you use the filter, you probably have the resonance set to a relatively high value so that is what adds volume when you hit the filter button to send that track to the external unit, the fact that resonance accentuate (i.e. makes louder) whatever frequency you set with the cutoff. So the proper way to use only the external FX unit is to set the resonance in cero and the frequency in 20Hz or 20kHz depending on the type of filter you use (must say, it took me a few moments to pull that one out).

As for the pioneer FX unit, i cant tell but im pretty sure it has to be a way around as well as there is in traktor.

Hope this helps and sorry again for the bad english and for my google chrome auto-correct that changes some words to my native language.

The ecler nuo 2.0 has a dedicated FX send knob per channel which would certainly solve your problem. In the other hand, it doesn't come with the classic AH filter (or any filter at all). In that matter it's just a personal choice, for the construction and audio quality i can't speak.

About the vumeters, when you hit any cue button the meters switch from L-R master out meters to L-R cue channel meters, in other words if you got one channel with audio coming in and you hit the cue button, both meters light up, there is no way to assign one meter to each channel.

Thanks for checking. A6 has the option of fx send return, it has third pair of ins/outs besides those for dvs, but the article explaining the routing is gone from their site (?).
What do you use to control the Traktor fx? I'm weighting between fx mixer and regular one + Traktor fx (X1). I like the modular approach better but the send return implementation on the Xone 23 worries me. How is it different from the DJM send return where there's also no regulation like on the Eclers? Btw is the Ecler send return proper, issues free?

Im not sure if im getting your doubt rigth.
About the DJM two channel mixers from pioneer, they don't have a FX loop, the DJM 250 doesnt have effects at all and the 350 and 400 have internal digital effects (more limited than traktor FX units), but they dont have a FX loop to route the audio through a external FX unit. The bigger-4channel versions do have a loop and proper controls but it's a whole other price range.

About the ecler, i never had one in my hands, but for what i saw in pics it should work well.

About the effects on the mixer vs "regular mixer"+traktor (if i got this right) I must say that if you are already using traktor to play the tracks and you want to use some kind of digital effect unit, the simplest/easiest way is to just use the traktor FX units before things get out of the PC and into the mixer. I mean, if you are going to use traktor, no matter where you get your effects from, you need a controller (lets say the X1) to play/pause/browse/loop your tracks, once you are at that point, using the traktor FX units with the X1 is the logical thing to do, then audio goes out the computer through the A6 into the mixer. With this setup you dont need any FX loop in your mixer or any strange routing of any kind, just traktor>A6>mixer and effects are being applied to the tracks before they get out the computer (and its a pretty standard and well known setup).
It's a different story if you are not playing your tracks from traktor or if you are using an external FX unit, and i did the previous testing to emulate those situations, but if you are going to play traktor 2 decks with traktor FX units then any 2 channel mixer will work regardless the FX loop.
In my opinion, xone 23 (or 22 as well) it's still a good choice cause all the audio remain analog, the pioneer mixers are digital so you have digital audio in traktor that converts to analog in the A6 that converts to digital in the mixer in that converts to analog in the mixer out, and that many A/D conversions is not a good thing, but in the end its a personal choice (before you ask, i dont know if the ecler is analog or digital).

To control traktor FX units, in my latest setup I was using a xone k2 with custom mappings in combination with a Akai APC40 mk2 and a 4 channel mixer.

Thanks. I'll break it down as simple as I can. Need comparison of sound quality (and other aspects worth mentioning) between:

Traktor live input + Traktor FX via Xone 23
VS
Pio DJM and its FX


So,
real vinyl played through Traktor with post fader application of Traktor FX
VS
Real vinyl played through DJM mixer and its FX.

I need post fader routing due to use of echo, delay and similar.

Ok, now it's much more clear. Traktor FXs are better and more versatile than the ones on the two channel DJMs, no doubt about that, BUT if you are playing real vinyl, a mixer with on board effects or a standalone effects unit is so much simpler... the pc+traktor+audio interface+controller just for add some effects is a lot of work and you are adding a lot of points of failure in the chain, for me is not worth the effort, as you said I would give a chance to the DJM mixers and also read the pionneer RMX manual, if you can kill the dry signal in the unit or somehow set it to be used in parallel loop FX it'll fit your setup.

About the pre/post fader issue, in the xone 23 the filter/loop assign is independent of the fader position.

I'm getting Traktor for the DVS, its fx are a bonus that I'm exploring if it's worth using. I'll play combination of real and timecode vinyl and real vinyl will be played as live input. I'm thinking that can't be worse than a DJM mixer regarding sound quality since it's also doing AD/DA, just as Traktor with the live input. With this combination there's the option for full analog chain in case I don't use Traktor fx, while getting a digital mixer makes it impossible. That's why I like modular. Seems that only thing that screws it is the S/R implementation on the Xone 23 and I see no other analog 2ch mixer with S/R except for the Ecler Nuo 2.0 which to me is still unconfirmed in this regard.

Now I get it, very very nice set up! You can always read the manual/user guide on the ecler, my instinct tells me it's just what you need but obviously I can't confirm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by electroshock

I see no other analog 2ch mixer with S/R except for the Ecler Nuo 2.0 which to me is still unconfirmed in this regard.

---

It annoys me to hell that I have to keep on pointing out the Denon X600

I didn't even consider it because I was looking for an analog mixer, if that's not a problem It seems to have everything anybody could want from a 2 channel mixer, that's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlayForMoney

It annoys me to hell that I have to keep on pointing out the Denon X600

---

It's not analog afaik, otherwise great mixer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kwal

the 23 is weak compared to the 22 in my opinion. i had the 22, bought a 23 and sold the 23 a month later..

the only downfall to the 22 is the filter pop. the 23 has small faders, the vu meters are set up differently, its cramped. the headphone cues were set up better on the 22 also allowing you to measure in on how you wanted the balance of the signal to flow in your headphones instead of just having an on/off cue per channel which doesnt let you dial it in exactly how you want it.

the only advantage the 23 has in my opinion besides no filter pop is the on/off switch.. the 22 doesnt have one and i have to unplug it when im done

---

I played on the 22 once and hated it (especially compared to the 92 and 42). The 23 is clearly better to me. But all in all for an affordable 2-channel-mixer there's nothing that can beat the Ecler Nuo 2.0.

Unfortunately the Ecler Nuo is quite hard to get a hold of in the US.

Here's the article describing how to use Traktor fx with send return: https://support.native-instruments.c...cles/209590489
Would be helpful if @jjjjuan or someone else test it with the Xone 23 and report back.

Regarding the xone 23 fx loop and external fx unit, I need opinion on what is causing the problem described here http://xoneforum.allen-heath.com/for...ts-send-return , a sudden volume increase when ext on is engaged and phasing.
jjjjuan previously said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjjjuan

For last, this was maybe what got confused the guy on AH forum in the first place (at least it got me confused for a while): in the mixer, the way to assign the channels to the FX loop is hitting the filter button on each channel, the thing is that the filter doesn't have an off button, so the only way to bypass the filter is to have it set as a low pass and the cutoff freq in 20kHz or to have it set as high pass and the cutoff freq in 20hz. What happens is that if you use the filter, you probably have the resonance set to a relatively high value so that is what adds volume when you hit the filter button to send that track to the external unit, the fact that resonance accentuate (i.e. makes louder) whatever frequency you set with the cutoff. So the proper way to use only the external FX unit is to set the resonance in cero and the frequency in 20Hz or 20kHz depending on the type of filter you use (must say, it took me a few moments to pull that one out).

---

Now is the bolded part the final solution for sure? If not, I'm thinking in this direction: I see the Ecler Nuo 2.0 has send level gain so if that solves the problem a gain level attenuator can be added on the Xone 23 send and regulate it. Something like this http://www.fostexinternational.com/p...EX_3-thumb.jpg
Or maybe the problem is in the loop implementation and this won't solve it? If someone could try would be great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3heads

But all in all for an affordable 2-channel-mixer there's nothing that can beat the Ecler Nuo 2.0.

---

Can you switch off the crossfader on the Ecler Nuo 2.0?

I'm uploading a video with the settings as said in the NI page and showing what happens with the audio in every possible scenario (traktor fx d/w set as 0% and 100%, mixer's filter on and off, ext-unit on and off, and filter resonance 0% and 100%).
As you can hear in the video, the only case where you can hear a volumen bump or some kind of "unwanted effect" in the audio is when the filter resonance is set to a 100% (more noticiable in real life than in the video, you can hear it in the hi hats), in all the other cases all worked like a charm. In fact, after recording the video I did some more testing on the d/w knob in traktor and it works great, no dry signal leaking through the fx return at all when d/w set to 0%, just the wet signal coming in when turning the knob up.
Any case, test it by yourself if you can.
The record is kvk500 from Mr. Tophat & Art Alfie (great EP) and it's pitched up to avoid youtube copyright issues (hopefully this will work).

Hope this help, once again, I strongly suggest you try it by yourself, I really don't know why the allen & heath staff in the AH forum gave up so easy, but for me it worked great.

https://youtu.be/Ri12PnAE4PI

Attachment 27109

Attachment 27110

Attachment 27111

Attachment 27112

Thanks for checking. I'll try it myself if I get a chance.

No problem. Of corse you can get much more "musical" effects wit this setup, I used a very strong ugly delay out of tempo only to get a very clear difference between the dry and wet signal for this demonstration.
And checking my settings, I noticed that I used the same output for the FX return and the deck C, of corse in this example It wasn't a problem cause there was nothing running on deck C, but just to clarify, the proper way is to use a dedicated output for the FX return.

Regarding the level attenuator box, for what I can tell you'll need to set the filter in the mixer as described in my previous post and then some box of that kind with the d/w in traktor set to 100% OR a controller with the d/w knob in traktor mapped to it, basically you'll be doing the same thing in both cases.

The box was mentioned as send attenuator from the mixer that would simulate the knobs seen on the Ecler, in case it helps. But it seems it is possible to get normal volumes without it. To control the effect in Traktor - yes, a controller would be required, X1mk2 for example.