Printable View
still can't decide which one to buy
Xone 92 pros
it is a classic
sounds amazing
I am familiar with it
6 channels
2 filters
Fully analog
Xone 92 cons
Interface Required
Old technology
No effects
Xone PX5 pros
Last A&H technology
integrated interface
effects.
Xone PX5 cons
4+1 channels
New and not already tested
92 has four-band EQ.
Fixed that for you ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by djluiscorona
Perhaps a demo will help you decide...
I chose a 92 over a Pioneer because I don't see it as 'old' technology. More like good sounding analogue technology that doesn't go out of date. Digital stuff always has the next 'thing' round the corner. However, the FX might be pretty good on the PX5 if the DB4 is anything to go by...
you don't usually move the mid-low knob while mixing.Quote:
Originally Posted by happydan
Not sure how you're mixing, but I use the mid low all the time for blending
I use all four, depending on genre/blend.Quote:
Originally Posted by djluiscorona
92 pro:
twin AUX S/R
I'm in the same boat with my choices. The included audio interface for Traktor and my D2's would be great on the PX5. Only 1 send and return, for a delay pedal and no full EQ on the return channel. Unlike the 92 which has a great slider and full band EQ for the effects sends.
Is it me or on the PX5, you can send the onboard FX to the send, the have a channel signal with the fx send and return up with the channel fader down to just have the full effects signal through like the 92?
92 all the way. Only one filter on the PX is the one missing part that kills it for me. 92, DB4 and 4D are all equipt with it and their new flagship is simply missing a mighty tool.
Tried both side to side and understand your struggle to decide.
The PX5 is amazing though and a lot of fun to play with. Don't miss the 4 band eq. 1 Filter is a let down. The FX send to onboard FX is super intuitive and fun to play with!
I just don't get these companies sometimes. The filters are one of the main things on A&H and they just release something that is a bit half-baked. Happens so much.
What you don't have on the 92 vs the x5 you can easily ad.
The 92 is an easy winner with the 4 band eq and 2 separate filters for me. And analog technology never goes old.
I am stumbled how A&H can reales a new mixer with just one filter section.
Precisely, I'm unsure as to why they would release any new high end mixer without the dual filters. I highly doubt it would affect any ongoing sales of the 92, short of the mixer in question being an intelligently updated 92 of some kind.Quote:
Originally Posted by djgstefan
Actually I would have expected more of a comparison with the DB2 than with the 92; the 92 is such a different tool.
I see price has dropped on the DB2 and I am not sure why you would choose the PX5 over the DB2, other than the 5th channel. Any thoughts? Does it sound better, have better filters or effects, etc.?
PX5 is Traktor Scratch ready while the DB2 Serato certified so depending if use on or the other certification for your platform might be the deal breaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by boris
for me, it'd be send/return, I have a Pioneer RMX-1000 that I absolutely love... Also, I scratch from time to time & the DB4 (can't speak for the DB2) doesn't cut it.. I even tried installing an innofader & had no luckQuote:
Originally Posted by boris
What did you end up going with?
I'm in the same position and have the option to buy a near new xone 92 & sound card or a PX5. It's a bloody tough decision!
Seems like the circa-2002 XONE:92 is the poor man's (or the reasonably frugal man's) Model1 mixer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Laserbeam
I was full Traktor when the XONE hit the market so I ignored it 100% over the years, as I had Pioneer mixers way back & then moved to NI devices later.
Now as I drool over the Model1, someone suggested I look at this old unit & man... It sure seems to tick off the boxes for a lot less cash.
Surprisingly, the newer units are not as appealing to me. Am I missing something? I have an external FX unit (RMX1000) so the analog breed of the 92 + 6 channels total = seems superior!
The model 1 was designed and is built by the same people as the 92. And it still only runs on 12V rails, so the differences there are really the EQ and IO setup, the cuing systems, and the overdrive circuitry.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbyduracel
IMHO, it's nothing earth shattering.
I do have my traktor setup with no channel EQs but with filters available kind of like the model 1, and it is a flexible and viable way to mix. But...I think the 4-band EQ is just better for most people and most styles. Short of making your own breakout cables, almost nobody is going to use the dsub IO. The dual cues are kind of cool, but how often does that actually come up? And most people overdrive the hell out of their xones anyway, so adding yet another way to distort the signal seems backwards.
Unless you need 6+2 channels, I think the xone:92 is probably the better mixer for most people. But, so do the people they made the Model 1.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk