Pio DDJ-SB, where is pioneer going with this?

[Rukks]

The dj'ing industry has changed....Pioneer seems unsure where consumers are going to take the market. They are trying to have a product and support team in every segment so they are prepared for the future. They are certainly not making the same profit margins that they were 4-5 years ago....but this way they will not be completely blind sided by the future. You will see them start to trim down their products in a year or two when they think they know what the future has in store.

They are basically playing the low risk/low reward game right now....

[Student]

The one thing I hope Pioneer are moving away from is there policy of having unique features on each model that you don't necessarily get if you purchase the next model up in their range. I know this is done for the purposes of product differentiation but it grates that you can buy one of their products that doesn't have some of the features that one of their cheaper models (in the same segment) have.

This is actually the one thing I have never been able to comprehend either. Why would Pioneer offer the pretty neat macro effects on the DJM700 but still haven't upgraded the 850/900 series to have this as well? And why did they offer the CDJ900 with slip mode, yet the 2000 had to wait for years until they got it? They'll probably do it to keep the market value a bit higher but it still seems strange to me. If you pour out near 2 grand on their top-level club mixer, you should be getting all that Pioneer can offer...

[Shishdisma]

Pioneer definitely position themselves as the "elite" brand, why else would the cost a fortune relative to their production cost? marketing that's why, they sponsor more professional touring dj's than any other company, have their own sponsored events, produce professional quality media and have set designers for their trade shows. And to be honest their stuff isn't as good as they tell you it is, it's all image and it works for them. In terms of gear I would prefer a denon SC-3900 and an allen & heath mixer than their "elite" range.

You're confusing "elite" with "professional." Look at Rane, SSL, A&H, JBL, or QSC. All of these brands "cost a fortune" relative to their equivalent knockoff Chinese brand, and the "production costs" have never had anything to do with the sale cost of a professional product. Elitism isn't the key here, its the durability, engineering, and infrastructure supporting the product that gives it a professional seal. Does a GLD really cost ~$9000 in circuits and processors to make? Does a Rane G4 really cost ~$700 in metal and chips to make? Why do PRX's have a $1000+ sticker price when Behringer can make a similar design for 1/4th the cost? The cost of the parts a product is made of is almost irrelevant, relative to the cost of it being professionally viable, thats why "high price = elitism" is kind of a stupid mantra.

It's only the recent flood of Chinese, race to the bottom, ultra low margin products that has distorted the perception of a professional build. Behringer can knock off the GLD in 5 different flavours, and cut the cost by almost half, but they still cant provide a viable competitor all around. The feature list and parts ledger are somewhere around half of the product, why should they account for all of the cost?

[synthet1c]

I do understand that it costs money to conceive of, develop an idea, prototype and then manufacture a product, and that any knock off company can simply copy the circuit board will little expenditure, and that accounts for a lot of the cost of "professional" products. I am all for paying more for quality as I have been doing this for just over ten years and remember when that was what occurred. But those days have ended, and think that considering the cdj range is simply a computer running the hardware and that the same r&d was not required the difference should be reflected in the price, although inflation has not really been added to the equation so the new range definitely cost less than in the past.

But the market and perception is what decides the value of something as it probably costs the same to make a cheap computer that sells for $500 as it does to make a cdj in manufacturing cost. The reason Pioneer costs what it does in my point of view is that it has the most "professional/elite" image.

But this topic has been discussed many times in the past and it really won't go any further as we are saying the same thing, I like the new range of pioneer gear and think it fits in exactly where it should, what I was simply asserting that I can't see them ever losing their place at the top in reply to the OP, it wasn't said sarcastically or with any malice toward the company, their products or the people who use them, I think the balance between quality, functionality and features of the new range is spot on. and for those reasons more deserving of the top place more than any other competitor. But hey this thing isn't even released yet so may not be built with the same components as the SX so this is all speculation, but I still think it's a smart decision to appeal to a wider consumer audience sooner than there second upgrade as would usually be the case for most.

[deevey]

But hey this thing isn't even released yet so may not be built with the same components as the SX

Soundcard is of lesser quality than even the WeGo, there's less knobs, less inputs and outputs, from the video it looks like the pots are plastic shafted.

What Pioneer have done is create a fantastic upgrade Pyramid from Beginner to Pro all based on the same Serato Software Platform.

You can sell alot more $300 kits to 16 year olds than $3000 kits to Clubs and Pro's and probably with a higher % markup.

When I was doing DJ Retail we'd sell around 30 "Low End" Deck/Mixer packages every week Vs maybe 2 Pro Technics/Vestax packages. 50% of those People that bought low end packages would be back within 6 months to upgrade to a mid-range package and "Maybe" a year later 10% would go for the top-end gear.

Pioneer used to only get the last 5-10% of sales, now they can potentially get 100%.

I know if I was still in sales I'd be pushing the Pioneer "roadmap" hard to the newbies.

[Polygon]

But hey this thing isn't even released yet so may not be built with the same components as the SX so this is all speculation,

You can see from the presentation video that the pads are very sloppy, pressing one moves the other 3 adjacent ones, which can get pretty bad if they actually get triggered.

Also, being half the weight of the SR, i don't think they're using the same high-strenght polycarbonate for the case as they are in the SR and SX.

[Polygon]

Well whoa, thanks guys for replying, i thought you'd get all mad over my question :P

[DJRavine]

It's easier for a luxury brand to create a budget product than a budget brand to create a luxury product.\

The SB will do well however this comes out around the same time as the WeGO 2. It's pretty much relegating the WeGO to a portable DJ device now because I forsee most newbies buying the SB over the WeGO. Unless they like flashy lights. Or they DJ with an iPad.

[Shishdisma]

You can see from the presentation video that the pads are very sloppy, pressing one moves the other 3 adjacent ones, which can get pretty bad if they actually get triggered.

Also, being half the weight of the SR, i don't think they're using the same high-strenght polycarbonate for the case as they are in the SR and SX.

Thats not really what we mean by that. Obviously they have different cases and different pads, but you have to look at it logistically. For "feel" parts and other filler components, its typically cheaper to use what's already in your production cycle than it is to bring in a new lower cost part.

Pioneer doesn't really make plastic pots, and everything down to the WeGo uses metal pots, which is why I'd be rather surprised to see plastic stems on this thing. Overall, things like the button materials, switches, pots, terminals, and fader technology stays relatively consistent across the product lineup, by sheer virtue of it typically being cheaper to use the parts you have and consolidate your parts orders, than it is to create a new part order for something marginally cheaper.

The $200 DJM-250 uses the same pots, terminals, EQ tech, metering tech, and filters as the $1,800 DJM-900. The core processing engine is completely different, because the DJM-900's DSP is effing expensive, and the 250 has a barebones case, but the little, arguably most important, parts heavily benefit from being established on the high end. This is why companies like Behringer pump out such a slurry of shit on a regular basis, their entire manufacturing process and theory is based on minimizing marginal costs and spamming features.

Uniformity and consolidation is most often a solid way to cut costs. Pioneer introduced an entire mixer, the DJM-2000 Nexus, with a heavy intention of getting the older 24 bit DAC off of their parts ledger and getting their entire high end line on board with a single 32 bit DAC. It wouldn't surprise me to see the same output, button, switch, and pot quality on the SB as the SX/R, and just having cost and weight reductions take place with a lighter case, different pads, and significantly less I/O.