DJM vs DB help please - Page 3
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21
    Tech Guru
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    York, UK
    Posts
    3,428

    Default

    I'm having some trouble deciphering what point you're trying to get across there. There is next to no fragmentation in core features going from the 17 year old DJM 500 right up to the 900.

    One thing I don't understand about the DB2/4 is why A+H decided to go with such poor IO on the rear panel.
    VCM100 / X1 / DJM250 / DJM900 / CDJ2000s / Maschine / Audio2+4 / 2i4 / HS8s / TSP 2.6.8
    Macbook Air i7-3667U+8GB 10.9 / Win7x64 i5-3570k+24GB


  2. #22
    Tech Mentor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NE Scotland
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by makar1 View Post

    One thing I don't understand about the DB2/4 is why A+H decided to go with such poor IO on the rear panel.
    This also annoys me a little, but then again, I can't really complain as I currently have 4 vinyl decks, and 4 Traktor decks, with the ability to add another line in, and a further 4 digital inputs. There isn't really too much call for any more inputs when I already have access to 13 separate sources.
    Technics 1210 mk2's, Pioneer CDJ 500, Allen & Heath DB4, NI F1's (x2), Reloop Contour Controller Edition, Sennheiser HD25 1-II or Allen & Heath XD2-53's depending on my mood...

    Mixcloud : xs2man - Latest Mix: Latest Mix 13-10-2016

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeekGod View Post
    DarioJ brings up a great point - how many times has PIO released a firmware upgrade that added new features?
    All the time? My CDJ-2000s are on version 4.20, and my DJM-2000 is on version 3...

    Quote Originally Posted by makar1 View Post
    I'm having some trouble deciphering what point you're trying to get across there. There is next to no fragmentation in core features going from the 17 year old DJM 500 right up to the 900.

    One thing I don't understand about the DB2/4 is why A+H decided to go with such poor IO on the rear panel.
    With the matrix, digital stack, and patchable sound card, there's not really any reason to go cray cray on the back panel. The only reason DJMs have RCAphilia is due to the fact that in an install or multiple user situation, everything's gonna be plugged into everything gonna be plugged into everything all at once (don't even get me started, Ill get flashbacks).

    4 triple stacked inputs across 6 line ins, 2 preamps, and 4 S/PDIFs is just redundant redundancy levels of redundancy for patching purposes. The DB's I/O across a matrix is more than enough for sensible operations, and youre not actually losing much. The only issue with it really is doing a retard roundup trying to explain matrix inputs to an install crowd when that redundancy is needed. For personal performance, the DB series' design goal, the I/O on top of the sound card is straight overkill.

  4. #24
    Tech Guru DarioJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    North & Central FL
    Posts
    794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by makar1 View Post
    I'm having some trouble deciphering what point you're trying to get across there. There is next to no fragmentation in core features going from the 17 year old DJM 500 right up to the 900.

    One thing I don't understand about the DB2/4 is why A+H decided to go with such poor IO on the rear panel.
    That was a bit of fan-boy gibberish. In all honesty, I don't follow PIO's updates, so I wouldn't know. Depending on how you look at either mixer, there are always going to be pros and cons. It comes back to personal preference. You're more or less likely going to get what you payed for.

    As far as the I/O goes - my theory for A&H not including a proper S&R, was that they ran out of magical rainbow colored unicorn piss.... but I think Shishdisma has a better explanation.

    Off topic - wonder if a linked K2 could host as a S&R...? It could work in theory right? if anything you could use the master out on the K2 into the mic in on the mixer...
    Last edited by DarioJ; 04-25-2013 at 03:56 PM.
    The MUSIC is what matters!
    Everything else is _________

  5. #25
    Tech Mentor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NE Scotland
    Posts
    372

    Default

    fullenglishpint figured out the S&R on the DB4...

    Technics 1210 mk2's, Pioneer CDJ 500, Allen & Heath DB4, NI F1's (x2), Reloop Contour Controller Edition, Sennheiser HD25 1-II or Allen & Heath XD2-53's depending on my mood...

    Mixcloud : xs2man - Latest Mix: Latest Mix 13-10-2016

  6. #26
    Tech Guru
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    701

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shishdisma View Post
    All the time? My CDJ-2000s are on version 4.20, and my DJM-2000 is on version 3...
    Right but did they add major new features? For example the DB4 updates bring new FX.

  7. #27
    Tech Guru DarioJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    North & Central FL
    Posts
    794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xs2man View Post
    fullenglishpint figured out the S&R on the DB4...
    That is one way, but I am talking about an aux channel being feed from for each channel on mixer.



    After watching this video, I think it might be possible. The loop fader (wet/dry) functionality is making me think that the K2's soundcard is being used to sample. If that is true, then it may be possible to have K2 act as an aux(out) feed w/ the possibility to control volume and eq for each channel(in). This could be used to do something as simple as chaining effects (direct back to mixer) or even better yet, throw the RMX back in there and BOOM....

    Im no audio engineer or computer guru.. I may just be way off on this, but the thought of it being remotely possible gets me smiling.
    The MUSIC is what matters!
    Everything else is _________

  8. #28
    Tech Guru DarioJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    North & Central FL
    Posts
    794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeekGod View Post
    Right but did they add major new features? For example the DB4 updates bring new FX.
    I do remember one - It was the beatmash feature for the 2K, when they released the 2KN.

    Anyone know what happened to FEP? Haven't seen him post in a while.
    The MUSIC is what matters!
    Everything else is _________

  9. #29
    Tech Guru
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    York, UK
    Posts
    3,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shishdisma View Post
    With the matrix, digital stack, and patchable sound card, there's not really any reason to go cray cray on the back panel. The only reason DJMs have RCAphilia is due to the fact that in an install or multiple user situation, everything's gonna be plugged into everything gonna be plugged into everything all at once (don't even get me started, Ill get flashbacks).

    4 triple stacked inputs across 6 line ins, 2 preamps, and 4 S/PDIFs is just redundant redundancy levels of redundancy for patching purposes. The DB's I/O across a matrix is more than enough for sensible operations, and youre not actually losing much. The only issue with it really is doing a retard roundup trying to explain matrix inputs to an install crowd when that redundancy is needed. For personal performance, the DB series' design goal, the I/O on top of the sound card is straight overkill.
    One thing I really like about my DJM is being able to have everything sound related connected up at home, and having plenty of inputs available for gigs where there'll be multiple DJs using Traktor timecode, Serato timecode, controllers, turntables, CDJs etc.

    Their matrix input system wouldn't work the same if they added more inputs but I think it's worth the tradeoff for such useful functionality. They might even have sold a few more units by doing so. Proper Send/Return, additional Master Out, and multiple analogue inputs per channel are things you find on most mixers these days, including the analogue Xone series.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeekGod View Post
    Right but did they add major new features? For example the DB4 updates bring new FX.
    The decimal point BPM was added at user request IIRC.
    VCM100 / X1 / DJM250 / DJM900 / CDJ2000s / Maschine / Audio2+4 / 2i4 / HS8s / TSP 2.6.8
    Macbook Air i7-3667U+8GB 10.9 / Win7x64 i5-3570k+24GB


  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by makar1 View Post
    One thing I really like about my DJM is being able to have everything sound related connected up at home, and having plenty of inputs available for gigs where there'll be multiple DJs using Traktor timecode, Serato timecode, controllers, turntables, CDJs etc.

    Their matrix input system wouldn't work the same if they added more inputs but I think it's worth the tradeoff for such useful functionality. They might even have sold a few more units by doing so. Proper Send/Return, additional Master Out, and multiple analogue inputs per channel are things you find on most mixers these days, including the analogue Xone series.
    For a joint gig/install situation, the DB's still have more than enough room for everything you could realistically need, thanks to the digital stack. Given that a DJM-2000 is split 6 line/2 phono, you're really only losing a pair of extra line inputs. You can still run 4 CDJs in standalone thanks to S/PDIF lines, and still have room for two separate SL2s to be patched in for non-push-pull changeover. The only reason I could think you might be pressed is if you had a 2 CDJ/2 1200 install, but even then, the 1200's probably wouldnt be hard patched to the mixer on account of timecode readiness and such. The people who complain about an S/R loop, and the subsequent pseudo sound engineering circlejerk, are just being absurd, in a situation where you're realistically purchasing a DB4 for it's intended use, an RMX-1000 probably isn't the centre of your setup. The gushing and theorycrafting surrounding that particular concept is mostly just wet dreaming over ~$3800 worth of effects hardware people aren't going to own and might get used 1-2 times per set practically.

    When you really break it down, A&H aren't really pushing the DB mixers as installs, but personal performance types. Absurd sound cards, mixer personalisation, and the x-link weirdness, all point to a more sacrosanct relationship with the hardware. If they were really pushing it as an install, they'd drop the x-link stuff nobody in a multi-user will ever use, and replace it with a LAN switch, which is really the main thing that keeps savvy owners on the DJM over a DB.

    The real point of running S/PDIF lines is to keep the analogue RCAs open as a free patch bay, and to cut down on install wiring. The whole "A/D/D/A conversion/sound quality improvement" crap is just fluff for people who like jerking off to numbers and the thought of "pure sound." The digital stack is mostly just a hidden bone thrown to multiple user system owners to make us hate ourselves less, kind of like the SD card slot and personalisation settings on CDJ-2000s.
    Last edited by Shishdisma; 04-26-2013 at 03:26 AM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •