I’ve been searching for specific information but I didn’t figured out the best option. I was completely rushed by the Xone:4D. The great looks and compact design are overwelming.
Untill recently, I checked a video on youtube by someone who was performing with a Xone:4D but he nearly used the functions of the 4D. That’s why I thought the 2 build-in 1D’s were overkill. Am I right?
Today I youtube’d for a 1D overlay in Traktor (wich will be the software I’m using since Ableton is, atm, too hard). I’m very excited by this guy and his showoff. It seems that his 1D is capable of doing all the regular stuff. Perhaps add a Nanopad or something like that and you’re settled.
So, we’ve got a Xone:4D vs Xone:92+1D (perhaps extended with a Nanopad / other 1D later on). The price will be nearly the same if I add up an (second hand) external soundcard (Audio8) with the last setup.
Another positive thing is the mobility. If some part(s) of the 4D brakes, there’s nothing left. If something of the second setup brakes down, I wouldn’t loose my whole setup. Plus, transporting will be easy in both cases.
So, I hope I made things clear enough. Excuse me for some typing-mistakes, I’m not a native English speaker/writer & it’s my first post ^^
Regarding your question, same here. though I am partial to nice LED lights of the 4D and the awesomeness of the 92, I am not able to help you on your decision.
(As this would be a snap decision at the time of purchase. )
There’s a few differences between the 92 & the 4D
92 has a 4 bands EQ, 4D is a 3 bands
The 4D has 3 phono inputs, on channel 4 there’s 2 line in
With the 92 you can link the 2 filters or assign them to cross fader, I’m not sure but it look like you can’t do it with 4D
Only one LFO for the 2 filters on 4D, you’ve got 1 for each filter on 92
The FX returns on the 4D have just a gain control… on the 92 it’s a complete channel…
& you’ve got 2 master outputs on the 92, just 1 on 4D. A booth out on each one; REC OUT on each one too but on the 4D is the same as FX2 Send…
well, they’re no big differences, and talking about workflow and use, I think that a 92+1D or a 4D are pretty much the same thing…
I don’t know if that gonna help you to decide or not…
I had the same question some months ago… finaly I get a 92/1D (& the Audio8) 'cause I wanted 2 real channel as AUX/RETURN and I really like the link of the filters aaahh & for the 4 bands EQ too
Thanks mate! I’m wondering if the 4 bands EQ is a “real” plus or just a gimmick. My main genre is house, do you think a second “mid” EQ is really good? It sounds great but I just wonder if it’s “usable”
Btw, what are those two extra channels (on the left) exactly for? I didn’t figure that out
well, for the 4 bands, I don’t know what to tell you… Personaly, I play a lot with EQ, much more than with effects, using it to make really smooth transition… I like it, but it’s just a +, not something absolutly needed…
But I really can’t tell you… it’s a personal tast I think…
I know some DJ in Paris, playing Soulfull/House, and they just use volume knob and filters… so, that depend of you more than of the style of music imo…
They’re AUX/RETURN channels… ins & outs for each one are on the back… Basically, they’re 2 channels… They’re here to return the signal of external FX for example… You send the channel you want to an FX (like KP3) with the “send” knob, and you return the KP3 OUT to the RETURN
You can use it like Line Inputs too… and they can be switched to MIC inputs… You can have 2 mics plugged with an EQ & volume control
So those are actually 2 indepent channels, a SEND + RETURN wich could be used for mic’s too? And yes, I had a KP3 (wich I returned later hehe) so I get the point, thank you! On the other hand, I’m wondering if I’d use a Mic anytime. Could it be that the 92 is overkill? Another option is the 62 but it’s ugly as hell. The 42 looks reasonable too, but isn’t that a major performance-drop?
4b EQ: okay thank you, that’s something I’ll have too find out myself I guess.. Sync’in music will allow me to put more time in my mixes / effects so who knows
Edit: I just read that the Xone:92 has some midi-controlling options. Are these controls assigned to the AUX channels?
The MIDI on 92 is only on filters freq knobs, the crossfader & can send a midi clock…
But you can’t really use it as a controller
Take a look at p.29 for what you can do with : http://www.allen-heath.com/DL/xone92_ap5345_3.pdf
I own a Xone 3D. Also I have a Korg Zero 4 and a Xone 1D (bought them when my 3D was sent for repairs). I have worked also on Xone 92 mixers.
Right now I DJ using the Xone 3D.
While it is possible to use only one Xone 1D for controlling Traktor, it cannot even compare to having 2 Xone 1Ds or a Xone 4D. So, my advice is: if you plan only to play track after track, a 1D will be fine. If you want to use effects, loops etc, than you need 2*1D or a 4D. Another thing is the symmetry: very nice if you have a 4D or 2 1Ds.
In terms off sound quality, I can say this:
in a big club, the resident DJ played from CDJ 1000 MK3 & Pioneer DJM 800. A guest DJ came and played using the Audio 8 DJ, Xone 1D and MBP. The sound quality was very poor compared to CDJs. If you are in a home environment, you will not notice the difference. But if you play on big sound systems, almost everyone will notice the difference.
last week I had the opportunity to hear my Xone 3D near Pioneer CDJ 1000 MK3 & DJM 800, on the same soundsytem (Qube). I listened to several tracks played from both audio sources (CDs or Xone 3D). The difference is HUGE. The Xone 3D sounds much better than Pioneer.
The problem you may encounter with the Xone 4D is firmware problems. The 3Ds and 4Ds are known for having software problems, and you may need to send your mixer back for repairs. However, when you have it back with the latest firmware installed, it will work very well (mine did ).
The 4 band EQ is an advantage or disadvantage depending on your personal taste; you should try both alternatives to see which one you prefer.
So, to summarize:
Xone 4D:
excellent sound quality, everything in one unit, lots of controls
it may die when you try to upgrade the firmware
Xone 92 + Audio 8 DJ + Xone 1D:
if something brokes, you may replace only that part (but I do not consider that something important)
lots of cables, poor sound quality on big sound systems
Oh thank you for the input, but I wonder what’s up with the soundquality? You’re saying that the quality was “bad”? I think there are a couple of other causes wich could lead to a bad quality:
bad mp3 song → you tested it with some songs so this isn’t the case?
bad connectivity (RCA / MIDI cables) perhaps?
broken Audio8? I think this is very hard to imagine hehe
The 92 is wanted because of it’s -almost- perfect sound- & buildquality, isn’t it? I think the “multiply-parts-setup” is an advantage, but that’s something personal I take it.
I really don’t understand the sound issue though. An Audio8 has a great soundquality, perhaps even better than the build-in soundcard from the 3D?
By poor sound quality I mean that the Audio 8 DJ sounds more dull than the CDJS & DJM 800; same tracks played. And the 3D sounds more clear than the DJM 800 (i think because the 3D has a quality analogic mixer).
I don’t know how to say this in words, but when you have the opportunity check out for yourself on a big quality sound system (dynacord, qube etc). You will notice the difference. I am not the only one saying this. I repeat, when I listen at home on my Hi-Fi system, i do not notice any difference between these sources.
The cables were fine, I used professional XLR-XLR balanced cables for every setup. The Audio 8 DJ was new, there was no problem with it.
The Audio 8 DJ is better than the one from the 3D or the one from the 4D in terms of drivers and stability. But when it comes to how it sounds in big clubs, test it yourself and see the difference.
I think I would go for the 92/1D combo simply because it allows me to buy what I need in a more affordable and staggered way. I simply couldn’t afford to buy a 4D outright
).