Ahhhh I see what you mean 
Well apparently Studiocare (Liverpool), DJRental (Midlands) and CDJHire (London) stock them already, so I guess it’s just taking a while for them to filter down to the rental market.
For house and techno the DB4 or the 92 win hands down. Better FX, better EQ, Built like tanks. The allen and heath mixers are the same price if not cheaper than the Pioneers. The allen and heath mixers are better you won’t regret it.
Who needs a Xone 92 when you can get all its features in the Behringer NOX606 for a fraction of the price?! /s
A+H make some great mixers for sure. I was considering the DB4, but got the DJM900 for about 25% less so I’m happy.
People that want a quality mixer that will last forever and is built like a tank also you can’t beat the 92’s filters.
Okay well balls to that no brand war thing anyway then. FINE. New topic. Allen and Heath - Xone:92 vs Pioneer DJM-900NXS. If you would like to see what I personally will be paying for them each to compare, click on the names of the mixers. That’s the store I’ll get my mixer from.
If you want built-in FX + sound card then go for the 900.
If you want 4-band EQ and more customizable filters and don’t need FX or a sound card, go for the Xone 92.
Well I see you’re a DJM 900 man, but I still want to hear some more POINTS towards the A&H 92. Notice I said points, please do not argue.
Notice I gave points for both mixers, no arguing? The Xone also has a more featured Send/Return loop; there’s not much else I haven’t mentioned.
Sorry! That was more directed at the thread, your message lays it out very clearly actually as to what I’m getting for my dollars. What exactly in my style of play is the example of a 4-band EQ?
If you do long transitions or 3/4 deck mixing e.g. with tech/deep house the extra EQ knob could be helpful, but it sounds like you tend to mix things up a little faster based on your 1st post?
It’s really down to personal preference in the end.
I do a lot of harmonic longer mixes where I might have three songs playing for quite a while, but even up to my practice sesh today, 3 bands+EQ has been more than enough. Is 4 better at like isolating or getting rid of vocals? Also, is the 92 full isolator EQ?
Bringing the thread back a little bit, I highly suggest you actually take a few minutes and look at the manuals for the DJM-2000 and DJM-900. Or at least take a few minutes to stare at their front panels. Owning a 2000, and having used a 900 many times, I can certify that unless you have some bizarre strain of autism that makes you seize up when an LCD panel is involved, you absolutely want to spend the extra ~$200 on a 2000. I can literally break this down point by point if you ask me to.
As for 2000 vs :92, if you’re absolutely crazy about filters, the 2000 is pretty decent, but can’t touch the filter flexibility the :92 has. However, virtually everything else bar cost is so much easier to manage and use on the 2000.
+1 for 900 & RMX1000
Break it down for my friendo! I want some user based opinions here. Shall I drop you a beat while you break it down? Turns on Radio only to find Avicii’s “Levels” is playing. Alright never mind that beat. Just break it down.
I’m gonna make this an epic set of bullet points, to spare a wall of text.
-First and nearly most importantly, the layout of the effects unit. On the 900, you get a cramped setup of knobs with a TFT panel. On the 2000, you get dedicated buttons for each effect and time selection, in addition to extremely well spaced out knobs. This allows you to actually change and manipulate the effects without feeling like youre playing keyhole surgery.
-Arguably just as important as the first is the 3 band EQ on the effects unit. The effects unit on the 900 borders on useless in a variety of different situations simply because there’s no adjustment beyond “strength.” On the 2000, you have a 3 band EQ to tweak as you need to. Echo/delay on a phrase? Impossible to do without double-beating the kick drum. With the EQ, pull out the bass, and tada.
-The effects they added to the 900 (melodic and spiral) aren’t exactly the most useful, and are quite absurdly heavy handed. The effects they dropped off of the 2000’s unit (Multi-tap delay and an adjustable gate), are a lot more versatile and applicable.
-The Colour Effects. With the exception of the Crush (arguably), the 2000’s “INST FX” are a nice little swiss army knife of modulation and variation. The biggest difference I can describe short of just listing the effects (check the manual, they describe them all quite nicely) is that the 2000’s unit offers really smooth modulation and warping of the track (Jet, Zip, and Noise with a volume control), as well as split filters. The brand new effects the 900 adds are a bit too situational and “Im using an effect” than Id like, and dont really see normal use.
-Adding to the above, probably the most convenient addition on the 2000 is the Parameter knob on the “INST FX.” Noise volume, filter resonance, and a wet/dry for the others. This gives you a simply absurd amount of control the 900 frankly doesn’t have. Want to swap the filters from smooth mixing type to a stabby sweep type? Too bad. Noise generator not quite blending? Too bad. With the 2000, you have the ability to sit the effect in, with the addition of only one knob.
-A minor positive, but a significant one nonetheless is the usage of a full 7’-5’ knob on the INST FX as opposed to the detented pot for the 900. It gives you the entire range of the pot for snapping or fading filters, rather than just half of the knob with the responsibility not to overshoot the centre. It lets you really flex your wrist and filter smooth.
-The 2000 has a built in 6 port LAN switch. This lets you link 4 CDJs and 2 laptops into the mixer without any kind of extra hardware. If you Link multiple CDJs, or use a laptop with Rekordbox rather than media, this tick alone is worth the ~$200 upgrade. You can travel with just the decks and mixer and always have the ability to Link in everything, as well as always have the mixer Linked in for quantization and “Dont touch it, it’s red” mode.
-The screen, and the 5 modes rolled into it. Check the manual for more info, but that thing is really just a fun set of icing on top of a mothership. I rarely use it in “normal” mixing, but it’s a lot of fun to mess around with it once you get to grips with it.
The only thing the 900 really has going for it is the TS soundcard. The 2000’s is a bit basic, but still gives you full output and recording capabilities.
Any other specific questions Id be happy to answer.
I just got my DJM-2000 2 days ago. I’ve been playing a bit with it but with work and everything, I haven’t had time to really sit down and learn every button yet. A few of my friends came over last night, some of them started DJing before I was even born (not kidding here), and I realized that it is really an intuitive piece of gear. The screen is extremely easy to use and understand and even though I had to look a few things up throughout the night, everyone easily got a hold of it.
On the other hand, it is extremely easy to forget to turn on or off something, let that be an effect, a cue button, or a filter. There is a lot going on on its surface so if you’re the type of DJ that tend to forget to turn a few things on or off, the 2000 is definitely not for you. This is actually the reason I got a pretty much 2000 for less than half the price. The guy that sold it to me, an older gentleman, found it way too complicated for him so he bought a DB4 and kept the 2000 in a box. Hopefully it helps, but again, I’m still learning with it.
If you only use 2 CDJ decks that have Digital outs (1000, 900, 2000, 2000Nexus), you can very easily have EQ’d FX by duplicating the left CDJ across channel 1+2, and the right CDJ across 3+4.
If you don’t have digital you can just split the RCA connectors.
Uhm, holy hell. Well you broke the shit down out of that. I now have a few questions:
-
With the 2000 can I just plug in the USB and the sound card will be formattable for Traktor (Non-Scratch) External Mix Mode?
-
Can you explain exactly WHAT the screen does just a bit more? You seem pretty real-world learn’d about it so I’d like to hear it from you.
-
For a guy like me, that may not use the touch screen much (Answer above pending.) would a DJM-900NXS and an RMX-1000 be better?
Thanks in advance!
What exactly do you use the screen for, and what kind of music do you play? Cheers fellow Canadian!
The DJM 2000/Nexus has a more limited sound card than the DJM900.
You can either have 4 output decks and 0 inputs, or 3 output decks and 1 input for recording.
Whereas the DJM900 allows you to have 4 output decks and 4 sets of inputs running simultaneously.