Purchased the X1800

As the other topic is now closed i wanted to post a follow up to the previous i started regarding purchasing the X1800.

So i finally went ahead and picked up the X1800 a week ago. First thing i have to say is that at the price point i picked it up for it is a lot of mixer for the money. The big pluses are the integration with the SC5000 and the amount of current and potential future options that are onboard. The negatives are that after coming from using the Xone 92 for 10 years the sound of the X1800 is a bit lacking. I would even say its behind the DB4. I played out on it over the wkd and recorded a few sets and noticed today that the recorded sound is noticeably different to the Xone 92 which i found strange. There seems to be a lack of warmth and noise to the recorded signal. I ran everything on the channel and master at 0dB. Not sure if that influences anything. The biggest disappointment was the quality of the pods and fader caps. I noticed a bit of wiggle and play in the eq/filter/fx pods when set at 12 o clock. One of the upfader caps popped off and was a struggle to get properly fit on again.

I really like the integration with the denon players and the modern feel the mixer has but in terms of sound and ability to sculpt the sound in the mix i am not entirely convinced. I have another week left if i want to send it back. Might get some DJ tech tools caps and swap them out and see if things feel a little more solid with the eq etc. If i was really confident that the sound would improve in a future update then i would definitely hold on to the mixer. For the money compared to a Pioneer it is an absolute no brainer.

2 Likes

Hi @N1xer, thank you for your comments.

Can you confirm the mixer is on V1.2 firmware?

Also that the SC5000’s are on 1.3.1?

Thank you

Gee, I wonder why a digital mixer doesn’t have a warm analog sound and…noise.

7 Likes

Well, with Pioneer players, the DB4 is better than the Xone 92, and the DN-X1700 is even more musical and lush than that. So the X1800 being a digital mixer is a potential benefit, not a detriment… just happens to be a curious situation in the case of Prime.

As long as you’re not running into the top LEDs on the meters, you can run them wherever you want… just realize you need headroom for more dynamic tracks. So give yourself some room on the less dynamic ones and don’t run every track right below the top.

Your experience is consistent with mine. X1800 processing sound quality is inferior to many other digital mixers. SC5000 has its own audio processing issues, too. Using a good analog mixer with the Prime players seems to at least cover up or bypass some of the players’ issues and avoid the X1800’s own.

I previously recommended you get the X1800 to experience the integration, not because the combination was going to give you the best sound. That’s not even possible on the players right now in absolute terms, anyway. If you still have the Xone 92, the players and it together should sound more pleasing. When you want integration goodness, use the X1800. In the meantime, heart my two feature requests for better sound processing:

https://denondjforum.com/t/improve-audio-processing-quality/

https://denondjforum.com/t/improve-the-x1800s-sound-by-investigating-the-methods-used-on-the-x1700-sharc-dsp/

Go and listen to the DB4 before posting that condescending nonsense

While I have no doubt in your complaints (x1700 user here) you worded it so badly that it deserves a little jab. Relax and learn where the edit button is.

Yes Jay, both running latest firmware

Thank you @N1xer, Your best course of action is to contact global customer support here, please contact them here: https://www.denondj.com/support

Regards J

@SlayForMoney & @N1xer - guys please be respectful on the forum, thank you.

3 Likes

Any chance we can get a link to your mix from both the mixers. I currently have the full prime setup but I am looking at getting a 92 and would like to hear the sound difference for myself.

X1800 has a hopeless sound. I hope you get your back to the store. I also bought a soundcraft ui16 to try to improve the sound but nothing could. The mixers of pioneer or old Denon models have better sound. I regret the purchase all the time and nobody money will return. Many people who know the sound, etc. I tried to set the sound system under X1800 and told me that this equipment is just such a thing and nothing to do with it. No sound correction is given.

I think you just have one poorly x1800 there, or some local issue affecting the sound.

The 1800 is certainly better sounding than most other mixers in its price range. On straightforward human ears, I’d say it sounds even better than the dnx1700

Comparing them, I’d say the X1700 has vastly superior 96khz upsampling for lower-rate digital inputs. It also has better analog input and output sections. I’m also not a huge fan of the 96khz mode in general on the X1800, but considering the only thing in that rate I actually pipe into it are the Prime players, most of my issues with the X1800 96khz mode with 96khz digital inputs might just be the players processing issues I’m hearing. It’s actually possible the X1800 sounding the worst with the Prime players is because it’s the most revealing of the player sound faults and not that it’s adding much degradation to them… especially since it measures fine USB to USB. It’s hard to say. I certainly wouldn’t call the X1800 bright or harsh, though, rather a little dry and restrained. At least at the lower rates and with matched input signals, the digital to digital processing sound is very physical, fairly cohesive, has good depth imaging, and significantly more accurate low-end than Pioneers.

Maybe the X1800 doesn’t do as well on dense material and can get a touch congested and lacking, I don’t know, micro dynamics even with 44.1khz inputs and software? But that’s a complaint I level on the Prime players, too, and they exhibit some of that across mixers on their own. At least the X1800 doesn’t lose macro detail in the process (no pun intended) of sounding more compressed on very layered stuff, though. Could also be the subterranean low-end on it spoofing that impression, but its tendency to make me want to listen at a lower volume makes me think that’s not all it is. The X1700, though, has some amazing, open, musical midrange and a shimmery vibrancy to it I like a lot, and upsampling 44.1 to 96khz on it just makes this more so. The old flagship really makes me want to crank it and listen, to the point I forget to even mix in the next track sometimes.

The thing is… the rest of us play to humans. It doesn’t matter what some test program or scope says.

1 Like

I find the logic of that statement lacking. The impetus for the measurements was humans listening to the gear in the first place and hearing differences. Audio tests tend not to be particularly comprehensive, but they are concrete. They’re loaded with false negatives (they miss a lot), but they tend to not produce false positives (incorrectly finding characteristics)… assuming you show repeatability. You hear a difference between gear, and tests may or may not find anything. If tests do find substantial differences, though, that’s not inconsequential but rather more likely the tip of the iceberg… the Prime players vs Pioneer players is a case in point. 100 times the intermodulation distortion and loads of nonlinear harmonics added to the original signal when you’re just at zero pitch is not inconsequential. As I said, however, I found no measurement problems with the X1800 to back up the apparent sonic signature it has, in my opinion, compared to the X1700.

So 100 more people will demand a free drink from the bar because … no they won’t. Coz they won’t notice, won’t care, won’t mention it, won’t give two hoots about it… no matter how many times you slip your scope findings into any and every post you can.

2 Likes

This is true but here is something to consider and this is from a sound system operator’s perspective.

You have a club with 2 identical rooms and 2 identical sound systems but 2 different setup men/women. Only 1 DJ booth and 1 DJ will be playing and both rooms will be receiving from that one source.

One setup man works with the philosophy of plugging in everything correctly and getting the levels right for playback. The other setup man is a little more technical, he knows that the club/venue holder wants to maximize it’s profits from bar sales and wants to work on the psychoacoustic properties of the playback.

Which room in the club will do better over all?

Again, punter-wise no one cares as long as the damn music is playing and it’s not sounding grotty … and that’s not sounding grotty to the human ear, the only measurement tool that real people will be bringing with them into a venue. (As the doorman probably won’t let em in with a C-weighted audio spectrum analyser under their coat lol

Sound is important - to a point - and it can be interesting - to a point -

When one person thinks they’ve found something microscopic, that no one out there, in the real world, out there beyond the soldering iron would ever be likely to notice and shoe-horns their self-proclaimed world-shattering findings into every other post they make… it just starts getting boring, annoying and spammy

The one with the quickest or most bar staff.

Simple as

Even more so when everyone’s had a drink or 10

Here’s a real world example

Yesterday I was checking out a chain of bars that the owner of asked me to take a look at to see which I would like have a spot in.

The first one, the DJ setup a pioneer controller, serato on the laptop and one jbl speaker. The music was good, the sound was good and everybody was enjoying themselves. There was nothing to complain about, some were dancing and most were just chilling. But that’s all that happened. Just adding a second speaker would have created a field of sound that would’ve emersed people and maybe could of got a lot more bodies on the dancefloor other than the impaired ones. But still the bar and it’s patrons like it.

The second one had a virtual DJ operator and was kinda dead and the third one had a live band which was good party.

Someone who just comes to DJ and those who come to listen obviously have no concerns about the technical details and that’s the way it should be. That’s cause they are in the end use of the chain.

I’m about to get a weekly spot and I know that maintaining good sound will do a lot more for me, the bar and the patrons.

Is Mr. R a little passionate about his stance? Absolutely. Spammy about it? Maybe lol. Hopefully this might be a little insight for the new viewers :wink: