That was indeed weird.
That too. The Pioneers all have grease in their faders. X1850 added grease over the ungreased X1800. He just bought a DB4, so he might also be comparing the X1850’s upfaders to the long, ungreased Xone faders.
I think maybe this guy would have liked the X1800 and either an SC5000 or SC5000M.
Yip. Bit of a fussy thing to complain about, if you ask me.
Not sure he would, tbh. He made some good points about the FX. I mix a lot of the same type of Trance as him and would have to agree about the Reverb and such, plus not having the ability to have the Phaser/Flanger go up to 64 is a little annoying.
Sound quality totally depends on the manufacturer. In my opinion, the sound quality is like day vs. night between Denon DJ and Pioneer. There’s no comparison. I’ve owned the DDJ-SX, and currently own the DDJ-SZ, MCX-8000, and the Prime 4. Denon has them beat hands down.
these are all all-in-one devices. but this thread as well as the video in question is about the top of the line models. the x180/50’s reverb isn’t good. the dub echo on the other hand is very good. denon would have to clarify why there’s such a difference between two effects on the same device.
Yeah. Weird take. Very weird to get along just fine with the cue pads on the Kontrol D2 and S4 but really all along you wanted hard plastic buttons above the jog wheel.
Whatever. I’ve used different Pioneer CDJs for years and they’re nice. Hasn’t prevented me from enjoying the Denon gear. Horses for courses, and controversy gets you more channel hits. Pfft.
That poor bloke in the video so needs to read the manual, and have a caffeine drink before getting near a microphone 
His whole demeanour, including the upturned monkey palm gestures/shrugs really point to him having made his mind up about the models themselves and the features, which he would have been able to read about pre-purchase (“Gate feature has always been useless to me, and it’s useless here too“), before purchase. Yet, he still went ahead and purchased.
He’s either a pio dealer or a customer who has a store he uses with a 14 day money back policy.
We can close this topic. He seems to have moved on to the flagship Pio set @ around $7K
That must have been the headphones and limited edition carry bag.
Just from the YT videos of various people, CDJ-3000 has better highs and less distortion than Prime playback, though worse than old models with keylock off. Basically what I expected.
The V10 is also a different sound from prior Pioneers as it’s lost the bass bloat and reminds me of a tighter, more-detailed DJM-1000 or a less-sweetened & less spatial (euphemistically, maybe more-focused) DJM-900NXS2. Maybe lacks the analog-like ease of the DB4 or speed and upper mids’ ‘inner light’ of the MP2015. It’s closer to the tone of a Denon mixer than any prior Pioneer, but without the Prime mixers’ dry, powdery quality or unfortunate sense of the sound being squeezed through a pinhole.
I don’t have any doubt the Prime playback processing can be improved further quite easily, and with the Prime mixers’ features would be a force to reckon with. However, I’m curious what the heck is causing the Prime mixers to sound the way they do when they test so well on my end. I hope someone with some know-how and good test kit can figure out what measurements the Prime mixers could do better on, because in RMAA they test fine and I don’t believe it’s just the difference in brand on it I’m hearing.
Whether right at this moment people want to spend 4 times the money per layer on the players and like 2 times or more on the mixer for these (potentially temporary) differences with Pioneer, I guess that’s up to the buyer. If InMusic really ups the Prime processing sound, though, it’s going to make that choice a lot less likely. I can sort of understand why that guy is especially thrilled with the Pioneer system, though, considering how much trance he plays.
You’re guessing audio quality from YouTube videos !
That’s laughable
It’s not that laughable if the videos you’re comparing them to are also on YouTube. Your speakers or headphones are adding distortion and doing stuff to the frequency response, for instance, but if you’re using the same ones to do the comparison of things elsewhere in the chain, be it recordings or gear, it’s still valid to some degree… at least as much as subjective listening can be, anyway. The Prime stuff sounded noticeably smeared or veiled, dark or rolled-off, more distorted in the highs that do get through, and more muddy overall. Even on that guy’s own YouTube videos, compare his Prime trance set to the new Pioneer trance set. I also can infer some stuff with my own experience on older Pioneers, the DB4, MP2015, etc, that I’ve got in-person and also have uploaded onto my own channel. You of course have to be careful to check to make sure it’s an upload verses live streaming archive when comparing videos, as the latter ones are more degraded. The differences seem pretty consistent, though.
But still so definitely laughable.
Someone could have recorded their YouTube video with patient attention to signal gain structure in every stage of their gear, ensured great headroom, made sure nothing stayed blasting high into the reds but played something dreadful from source, like a tune their mate “remastered” and it’ll sound the way it sounds
Someone else could have slapped everything together in a couple of minutes but had a really clean source deck and track and it wouldn’t sounded abysmally bad.
The point is that we just don’t know what pristine or grotty gritty stages anything online, especially from individual uploaders. It’s the audio equivalent of sharing hypodermic needles … yeah, looks clean dunnit lol
This threads going nowhere, same old singer singing the same old song, to any empty room.
A mod should close the thread.
True, but assuming the same person had the same habits and also looking across multiple people for patterns, you can certainly draw some reasonable conclusions. Not perfect, but until someone runs the CDJ-3000 through some actual tests, I’m fairly convinced by what I’ve heard so far that the new Pioneer stuff probably lacks some, though not all, of the audio processing faults that Prime currently has. I also think I might prefer the new Pioneer system’s sound played off YouTube as much or more so than the Prime system’s sound live and in-person.
Haba
No chill whatsoever Reti
Thank lord cheeses this thread is over soon. We can leave Cola Olli olla hartsissa CDJ: n kanssa. He’s happy, hope you’re happy too. I’m more of a Pepsi kinda guy. Anyhoo. If he’s selling his D2s and S4, snap them up; they’re a great setup.
Hah hah.
Seriously, though, folks, find me a Denon Prime video stream archive that sounds as good as something like this stream archive:
And I don’t even mean finding me challenging musical material… not super dense or loaded with balearic trance highs or anything like that. Let’s make it easy. Hell, my Prime uploads don’t even sound that pristine, to say nothing of my stream archives. Maybe if I stop streaming live and record the video with 24/96 lossless audio to upload later I might get something resembling that on YouTube, like kind of a draw.
Because Youtube will re-encode your stuff to shonky AVC and low bitrate MP4a unless you have enough subscribers to get encoded to VP9 and Opus. YMMV.
The audio is all Opus or AAC. You can check it in the nerd stats. You’re talking the live stream. I mean the saved upload that’s been post-processed or the archived live stream.
Well there’s a nice background hum on it for starters!