Unfortunately, I talked the X1700 up so much they now go for more than the X1800, and good luck even finding one in Australia. If you’re willing to pay a premium and shipping, you might find one in Japan nearby.
Good evening
I’ve joined this forum to ask about the Denon 1850 X.
I had a 750mk2 with my Technics, at Christmas I bought the SC 6000 M ( it’s the best device I’ve had since the Technics, much better than the CDJ2000 I had…). I decided to sell the 750 and get the 900 Nexus 2. I found that for home use the sound was no better. I sold it again and went to Allen & Heath and bought the Xone96.
I just sold the Xone96 to a friend for an urgent event.
It is true that the Xone96 sounds great but it is a mixer for mixing with software and PC or to have a lot of devices in the set up.
If you want to use FX you need to buy something external.
This is a problem for me because I’m looking for simplicity.
I have tried a PX5 at another friend’s house and it sounds great but the FX are not as easy to use as on the Pioneer.
The best desk on the market is the Pioneer V10.
But I’m a home dj and I think it doesn’t make sense to go that high.
I wanted to ask about the Denon 1850 X. I have read that it gives problems and that it breaks a lot?
Is that true?
Because I also read about Allen Heath and I know that it gives problems. Especially the PX5 but also the 96 with its cards.
In terms of sound I think Denon sounds better than Pioneer except for the V10.
I look forward to your comments
Thanks for your feedback!
DB4 has the best effects, but also is easiest to get lost in them.
In contrast, the effects are easy to use on the X18xx. As for durability, I have two X1800s and the only major issue for me has been the channel sweep FX not turning off when in the center, like a knob deadzone width issue, which a wiggle will fix… probably resolvable in the firmware.
As for sound, I think the new Denon DJ mixers sound quite physical and analog-like, but perhaps grainy, over-damped, and not as transparent in-the-mix as the MP2015. The old X1700 sounds more lush, euphonic, musical and has more options, but isn’t as smooth, detailed, precise, and fast as the MP2015. Personally, I prefer the MP2015 and X1700 sound over the X1800, but the X1800 integrates better with Prime for all the lights, effects, etc.
The V10 doesn’t sound quite as bloated in the lows as the prior Pioneer digital DJMs, but still has a mildly synthetic quality going on in the mids and highs, though even that seems to have been improved. It’s more matter-of-fact and less bloated, artificially-warmed, and sweetened than the DJM-900NXS2. YMMV. For me, too many channels, too cluttered, and I dislike the shared channel filter selection and dry/wet knob for the filters instead of by frequency. I also don’t understand why they went to the same analog input gain structure used by everyone else when their old method was functional & unique with the added “clip” indicators finally. If people want a recent six channel digital DJ mixer, though, then it’s the only game in town and certainly isn’t a step down in sound quality for Pioneer, though I can imagine some users preferring the sonic flavor of some of their prior models.
Yeah I missed one on reverb a few months ago for like $400 and kicking myself for it; now on the hunt for a PX5 because it’s the same price as used X1700s are going for.
Just to nitpick, both Model1 and Formula Sound offer excellent options in the 6-channel mixer category.
I have a question about sound in the X1800 (and presumably the X1850) – you mention it has an analog-ish sound; are you just talking about the sound a signal makes going through the mixer, or are you talking about the summing? I have a DB4 and I love the sound of it just playing a signal through it, but the summing is a bit too clinical in comparison to an analog mixer, where it seems far more dynamic. I’m also curious how the phono preamps are on the X1800/50 (on the DB4 they are definitely less than ideal).
Right now I’m torn between getting the X1850 or the PX5; the former has an edge in terms of feature/functionality (easier FX, digital ins, and the bells and whistles with the Denon media players), but I’m still leaning to the PX5 in terms of the analog signal path.
Yes, I agree that the best digital sounding mixer is the MP2015. But I don’t want a rotary.
I’ve already had one:
750mk2: I was comfortable with it but I wanted to change to a better mixer on a whim. With the fx that the 750 has it’s enough and you can record your sessions directly from USB with DJMREC. 900 nexus 2 ( I think its price is too much because I didn’t appreciate a better sound than the 750mk2 in my house). But like the 750 it is a table that already includes fx and recording. Xone96: It is the mixer that has given me the best sound. I loved the setup with the SC6000M. I thought I wouldn’t miss the fx but in the end I ended up missing them. The problem with the Xone96 is that you need to add another device for fx. Plus a recorder to record your sessions.
I’m looking for simplicity and not having so many cables and devices.
And I’ve also tried the PX5. Good sound and has built in fx. Maybe compared to Pioneer it is more difficult to use fx.
I think that for home use it’s too much to go higher than a 900 nexus 2 or a 96.
In fact, after the experience I’ve had with these mixer, I think that for home use the reasonable thing to do is: 750mk2, PX5 or Denon 1850 X.
The only one I still have to try out of these 3 is the Denon 1850 X.
The handling of the fx is very similar to that of Pioneer, it seems very easy. It has things that I think are better than the Pioneer ones, for example independent filters per channel.
And the few references I have is that it has better sound than Pioneer.
Having also the SC6000M should be the best option.
That’s why I ask here to get feedback on this mixer.
My doubts are:
How to record your sessions on the 1850 X? do you need to buy a recorder? Is it possible to record on Engine with a USB cable?
As for the fx, are they pleasant to the ear? for example the Pioneer filters are very squeaky compared to Allen Heath.
As for component quality. Do you think it is similar in quality to the 750 mk2? I have tried the PX5 and I find it to be of worse component quality than the 750mk2.
Thank you very much
Considering the 750mk2 is just a 900NXS2 without the SPDIF inputs and some of the other features, that’s not too surprising that they don’t sound hugely different.
I think the DB4 is a beautiful summer. It doesn’t hurt that the master and record analog outs are gorgeous, especially compared to the booth section. The tone controls’ modes change the sonic flavor in interesting ways. If you want more wooly, congealed, tapestry-sounding summing, then the X18xx line might be right up your ally. Then again, you might find either too much of a good thing. If you find the DB4 summing too clinical, maybe you’d find the X18xx line too confused in-the-mix. Perhaps some other mixers would be in your Goldilocks zone.
I honestly haven’t bothered using the DB4 or X18xx phonos, but if they concerned me, I’d use outboard discrete ones I have. I think the last time I played vinyl was on the MP2015 phono pres, which I find make MM/MI sound more like MC.
Yes, there are 6ch analog options still being manufactured, but to get sound quality like the digital boards requires sparse features and/or extreme price.
I love rotaries longtime. It’s the only way I use the DB4. Hate faders. Other than the sweep FX centering issue, the inability to rotary-style the X18xx line is my biggest gripe with them. Their curve is fine, though, unlike the d.4 or Xone 62. I might even be able to placebo effect my way to enjoying their over-damped, grainy, less-transparent-in-the-blend sound if there was rotary mode. I’d be like “these smooth rotations are making it sound so sonically smooth!” even though it would be all in my head, hah hah.
The X18xx line are digital mixers. You will connect it to a computer with USB for all your PC in/out needs, or you can connect it to a little outboard recorder if you want. You can even connect its SPDIF out to a USB audio interface that has SPDIF in, but that makes no sense to bother with except for audio tests.
I think the Prime filters are more like A&H than Pioneer, but not as lush/euphonic as A&H… like dry-sounding… again, the over-damped, grainy quality. I don’t like the resonance on the Pioneers pushed as compared to A&H or Rane’s version of Vermona filters. My favorite are probably the smooth-sounding Vermona wannabes like the Rane and the old PPD digitals.
I should also note the Prime resonance control is hidden in the menu, which is weird. IMO they should have kept the resonance where booth is, put the booth where balance is, and hidden balance in the setting menu. Strange changes from the prototype.
As for component quality, it’s hard to say. The newer Xones often get lambasted for feeling cheap, but A&H says they’re using more durable parts than before that they’ve proven with QA testing. Feel is important to people, though.
Component quality isn’t just about durability, though. Just an analog volume control alone has a sound all its own, and often you do have to spend more to get not only longer use out of it but a higher fidelity even when it’s still brand new.
I suppose this comes down to 1) if you can live without Prime integration and 2) how much you want to spend. If the former is yes, then that opens up a lot more options for you, obviously contingent on the latter.
1 Like
I have the Denon X1850 and although it’s got a nice sound and loads of tech features for the sc6000’s setup, it’s cheap for what it offers, because of this it is fitted with cheap components that will fail.(ie channel faders are rubbish) I would suggest you remove that from your options. It is a shame though, because it is actually a nice bit of kit, just cheap. P.s. mine is away being repaired under warranty as i write this. I now use a pioneer djm 750mk2, which sounds crap compared to the X1850, but is way better built and more reliable.
1 Like
Thanks for share your experiences with 1850 X
I decide buy PX5
I had Xone 96 but sales because I need FX and I don’t want have my table with many appliances
Thanks!
3 Likes
Nice, hope it proves to be a worthy companion 
Except the PX5 won’t work as well with the RMX1000 as the X18xx will.
Why? It has send and return - that’s all that it needs to run the external fx unit.
1 Like
Wow I just realized you replied to this six weeks ago - thanks for the comments!
That definitely answers my question. And maybe I’ve just convinced myself the DB4 summing is less dynamic than an analog mixer, but either way it sounds like the Denon will only make that issue worse. I may move to the PX5 myself based on this discussion; my main gripes with the DB4 are no effects loop, no MIDI out, and the fact that I’m going to lose the sound card the minute I upgrade my computer which will be any day now. The PX5 solves some of that but it loses the input flexibility the DB4 has (the matrix but also I use the SPDIF inputs for my Denon SCs). I also prefer the FX layout of the DB4 but that’s a given. I’ll likely hold off a while longer though; even used it’s hard to find a PX5 under $1400 right now.
I should add that based on what little I know about this I agree with you about the filters; I haven’t heard the Ranes but I have a Vermona pair that I love (the main reason I want an FX loop); I’m currently running my 1200s through them directly. Which means I can only use them with actual vinyl 
Xone96 and a delay pedal works really well for me. I wouldnt mind a djm 900nxs2 or v10 either though
Sorry to bump this topic but do you (or anyone else know) if this can be solved by adding a dry/wet pedal between the RMX-1000 like for example: One Control Mosquito Wet/Dry FX Blender. I own a RMX-500 and i’m doubting about the X1850, DJM-900 (NXS/NXS2) and the PX5.
Also I read alot of good stories about the Xone 96 but the lack of FX are holding me back. Anyone with experience hooking up external FX units which are stil simple in use?
I have a rmx1000. Why you ant a wet/dry pedal between the fx and a mixer? Does Your mixer have no send/return?
My current mixer Reloop RMX-90 DVS doesn’t have send/return so I’m looking for a replacement. In my search I found this topic: RMX 1000 connecting with XONE 92 – Pioneer DJ (however I own a RMX-500) which is why I’m wondering if the PX5 suits my needs or if I should go for the x1850/DJM-900.
If You want to use rmx1000 with px5, djm900 or X1800/1850 - all these mixers have send/return - will work great with the external effect. Xone 96 also is good for this type of effect (master send/return loop). Xone 92 - will be more difficult, as there is no dedicated fx loop, but You could work it out using aux and return channels. Just routing from the mixer will be less intuitive.
On RMX-90 your only option is to put the fx unit between master and the amplifier.
1 Like
I have a Mastersounds Radius 4, its not too expensive and something a bit different.
The linear Radius 4V looks fantastic too, and they have a well routed send/return option.
So I managed to break 2 faders in 1 month on my x1800. It’s a bit old, but the process to replace the fader has me a bit jaded.
I’ve also been having tons of issues with realiability of the mixer firmware. It won’t auto-detect my players like it should. I have to manually fix the deck assignment every time on boot. This has been an issue over a year, and Denon support hasn’t given me any update since I opened a ticket 3 months ago.
It’s really hard to recommend the Denon mixer, even if it comes with all the enhanced functions. Last thing you’d want is for show time to come around and some bug ■■■■■ up your set (has happened to me uncountable amounts of times now).
I love the mixer, I love the players, but the firmware needs some serious work, and the design needs some professional input.
Get yourself something like a Xone or a Pioneer mixer if you can live without all the bells and whistles.