Which mixer for best sound quality?

Engine DJ Hardware Media Players
23

Unfortunately, that often doesn’t include the ultrasonic range, nonlinear distortion, or a bunch of esoteric stuff that people clearly are able to hear directly or the secondary effects of, sometimes more than the usual specs, but for which you need a real expert and some high-end gear to detect. NWAVGUY, who designed the O2 headphone amp and ODAC, and did many gear tests before disappearing from the audiophile headphone scene, demonstrated this quite a bit.

I was surprised Rightmark even detected the IMD, let alone grouped it into at least some of its total harmonic distortion figures. I first assumed it was in error, but was able to confirm it with other methods like the spectrum analyzer in SoundForge when not using any conversions. Then other people verified it with their own tests. You do certain simple harmonic distortion tests and the players’ numeric results come out as clean as the InMusic specs, though clearly their original frequency specs were in error, like Engine OS is converting to a lower sample rate than the track you play.

So, it’s certainly possible a mixer can do weird things and True RTA & Rightmark wouldn’t show anything significant, as they’re not even professional grade tools and have flaws. Most of the people I’ve seen using any real pro testing gear on DJ equipment barely even scratch the surface on the tests they could be running. And that’s not getting into the people using consumer tools who don’t know what they’re doing or don’t bother to double and triple check with other methods.

2 Likes
24

I’m using my 6000s with either a Rane 2015 or a DJM V10 (connected via s/pdif). Both are great matches. The 2015 sounds slightly flatter and very crisp, while the V10 has a bit more of a punchy sound.

2 Likes
25

Yes, a Xone:db6 6 channel beast would be awesome with updated components and pro faders like the Xone:96.

Still looking for a db4, but no chance to get one at a fair acceptable pricing…

3 Likes
26

They are going fast. Even models with some minor faults like not working buttons, bad faders or faulty leds. In the Netherlands such units go for 800€ to 1100€

27

True.

Here in Germany are to many fake offers on eBay Kleinanzeigen and eBay.

Often they use gear pics from the web or other older auctions.

Really hard to get one

I know one dealer who has a brand new unit in stock, but they want 2k for it.

28

I now got the 1850. I was hesitant with this as I was a bit uncertain about (sound) quality of the mixer. But to be honest, I am quite happy with it, it sounds pretty okay to me actually. Could definitely be better but nothing too bad.

I guess I will upgrade to a V10 once it is available again. The Xone96 was tempting but I also need to use Serato from time to time and that is just too much hassle with the 96.

29

i’d go for a Allen & Heath xone 96, if you love deeper warmer sound, I’d also recommend a Rane MP2015 (my previous mixer, pioneer have always sounded a little too cold to my ears,

1 Like
30

Yeah, the Xone96 definitely is nice sound wise. But I also want to be able to use Serato with it from time to time. I also don’t like that it doesn’t have onboard effects. This makes me wait until the V10 is available again.

31

A couple of dealers in North America can source you a v10 if you’re buying outright. Cash in hand puts you way ahead of dealing with financing. Just an observation and a heads up.

1 Like
32

If you can get hold of one I personally would recommend a A&H DB4 mixer. Exceptional sound quality and mind blowing capabilities with all the functionalities.

3 Likes
33

“equaled apparently only by the analog Iso420 in tests.” are you talking about the test done at the lion and lamb ? if so the results are biased

34

Honestly, from Behringer DDM4000, to XONE92 you aren’t going to get much difference in Sound quality. Most of todays mixers are digitally processed (DSP) rather than analogue, to my ears they all sound rather unsophisticated and grainy. But then, adding faders, isolators and numerous transitional stages is unlikely to make it sound nicer. That said, mixers are for DJs to play loud music, so we should not be surprised if it doesn’t sound like a high end HIFI. If you want sound purity then you’ll need to find an old fashioned analogue mixer. My fav. Is always the A&H XONE62. For my SC6000m I use the RELOOP RMX60, which sounds great on our RCF sound system. But nothing compared to SL1210s connected to the XONE62. You could opt for Digital all the way, in which case the DENON x1800 / x1850 is certainly an easy decision.

35

The lion & lamb test methods were actually biased against the Rane MP2015 due to the fact they discarded certain tests that it would do well in, they were overly emphasizing of tests that are completely useless but for which the Iso420 would show on-paper superior results, their graphs were kind of crummy and lacking consistency, and they also left out a bunch of other measurements that are not that difficult to do, like IMD and discrete waveform traces. In spite of that, though, only the Iso420 was in the same league as the MP2015, they used three different Condesas to confirm that mixer design has some seriously heavy (though arguably euphonic) harmonic distortion, and IMO they did treat the valve MasterSounds in a fair way considering its moderate but still significant levels of harmonic distortion. I mean, if you’re buying an analog mixer with valves on its input section intended to add pleasing distortion, you know what you’re getting into. Some people also complained that the test didn’t bother with phono connections, but those people are clueless.

1 Like
36

Interesting, can you elaborate. It was sad to see they discontinued the DB4. Was on my “list” as a secondary / production mixer, it’s a monster for that.

1 Like
37

Very pleasant DACs on the record & master outs of it. It’s a great mixer even as-is but has some areas they could improve the firmware just to tweak some features, like allowing Split to be selected but overriding it when two or more cues are pushed without needing to go back into the menu. I believe I had a few suggestions for them to improve the firmware on the current DB4, and then an idea for a newer model or two in the DB lineup with updated aspects. A&H seemed totally uninterested in doing any more digital DJ mixers, though. If they change their mind, I’d love to touch base with them again and explain how it should happen.

1 Like
38

Ah so we cant really expect they will continue it in any way. sadge.

I was in contact with A&H as well and asked but they wouldn’t say anything.

39

I use the Rane 68 with the SC5000’s just a basic setup not using Serato just my external drives and streaming the sound is GREAT the 68 has digital inputs. I had the x1800 but I do believe I had a defective unit. I do recommend the x1800 or x1850. Any dj mixer that has digital inputs is always a plus. And high end cables is a must !

40

Well, I got a new DAC for my computer the other day (SMSL C200). This DAC sounds sensational (as it should by it’s specs). I hooked the DAC up to the Radius 4 and it still sounds pretty good but when I go straight from this DAC to my amp (Topping PA5) it does make a difference. The sound seems to open up and it’s not quite as flat sounding as the Radius 4. Saying that, the mixer still does sound pretty bloody good.

I also used the same DAC to compare digital output (coax from the SC6000M and usb from my computer). I volume matched them as good as I could, I honestly think you’d be hard pressed to tell the difference. I think it maybe loses a tiny bit of sparkle with the SC6000M but I sure as hell wouldn’t back myself in a double blind test. I was running the latest version of Engine on the SC6000M.

Completely subjective tests of course, but I think I’m going to go digital with my next adventure in dj mixers and use an external DAC (unless I somehow manage to track down an MP2015 for a decent price). The cheap chi-fi DACs are absolutely amazing now. Digital volume control on the C200. I might even modify an old djm-800, 900 or dn-x1700 to rotary.

1 Like
41

You really think it’s that harsh?

I think the X18xx mixers are fairly accurately reproducing the crappy audio processing on the Prime players that we can measurably explain. The Prime mixers measure fine, and it might be just some non-bypassable limiter or firmware issues near or within the mix bus portion of the signal processing that’s producing most of its wooly, mushy, powdery blur in-the-mix, poor low-level detail, and grainy top end.

In contrast, the highs on the Prime players sound tizzy, uncontrolled and laced in distortion in comparison to the Prime mixers’ highs that, if anything, can sound a bit constipated. That’s with Elastique off, which itself further increases distortion and does some weird fluttering of the phase in various bands even at zero pitch. The dry, granular quality to the mixer highs is maybe slightly offensive, but that’s a lot milder than what the players are doing.

I want more ambience around the mixer highs, and on the players less midrange blur and more control on those highs instead of the subtle sense of static or squirting canned air. You too often have to cut mids to make the Prime combo sound clear, but that’s just accentuating the player highs that, with the slightly reduced roll-off now, have more aliasing echo and rasp mucking them up. That difference in Prime player highs and overall increase in distortion is immediately noticeable pairing them with any mixer compared to other players.

That means to me the Prime players are most of the issue, because I can put old Pioneers & Denons, Gemini MDJs, and Hanpins into any of my mixers, including the Denon Prime mixer, and while the Prime mixer has a signature, that combo still beats the Prime combo on sound. Use a top digital mixer like MP2015, X1700, or DB4, and, yeah, it’s even better, but the Prime mixer is not awful with better playback piped in. I think even a halfway decent digital mixer, though, might be too revealing with the Prime players for some people compared to analog.

Nonetheless, if you want to go back to a digital mixer but not an X18xx, you’re not bothering with player integration over ethernet anyway, and you want tone control options, then the 900Nexus/SRT versions might be a reasonable choice of those three to go with Denon DJ Prime players, as the 800 is EQ mode only, and X1700 is isolator mode only. It’s a touch noisier than the 800, but has a more precise analog input section than the older model while not sounding quite as overly sweet and synthetic as the 900NXS2. You also might be able to find it at a much lower price than something like a 900NXS2 or DB4, even though that 48bit fixed point digital Xone has reduced latency than floating point mixers and more options, including my favorite of them on it: rotary mode.

Analog volume controls actually have a sound, which is why VCA to some extent but especially DCA and full digital mixers have an easier time of it.

2 Likes
42

I can recommend Model 1.4 as a mixer for the SC6000. Of course, you have to like the handling of the M1.4. I use the master EQ to compensate a little for the shortcomings of the SC6000 and the generally good sound of the mixer takes a little of the harshness out of the treble. Also, when running two kicks in parallel, it sounds a bit more pleasant with the M1.4 than with the DB4 I had before (it sounded too “digital” to me on the SC6000).

I had already discussed this with @Reticuli too. Perhaps the minor “shortcomings” or “imperfections” of an analog mixer “mask” the digital problems of the SC6000 a bit.

2 Likes