kebzer

There are very few pieces in my studio that I swear by: my 2kxl, my mk2s & my RME. Everything else is on debate. When people ask me what audio interface they should get, I always go by this rule, no matter what: 1. You own a PC/Win machine=RME 2. You own a Mac/OSX machine= Apogee

What's all this about RME? Tho, I still rock my beloved 9632.

Its true that the 808 doesn't worth anywhere its commanding price right now (north of 2k). The exact same applies also for the SP1200. Both are extremely limited machines, capable of doing only specific things. If someone can afford them, then they are a great addition to any studio, but mos def a novelty. One thing a lot of people misunderstand is that we are talking here about machines with 20+ years of abuse. That was the problem with my SP1200, so I had to let it go (it commanded a lot of expensive repairs all the time). Especially the 808 had differences from the factory, as it was hand-assembled with major variations on the qualities of the chipsets & analogue circuits installed. This gave it an additional value, as practically no 808 sounds the same like another one, but you can also imagine the nightmares coming from hand assembly... Internet always creates overhype and these 2 are a great example of that. I was losing my sleep until I got an SP, then I tried making my first beat on it and felt like I was in a time trap, with all the sour little surprises that await (e.g. no decimal points for BPM, overheating, rock hard pads, humongous size).

Its a hefty little piece, and def an upgrade from the previous one (especially the 8 outs & loadable sounds). I would never compare it to the original 808, not even vs recorded samples from the 808. The og 808 & 909 are a million miles away from this, cause they actually construct each sample on point, not playing it from a ROM chipset. I've only experienced the 808 live once, and I can only say one thing: it doesn't have a headroom limit. The 808 body builds as much as your monitors / soundsystem can handle. This is the true difference with recorded samples. Still, this TR8s is a great addition for quick sketches or nice 808 boom additions.

https://www.recordcase.de/en/dj-tech-handy-kutz Thanks for the link, but it says release date 30th April, wtf?

Where did you buy one??

Well, even Jeff has to eat, and a check from Pioneer is always welcome. So long with the turntablist bullshit he's been carrying around, I'm unfollowing him everywhere. This idea is dumb and will only demonize scratching even more to the mainstream ears, as every PaulyD will fuck the shit out of this feature in every small venue.

During my early DJ years I had to make a choice: invest in records or invest in equipment. I couldn't afford both at the same time, so choices had to be made. Coincidence was that SSL had just came out.

Want to clear something regarding the Internet: You UK guys were always lucky cause you had all the great imports and UK-only versions. We, the rest of Europe (and especially Balkans) never had any great imports and the prices were always super high. The internet was actually good for us, cause we finally had access to all those great breaks, which most of them remained completely unknown to us until Youtube.

I was part of the beta testing for it & tested yesterday the official release. Its solid as SDJ 1.9, but don't expect any difference like SSL vs SDJ. This has to do more with 64bit support and hi-def displays. It has a few bells and whistles around but nothing major for DVS users. My beef with Serato will continue forever until they unlock FX routing to the AUX channel on SL3/SL4. Those mofos have kept this locked since forever to push mixer sales and until SL boxes are irrelevant anymore.

Diggin runs, although highly fascinating & rewarding, were/are an extraordinary boring proccess. I always hated having to go through incredible ammounts of horrible music until a good cut comes out. I mean, my taste would become so intoxicated to bad drums, awful vocals & riffs or destroyed grooves, that I usually ended up surpassing good samples during the first hearing, so I had to repeat the whole process twice just to make sure I haven't left out anything useful. Though, nothing beats finding an unused sample or a b-side cover with a killer instrumental extention. Actually, I believe that diggin is more rewarding even from beatmaking itself, like finding and writing down a new melody vs playing it again. Truth be told. Also, hauling crates back home was always painfull to my back.

Yes, if a channel is blown, the HPs will only play on one side. Also, if the headshell/needle reads only 1 channel, it will again show on HPs.

What about the headphones? Does the sound come out OK?

Those screws on the CF sides are an absolute no-go. We've come a long way since bloody fingers and I don't want to remember any of that shit. Also, no fader curves on the upfaders. Not a very important feature but def a novice move by Reloop. This mixer offers nothing extra from options like the 250mk2, 450mk2, 61 or Z2. Its price doesn't mean shit.

It seems that a lot of these companies, which still make samplers, have completely lost it. Roland just keeps on making the SPs based on late 90s mentality. AKAI/InDesign can't make a decent standalone unit. Pioneer keeps on throwing shit against a fan (only 2 stereo outputs, seriously?). I find it absolutely impossible to believe that we had already reached the pinnacle of sampler design 25 years ago...For any single "new" sampler there is at least one alternative from like 20 years ago. These companies need either to start from scratch and build something OUTSIDE the laptop/PC realm, or just called it quits and just make midi controllers.

Adams and Focals aren't *that* much different in price for me... like 20% more for Focal Shapes, and the same price for CMS (possibly less cuz I've seen them on the used market around here, but not the Shapes or Adams). Which do you like between the 2, if price was equal? I'd still take the Adams (I own the og A7) cause they translate drums much harder than the Focals and suite my style. The Focals have insane definition on the highs and you can really spot frequency clashes, but they are still too "bright" for my taste.

As a former user of all 3, I can vouch either for the Adams (if you want to keep your budget in control) or the Focal (if you want to overspend). I'd leave the Genelecs out, as they are very "soft" sounded and not really suitable for hard-beat music.

Serato FX allow to dial in different parameters per FX and as I can see, the 72 allows for all 3 FX banks to be triggered individually, so I would expect that you can dial in params via the touch screen.

I used to have this problem with some files and they were locked as read-only, by default. I figured that these files were actually bought off a DJ-pool, so I guess the write-protection was some sort of policy. I had to manually re-save each file on a new location and under a different name, but I guess this is not an option for a full library.

I must give props to Rane for actually listening to everyone's wishlist and dropping them all on the 72, but design-wise it looks more of a modded 62 than a new mixer. Hopefully, the InMusic price policy will kick in and it will be priced below the S9, otherwise with Rane's usual pricing policy this thing should cost a kidney, an arm, a foot, an ear and a couple grandsons altogether.

porrtis, mind that the Eclers CFs have an extreme soft touch. If you're used to hammering on a heavy CF, like any typical Vestax owner, you'll have trouble getting used to the Ecler and might eventually not like it. I sold a 56s 3 weeks after getting it for the same reason, too soft for my fader hand to the point I couldn't feel it in my fingertips.

porrtis, no diss but you need to get things sorted out first (and use a lot of google, lol). The Rane TTM56s is NOT compatible with Serato. The TTM57 is, but only with Serato Scratch Live, not the new software Serato DJ. The NI Z2 is a great budget mixer for DVS use, but it is still a budget mixer. It does NOT have an Innofader CF, it has the Innofader MINI which is a very basic version of the normal Innofader, but nowhere close to durability and functions. Now, if you are really looking to get into DVS, while keeping the scratching part in full, you'll have to look only at the options available from Rane & Pioneer. Anything else is just inferior. The choices you have are: Rane 61 - compatible with Scratch Live & SeratoDJ Rane 62 - compatible with Scratch Live & SeratoDJ Rane TTM57mk2 - compatible only with SeratoDJ Pioneer DJM S9- compatible only with SeratoDJ Pioneer DJM 450 - compatible only with Rekordbox Pioneer DJM 250 - compatible only with Rekordbox

You don't need a new fader, you need a new mixer with advanced CF controls. I.e. you need a Vestax PMC 08. You can find one in decent condition for less than 500 bucks, which makes it still the best mixer for the buck. I won't recommend you the Rane TTM 56s, which is more like a BMW vs Mercedes, because you're a Vestax guy and you won't find the fader feel that nice on the Rane, as it is too soft.

For me the difference is as simple as a double-time chirp. I just can't make SSL/SDJ translate correctly pitch variations when doing such chirps, end of story. For juggling though, DVS is a godsend gift. It's impossible to calculate the ammount of money it saved me from rebuying double copies of the same records again and again.

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=DyupAP6_yWQ I still rock his Funk pt3!