Xone:42,62 - New to forum
Xone:42,62 - New to forum Posted on: 13.12.2010 by Elene Vanstavern Hey there. New to the community
. Was looking for a mixers specific topic but this appeared to be as close as I could get.I just purchased two CDJ-2000 units and am about to buy a mixer. I am sold on The Allen and Heath sound quality. I am debating between a 42 and a 62. I assume the sound quality is exactly the same. I have reviewed for myself the everything on them from the layout to the filters when deciding between the two. The 92 unfortunately is out of my price range. I really wish though that there was a $900 USD price range mixer (by A&H) that had a digital input so I could use the digital output connectors on the CDJ-2000. But as I see things, everyone seems to be more excited over the 42 vs the 62. I am wondering why people would choose a 42 over a 62. The USB connection is great but I don't see what major boost the 42 has over the 62. So maybe someone can shed some light on that if that be the case. Maybe it is the 4 band EQ people don't like anymore for some reason I don't know. | |
| Dorie Scelzo 08.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by movingzachb
|
| Elene Vanstavern 08.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by geminimech
|
| Elene Vanstavern 14.12.2010 |
Originally Posted by mostapha
|
| Elene Vanstavern 14.12.2010 |
Originally Posted by 3heads
|
| Celestine Porebski 14.12.2010 |
Originally Posted by 5meohd
|
| Dorie Scelzo 14.12.2010 | The 62 is older and it looks less like the DJMs people all at least believe they're used to and/or like. I'd choose the 62 over the 42 in a heartbeat, even with the less detailed channel meters. For me the CF assignment also being used for the faders isn't the least bit of a problem, because I don't use it to mix anyway. At least you can turn it off while using the faders. The 62 gives you two more channels (though the EQs are different and they can't be assigned to the crossfader or the filters), a second filter (though they both have to be the same type of filter and you can't assign a channel to both of them), and a mixer that doesn't look like the bastard child of A&H and Pio's design teams. You lose a more open layout that some prefer, DJ-style fader caps, full kill on all the EQs, and a few segments in the channel meters. I'd go for the 62 over the 42 in half a heartbeat, but if it were me, I'd also probably spend $300 on a basic but quality Vestax and save up for the 92 R. Oh wait, that's what I'm doing |
| Elene Vanstavern 13.12.2010 | Thanks for the response. Is your 62 a storm grey? Both are the same price where I am.
Originally Posted by 5meohd
|
| Elene Vanstavern 13.12.2010 | Hey there. New to the community
. Was looking for a mixers specific topic but this appeared to be as close as I could get. I just purchased two CDJ-2000 units and am about to buy a mixer. I am sold on The Allen and Heath sound quality. I am debating between a 42 and a 62. I assume the sound quality is exactly the same. I have reviewed for myself the everything on them from the layout to the filters when deciding between the two. The 92 unfortunately is out of my price range. I really wish though that there was a $900 USD price range mixer (by A&H) that had a digital input so I could use the digital output connectors on the CDJ-2000. But as I see things, everyone seems to be more excited over the 42 vs the 62. I am wondering why people would choose a 42 over a 62. The USB connection is great but I don't see what major boost the 42 has over the 62. So maybe someone can shed some light on that if that be the case. Maybe it is the 4 band EQ people don't like anymore for some reason I don't know. |
| Dorie Scelzo 08.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by movingzachb
|
| Elene Vanstavern 08.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by geminimech
|
| Verlene Geevarghese 08.12.2011 | Congrats sir. It is a fantastic mixer in just about every aspect, I'd love to buy one, but just can't shell out that kind of dough. |
| Elene Vanstavern 08.12.2011 | Though its been a while since I posted this. Wanted to update - I ended up buying a Xone:92. Love it to death. |
| Elene Vanstavern 14.12.2010 |
Originally Posted by mostapha
|
| Elene Vanstavern 14.12.2010 |
Originally Posted by 3heads
|
| Celestine Porebski 14.12.2010 |
Originally Posted by 5meohd
|
| Dorie Scelzo 14.12.2010 | The 62 is older and it looks less like the DJMs people all at least believe they're used to and/or like. I'd choose the 62 over the 42 in a heartbeat, even with the less detailed channel meters. For me the CF assignment also being used for the faders isn't the least bit of a problem, because I don't use it to mix anyway. At least you can turn it off while using the faders. The 62 gives you two more channels (though the EQs are different and they can't be assigned to the crossfader or the filters), a second filter (though they both have to be the same type of filter and you can't assign a channel to both of them), and a mixer that doesn't look like the bastard child of A&H and Pio's design teams. You lose a more open layout that some prefer, DJ-style fader caps, full kill on all the EQs, and a few segments in the channel meters. I'd go for the 62 over the 42 in half a heartbeat, but if it were me, I'd also probably spend $300 on a basic but quality Vestax and save up for the 92 R. Oh wait, that's what I'm doing |
| Elene Vanstavern 13.12.2010 | Thanks for the response. Is your 62 a storm grey? Both are the same price where I am.
Originally Posted by 5meohd
|
| Hope Franzi 13.12.2010 | Having owned both, I can say that the metering and faders on the 42 are indeed an improvement. It's worth noting that the 42 filter is also more easily assignable as it's not linked to the crossfader. It also has a greater frequency range and a bit more bite at higher resonances. I don't agree that the four band EQ is a significant advantage either - it may be nice in some circumstances but the three band isolator on the 42 channels sounds brilliant and is a little more versatile. The built in soundcard could be useful to you as well, though it's pretty basic. |
| Lonny Hoogewind 13.12.2010 | I just got my 62 4 days ago, along with traktor pro. It is hands down the best improvement to my dj setup. It makes my mixing with ableton better as well as learning traktor a bit easier. Its just so nice to have the quality essentials right there in front of you.. rather than constantly trying to decide on what controller I want to use.. how many eq bands.. how much resonance I want on my filters etc... its all there.. and I love it. 62 vs 42.. hmm.. for me the 62 was cheaper and I needed the 4 band eq. With 4 bands you can shape your mixes much better.. I mean literally/mathematically it just makes sense to "me". I'd try it with a controller first and see if it works for you. |
| Carroll Guglielmetti 13.12.2010 | Lots of people prefer the dj style faders and better led meters. The 62 takes after studio mixers too much in my pionion. |
<< Back to Reviews of DJ equipment Reply