| Author
|
Pioneer CDJ 100 Or 200
|
Wozie
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
25
Posted : May 17, 2007 14:03
|
I own the 200's and have used the 100's for years, I suggest getting the 200's, they read re-writable CD's and MP3's. they have a folder search option and a CD text read option. They have the same feel as the 100's but have an extra bonus, a loop function that can be edited AND!!! the big bonus.....They give you a very acurate BPM reading! So all in all the 200's and 100 times better thatn the 100's.
Ill check up the cue / MP3 issue, Im sure its not true! |
|
|
Wozie
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
25
Posted : May 17, 2007 14:04
|
|
Ooops! double post - sorry - Hehehe |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : May 17, 2007 14:37
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-05-17 14:03, Wozie wrote:
AND!!! the big bonus.....They give you a very acurate BPM reading! So all in all the 200's and 100 times better thatn the 100's.
|
|
Or you can just beatmatch by ear?..
|
|
|
|
RenderingRebel
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
293
Posted : May 17, 2007 19:33
|
100s do fine for me, also a bargain second hand
I wanna get some for at home aswell
Dont need fancy players at home just to record a mix once in a while and try some new tracks
Also better to learn how to mix tight, i learned on 100s and my first time on 1000s was heavenly
Perfect mixes because you learn how to mix by ear, the 1000s only give you more control
 SQL: http://www.myspace.com/sqlmusic
Coming up: Releases
Planned: make tracks |
|
|
|
psytik
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
47
Posts :
71
Posted : Jul 17, 2007 19:58
|
|
yes my question is this what cdj are better for traveling and strong work outdoor dust ect |
|
|
|
trancedelux
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
69
Posted : Jul 19, 2007 01:50
|
I own 2 cdj 100.. I think that both the 100's and the 200's are built the same; same materials, same endurance. I think both are very light and resistant, so no difference regarding that subject, in my opinion.
The cdj 200 reads mp3; useful if you want to put a cd and lay down and enjoy hours of music, or if you like to mix with mp3. But that function makes this player a little slower when reading a disc, and the pitch also respond with a little delay, as I've been told. Also the jog wheel isn't as confortable as the one in the 100's.
About the BPM counter.. I find it to be distractive in most players and mixers, because you focus in the numbers instead of listening to the music, and you just can't trust the numbers. Those things aren't accurate, unless it's a Pioneer (in my short experience). So If your choice is to trust in the BPM counter when you mix, cdj 200 is a good option. My opinion is that i'ts WAY better learning to mix by ear, becasue that's part of the essence of mixing.. beatmatching by ear. I started with a Denon dual player (dn-d4500) which has an incorporated bpm counter.. and I trusted the numbers.. until I found out that it wasn't accurate at all.
About the loop function.. I had it on my denon dual player, and I used it... but when I switched to cdj 100's I didn't miss that function. At least for me, looping wouldn't be a feature that would make me go for the 200's instead of the 100's.
Besides, if you go to mix to a party and they have the cdj 100's, what are you going to do without your BPM counter?? having a bad time, for sure.
Finally, 200's are more expensive than the 100's. They've got more lights and buttons, maybe they look better, and have more functions (which I don't think that are really helpful), but I don't think they worth the extra money. I'd go again for the 100's. Hope it helped.. good luck
|
|
|
|
|
