Tell me about CDJ's....

[MUT3]

I started out with vinyl and in a perfect world I would have vinyl of all my releases that i buy on MP3. Too expensive. Wasted thousands on that. Im over it.

I mix way faster with CDJs. Dont have to pitch bend or guess as i would with vinyl.

I Can do teases and all that cause its quicker beatmatching with CDJs. You could argue about sound quality but i enjoy the crispness of CDs just as much as i enjoy a warm low end from vinyl.

[illandnatti]

I've used both CDJ's and vinyl, and the fact of the matter is that no digital file will ever be able to sound as good as wax. Period.

i'd say you are right with everything you sayd, but i have one question, cause you seem to be a neutral person about this discussion (like me too - play allso both vinyl n' cds)

Arn't nowdays wax record allso made of digital files? i mean - when i burn a wave file of the tunes i play (it's what i'm dooing with every file i can, if not i use a 320), and play it on my denon cdj or what ever. isn't it that i have digital in this case better quality???

or shoud i digitally put some dust pops over the wav file, til the people are satisfied about this?

you get what i mean?

A lot of the time these days, digital files are pressed to vinyl. This is true. However, I think the file that people are pressing to vinyl is a high quality .wav file that is loads better than an mp3 or even a CD quality wav.

Let me explain.
Highest quality mp3 = 320kbps (normally at 44,100hz)
CD quality file = 16-bit wav, 1440kbps @ 44,100hz

However, quality audio cards in studios are able to output at:
Wave IEEE float signed 32 bit,
12288Kbps
192000Hz

A song at this output would be around 90-100mb per minute of song length, which is just a ridiculous size to deal with for purposes other than mastering/remixing or PRESSING!

Probably not all vinyls are pressed at this quality, but I'd say the majority of them are better than CD quality. That's the difference.

[MUT3]

There isnt a magic format that makes vinyl sound "better"

They both use the same exact WAV file...Then the tunes are sent to be mastered...

Vinyl has its own mastering process that makes the track sound good on a vinyl disc.

Same with the digital release...But it still has to be 16bit 44.1k WAV as that is standard for most digital audio players.

I get what youre thinking though, I could be wrong. lol

[DJSmileys]

denon and stanton arent CDJ. dont be a tard.

go to a store and try them out. burning cds can get old real fast, but if you already have serato, CDJs are da bomb

if you really want to be cool, get the new CDJ2000s. you can put a flash drive on there and connect them with ethernet and stuff.

theyre basically cheating.

rofl, ok that the dumbest thing ive heard all day.

Idk wtf you use, but Stantons and Denons are the best CDJ's out there, except for the all godly pioneers . But if you dont have the cash to burn like most people, Stanton or Denons would be the way to go.

And i see your point, trying to say that CDJ's are cheating, and honstely they kinda are. Being able to go to any part of the song instaintly instead of rotating the jog wheel to the right spot. But because your able to do that, it opens up a whole new generation of possibiltys that vinyl would never be able to accomplish. Ill give you the fact that it might seem like its cheating from a vinyl players point of view, but i think CDJ's are the Gateway to a totally new incredable style of mixing, that the crowd is gonna demand. Instead of just track after track with a smooth transistion, its constally chaning, creating a new song by putting 2 together and just as soon as you think you know what to expect next, a CDJ artist can mix it up and blow your mind, without having to switch the vinyl that takes 30-45 seconds ( if your quick ).

And yah burning CDs does get reallly old really fast, but it beats going out and spending $400 on the same set of music. And this way you always have it backed up.

CDJ's are the way of the future

oh im not hating on CDJs, Ive used em. i especially like the 3 loop points. someday, when i'm a rich dj (oxymoron?) ill get a pair. i stick to my ableton-serato bridge setup right now i do one turntable on the right, rane ttm56 in the middle, and apc40 on the left. its pretty fun. ableton is the way of the future, but you still need at least one turntable to do the fun fx like rewinds, scratching, etc...

if you think i say dumb shit on this forum, you dont even want to look at the breakcore forum that i help admin

hey hey dont worry, i dont think that your dumb, but saying that Stantons and Denons arent CDJ's is retarted, thats all im sayin

Next

I've used both CDJ's and vinyl, and the fact of the matter is that no digital file will ever be able to sound as good as wax. Period.

i'd say you are right with everything you sayd, but i have one question, cause you seem to be a neutral person about this discussion (like me too - play allso both vinyl n' cds)

Arn't nowdays wax record allso made of digital files? i mean - when i burn a wave file of the tunes i play (it's what i'm dooing with every file i can, if not i use a 320), and play it on my denon cdj or what ever. isn't it that i have digital in this case better quality???

or shoud i digitally put some dust pops over the wav file, til the people are satisfied about this?

you get what i mean?

A lot of the time these days, digital files are pressed to vinyl. This is true. However, I think the file that people are pressing to vinyl is a high quality .wav file that is loads better than an mp3 or even a CD quality wav.

Let me explain.
Highest quality mp3 = 320kbps (normally at 44,100hz)
CD quality file = 16-bit wav, 1440kbps @ 44,100hz

However, quality audio cards in studios are able to output at:
Wave IEEE float signed 32 bit,
12288Kbps
192000Hz

A song at this output would be around 90-100mb per minute of song length, which is just a ridiculous size to deal with for purposes other than mastering/remixing or PRESSING!

Probably not all vinyls are pressed at this quality, but I'd say the majority of them are better than CD quality. That's the difference.

you know thats a very intresting statement. ive never been sure what vinyl was created from, but if thats true i could see how the quality could be tremendously better.

Honstely, ive only used CDJ's, cause i never had a chance to get my hands on vinyl, but i always thought the sound produced by CDJ's were amazing, and since they were newer they should be a higher quality of sound right?

now my question is, can you burn those 100mb wav files onto a CD and have the same quailty as vinyl?

[fractal]

for me, cdjs are a last resort (probably because of my lack of experience using em )

if i have to use digital, just give me a sec to plug my laptop in and keep my vinyl where it's at

[illandnatti]

denon and stanton arent CDJ. dont be a tard.

go to a store and try them out. burning cds can get old real fast, but if you already have serato, CDJs are da bomb

if you really want to be cool, get the new CDJ2000s. you can put a flash drive on there and connect them with ethernet and stuff.

theyre basically cheating.

rofl, ok that the dumbest thing ive heard all day.

Idk wtf you use, but Stantons and Denons are the best CDJ's out there, except for the all godly pioneers . But if you dont have the cash to burn like most people, Stanton or Denons would be the way to go.

And i see your point, trying to say that CDJ's are cheating, and honstely they kinda are. Being able to go to any part of the song instaintly instead of rotating the jog wheel to the right spot. But because your able to do that, it opens up a whole new generation of possibiltys that vinyl would never be able to accomplish. Ill give you the fact that it might seem like its cheating from a vinyl players point of view, but i think CDJ's are the Gateway to a totally new incredable style of mixing, that the crowd is gonna demand. Instead of just track after track with a smooth transistion, its constally chaning, creating a new song by putting 2 together and just as soon as you think you know what to expect next, a CDJ artist can mix it up and blow your mind, without having to switch the vinyl that takes 30-45 seconds ( if your quick ).

And yah burning CDs does get reallly old really fast, but it beats going out and spending $400 on the same set of music. And this way you always have it backed up.

CDJ's are the way of the future

oh im not hating on CDJs, Ive used em. i especially like the 3 loop points. someday, when i'm a rich dj (oxymoron?) ill get a pair. i stick to my ableton-serato bridge setup right now i do one turntable on the right, rane ttm56 in the middle, and apc40 on the left. its pretty fun. ableton is the way of the future, but you still need at least one turntable to do the fun fx like rewinds, scratching, etc...

if you think i say dumb shit on this forum, you dont even want to look at the breakcore forum that i help admin

hey hey dont worry, i dont think that your dumb, but saying that Stantons and Denons arent CDJ's is retarted, thats all im sayin

Next

I've used both CDJ's and vinyl, and the fact of the matter is that no digital file will ever be able to sound as good as wax. Period.

i'd say you are right with everything you sayd, but i have one question, cause you seem to be a neutral person about this discussion (like me too - play allso both vinyl n' cds)

Arn't nowdays wax record allso made of digital files? i mean - when i burn a wave file of the tunes i play (it's what i'm dooing with every file i can, if not i use a 320), and play it on my denon cdj or what ever. isn't it that i have digital in this case better quality???

or shoud i digitally put some dust pops over the wav file, til the people are satisfied about this?

you get what i mean?

A lot of the time these days, digital files are pressed to vinyl. This is true. However, I think the file that people are pressing to vinyl is a high quality .wav file that is loads better than an mp3 or even a CD quality wav.

Let me explain.
Highest quality mp3 = 320kbps (normally at 44,100hz)
CD quality file = 16-bit wav, 1440kbps @ 44,100hz

However, quality audio cards in studios are able to output at:
Wave IEEE float signed 32 bit,
12288Kbps
192000Hz

A song at this output would be around 90-100mb per minute of song length, which is just a ridiculous size to deal with for purposes other than mastering/remixing or PRESSING!

Probably not all vinyls are pressed at this quality, but I'd say the majority of them are better than CD quality. That's the difference.

you know thats a very intresting statement. ive never been sure what vinyl was created from, but if thats true i could see how the quality could be tremendously better.

Honstely, ive only used CDJ's, cause i never had a chance to get my hands on vinyl, but i always thought the sound produced by CDJ's were amazing, and since they were newer they should be a higher quality of sound right?

now my question is, can you burn those 100mb wav files onto a CD and have the same quailty as vinyl?

That's a great question, and beyond my expertise. We need a mastering artist/sound engineer who has done this for years to chime in right about now...any takers?

[DJSmileys]

now my question is, can you burn those 100mb wav files onto a CD and have the same quailty as vinyl?[/quote]
That's a great question, and beyond my expertise. We need a mastering artist/sound engineer who has done this for years to chime in right about now...any takers?[/quote]


Yah, cause really id love to know if i can make you sound any better then it already is. Please reply if yah know

[Omega Dub]

"now my question is, can you burn those 100mb wav files onto a CD and have the same quailty as vinyl?"

Yah, cause really id love to know if i can make you sound any better then it already is. Please reply if yah know

You definitely can't burn a wav file that is better quality than 16bit/44.1kHz to a CD, audio CDs are a fixed bit depth / sample rate format. However, there is the possibility that some of the newer high end CDJs might be able to do 24/96 playback, but that would require the song to be on a DVD, flash drive, or something such... I'm not sure because I perform with Ableton. This is one of my reasons for playing off a laptop, because I can render my original tracks at 24/96 and play them with Ableton + a nice soundcard, and get significantly better audio quality than standard CDs played on CDJs. Granted, the vast majority of sound-systems don't have the fidelity to reproduce much noticeable difference, but every once in a while I get to throw down on a Funktion One or Danley rig, and it makes it all worth it

Regarding the original idea about vinyl being pressed from better than CD quality digital files (24/96, or whatever) I dunno, I've never done mastering for vinyl or had anything pressed. I would suspect that most of the gorgeous sound of vinyl has more to do with coloration/distortion than it does with fidelity... I'd also appreciate if someone with some experience would chime in, it would be cool to find out

[illandnatti]

"now my question is, can you burn those 100mb wav files onto a CD and have the same quailty as vinyl?"

Yah, cause really id love to know if i can make you sound any better then it already is. Please reply if yah know

You definitely can't burn a wav file that is better quality than 16bit/44.1kHz to a CD, audio CDs are a fixed bit depth / sample rate format. However, there is the possibility that some of the newer high end CDJs might be able to do 24/96 playback, but that would require the song to be on a DVD, flash drive, or something such... I'm not sure because I perform with Ableton. This is one of my reasons for playing off a laptop, because I can render my original tracks at 24/96 and play them with Ableton + a nice soundcard, and get significantly better audio quality than standard CDs played on CDJs. Granted, the vast majority of sound-systems don't have the fidelity to reproduce much noticeable difference, but every once in a while I get to throw down on a Funktion One or Danley rig, and it makes it all worth it

Regarding the original idea about vinyl being pressed from better than CD quality digital files (24/96, or whatever) I dunno, I've never done mastering for vinyl or had anything pressed. I would suspect that most of the gorgeous sound of vinyl has more to do with coloration/distortion than it does with fidelity... I'd also appreciate if someone with some experience would chime in, it would be cool to find out

Thanks for your comments about wav files. It sheds a lot light on the subject.

Also my mate saw you play in Denver last week, and said that you were mental. Keep up the good work!

[charliefoy]

I think this whole Digital/Vinyl argument is totally down to preference. You shouldn't go for one option just because someone say's its better. Its whatever suits you. People might like the feel/sound/idea of vinyl, whereas some people may like the creativity options of digital methods. There shouldn't a right or wrong, do what you want to, as long as there's good music at the end of it, I don't care.

[Omega Dub]

Thanks for your comments about wav files. It sheds a lot light on the subject.

Also my mate saw you play in Denver last week, and said that you were mental. Keep up the good work!

no problem! and that denver show was a ragin good time

[Omega Dub]

I think this whole Digital/Vinyl argument is totally down to preference. You should go for one option just because someone say's its better. Its whatever suits you. People might like the feel/sound/idea of vinyl, whereas some people may like the creativity options of digital methods. There shouldn't a right or wrong, do what you want to, as long as there's good music at the end of it, I don't care.

THIS

[charliefoy]

I think this whole Digital/Vinyl argument is totally down to preference. You should go for one option just because someone say's its better. Its whatever suits you. People might like the feel/sound/idea of vinyl, whereas some people may like the creativity options of digital methods. There shouldn't a right or wrong, do what you want to, as long as there's good music at the end of it, I don't care.

THIS

Slight typo there, that should have been shouldn't, not should

[DFRNT]

I used CDJs and I've never had one complaint.
I used to use vinyl - it got to big and heavy, so now I just carry a CD folder.
it works for me - it might work for you too. I don't know, and I don't care.

Seems like this thread has gone awry.

My advice is to get some Pioneers - not because I think they're "tha bestest" (they might be though) - but because if you're using CDJs in a bar or club - it'll most likely be Pioneers, so you'll be used to the setup, the buttons, the way they feel etc.

There was an earlier post about Stanton c324s - I'm away to google them now and see what the chat is.

[ahier]

on a related note, do you guys buy 320 or wav from your online vendors?

[Sparxy]

on a related note, do you guys buy 320 or wav from your online vendors?

99.99% of people will notice no difference between a 320 and a WAV. I buy 320s, I DJ them out on CDs, I've never had any complaints.

[cyrusfx]

99.99% of people will notice no difference between a 320 and a WAV. I buy 320s, I DJ them out on CDs, I've never had any complaints.

This is true. The human ear simply isn't advanced enough to identify this difference. If somebody did a double-blind study differentiating mp3s from WAVs I bet the results would show people (statistically speaking) can't tell the difference.

The "better" sound in vinyl comes from the compression of frequencies and is totally subjective. I happen to think analog sounds great for dubstep, but to say its "higher quality" just isn't true. Other types of electronic music not based so much in bass would probably benefit from digital reproduction over analog.

[illandnatti]

on a related note, do you guys buy 320 or wav from your online vendors?

These days mp3's seem to have a higher standard of encoding. In the past (say like 2007 or thereabouts) a lot of 320's were not well encoded and sounded like shit compared to a wav. However, today there isn't much of a difference.

The places where it will make a difference is if you're playing on a system that's around or over 50,000 watts. Then, because the amplitude of the waveform is so high, it probably will make a noticeable difference (although I couldn't really tell you as I've never played on a system that big).

I do remember buying one track (Rektchordz - Feed Your Head (Elite Force Mix) https://www.beatport.com/en-US/html/con ... our%20Head) that sounded like shit as an mp3 and sounded WAY better as a wav. But most of the time I agree with cyrusfx, you can't tell the difference.

[Big MD]

finally we got to the real point of the discussion.

i tought it's just me, to not hear a big quality difference between Vinyl and a wav file. (out of the dust pops)

[DJSmileys]

I used CDJs and I've never had one complaint.
I used to use vinyl - it got to big and heavy, so now I just carry a CD folder.
it works for me - it might work for you too. I don't know, and I don't care.

Seems like this thread has gone awry.

My advice is to get some Pioneers - not because I think they're "tha bestest" (they might be though) - but because if you're using CDJs in a bar or club - it'll most likely be Pioneers, so you'll be used to the setup, the buttons, the way they feel etc.

There was an earlier post about Stanton c324s - I'm away to google them now and see what the chat is.

yah, pioneers are strong, sturdy and well put together and are ment to last for a long time and still be accurate

but Stanton c.324 are just tanks man

My pair has been threw a few tough times, transporting without a case, and even a crack head DJ who spilt vodka on them >.>.
But they are still alive today, Stantons are true troopers.

Another example, my friend has a pair, and once we were moving around CDJ's and while we were moving them, one of the CDJ's fell off the table onto a hardwood floor. You could hear the thumd, and my heart seriously stopped when i heard that ( you never wanna hear the sound of crashing equipment ). But we pick it back up, and it still worked perfectly, and that CDJ is still running today.

Yes pioneers are built to last, but Stantons are too, from my experence, Stantons are tanks, and if treated right, will last you a long time