Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The cult of rotary mixers

residentadvisor.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#71

Post by timc3 »

jjulius wrote: post #64
empath75 wrote: post #45

All mixers use almost all rotary controls — the only non rotary controls on most mixers are the channel faders and the cross fader. The primary advantage of a channel fader not being rotary is that you can see at a glance where it’s at, and quickly move from one setting to another to a rough level of precision. When you’re doing hip hop or certain kinds of house mixing (think your classic Chicago house style like Bad…

There has been a renewed focus at parties over the last few years, particularly within the minimal techno scene and especially in the Romanian subset of that genre, on quality sound at parties. Granted, those parties and that music are designed specifically for "the heads", so they're few and far between in the larger picture of club culture, but they do manage to throw a lot of festivals (see: Sunwaves) with thousan…

20 years ago UK raves/festivals used to advertise what systems they had as much as the DJs playing. It’s not a new thing. I remember deciding that I would rather go to certain places not based on who was playing but that they had a Turbosound rig.

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#72

Post by bichiliad »

vidanay wrote: post #58

And to think....all I want is a 6/12 channel stereo mixer with 3.5mm jacks so that I can combine my PC's and ham radio(s) signals into one common set of speakers.

This may just do it, and it has one of the smallest formfactors I've seen in a mixer that supports 18 channels.

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#73

Post by enneff »

H1Supreme wrote: post #67

This article has surfaced some of my current frustrations with the DJ Mixer landscape. I've been DJ'ing (mostly mixing at home) for 20 years now. Started with a cheap Gemini, and got a Pioneer DJM-300 shortly after I used that DJM-300 from probably 99-2014. It was an absolute tank. Aside from two crossfader replacements, it didn't have any issues. If the RCA's didn't get smashed in as result of a drop, I'd probably s…

I own an Allen and Heath Xone analog mixer and it has wonderful build quality and was quite cheap (sub $500). Much better than many of the cheap mixers I’ve used I’ve the years. A&H have a deserved reputation for great build quality.

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#74

Post by enneff »

laumars wrote: post #44
cellover wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the best Midi sequencer in the world that is being built by Sequentix: the Cirklon (1): a no compromise hardware sequencer hand built and built to last, with unique features. The waiting list is around 6 to 10 months! (1) https://www.sequentix.com/shop/cirklon-hardware-sequencer

I've never spent more than £150 on a MIDI controller and have taken mine on the road on many occasions for live performances too.

The Cirklon is not a midi controller, but a sequencer. There is nothing else on the market with its same feature set and build quality. It is a wonderful device and there’s a reason they are so crazily popular.

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#75

Post by ghostly_s »

jen729w wrote: post #14
antris wrote: post #2

I've been playing records for a few years and have had the pleasure of playing with a DJR400. Some personal additions to the article I'd like to share: 1. The physical feel of the device is amazing. Every knob feels and looks both smooth and incredibly sturdy. It's like the difference between driving a Mazda and a Porsche. Madza might be more versatile, practical, and cost-effective. But which one of them is more fun…

> After a long day sitting on a computer, the last thing I want is to feel like going to stand next to another computer. Utterly tangential, but this is why some of us still love shooting 35mm film.

...or why some of use shoot on manual-forward digital lines like the Fuji X-Series. :) I basically never look at the menus, and have never once felt like I had to 'debug' my camera.

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#77

Post by nraford »

jbergstroem wrote: post #63
antris wrote: post #2

I've been playing records for a few years and have had the pleasure of playing with a DJR400. Some personal additions to the article I'd like to share: 1. The physical feel of the device is amazing. Every knob feels and looks both smooth and incredibly sturdy. It's like the difference between driving a Mazda and a Porsche. Madza might be more versatile, practical, and cost-effective. But which one of them is more fun…

I own a Model 1 ( http://playdifferently.org/model-1/ ). The overall feel is very "analog" and the faders are by far the best I've ever used. The "filter" approach (LPF,HPF) is also hard to live without. With that said -- not going to lie, still remember the sets I've done on the Radius 4 or Rane's. The feeling creates a totally different experience and it changes the way you mix. Casual, fun - "closer" to the audien…

I own a Model 1 also and freaking love it, but I just picked up a Condesa Lucia V and have to say, I'm totally converted. The isolators alone are worth the switch. I miss 6 channels on the Model 1 since I use a lot of Ableton drum fills and loops, but honestly probably going to sell my Model 1 compared to the Condesa. Pure tactile, expressive joy. Both are amazing but the knob action on the Condesa are so expressive. Just so much for to work it in the mix. Both are gems though. Enjoy!

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#78

Post by nraford »

l33tbro wrote: post #19

Audiophile stuff is so often a bunch of baloney, but a vintage Bozak or Urei rotary actually does sound superior to modern mixers in a pretty noticeable way. Even for colder electronic stuff like minimal techno, I think the discrete components make things sound rounder and just more pleasant. Maybe the best rotary mixers being built today are by a guy in Adelaide, Australia (1). You'll have to wait 3 months (at least…

I just picked up a Condesa V and it is no doubt the best, most enjoyable mixing experience I've had in my 25+ years of DJ'ing. And Medhi is a legend in his attention to detail and customer support. Well worth every penny and minute of wait!-

PS - was kind of surprised this RA article didn't mention Condesa. Huge miss.

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#79

Post by laumars »

enneff wrote: post #74
laumars wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never spent more than £150 on a MIDI controller and have taken mine on the road on many occasions for live performances too.

The Cirklon is not a midi controller, but a sequencer. There is nothing else on the market with its same feature set and build quality. It is a wonderful device and there’s a reason they are so crazily popular.

It’s still just a MIDI controller at its heart. But in any case MIDI sequencers aren’t a new thing. You could achieve the same thing with an Atari ST.

Your point about build quality is the crux of the matter. These things are essentially just clocks and like with clocks you could buy a £5 budget wrist watch or a Rolex. People who wear and use their watch daily will justify the price tag of decent watch because it’s sturdier, prettier and they can afford it. But that doesn’t mean one watch tells the time differently to another. And equally a sturdier built MIDI sequencer doesn’t make a blind bit of different to the sound quality of hardware it triggers. Which was the point I (and the former poster) was making.

Now I’m not criticising those who do want nice audio equipment - we do the same thing in IT with dev laptops and give a whole plethora of “reasons” why. Like I said earlier, if you’re going to use something regularly then why wouldn’t you want to use something nice?

Re: The cult of rotary mixers

#80

Post by syn0byte »

hammock wrote: post #54
AstralStorm wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only problem with save/load in faders is haptics. Touch screens can show dynamic content and work like a fader just fine. (As opposed to a knob, which does not work right without the physical form.) Once someone invents a display with programmable shape, there's your programmable true fader.

>As opposed to a knob, which does not work right without the physical form What about the iPod circle? That is basically a digital pot. In fact that idea is used on a bunch of Bluetooth speakers including Harmon Kardon and Google Home to control volume.

iPod 'circles' are physical. They are resistance based just like pots. Nothing digital about them.

https://www.adafruit.com/product/1069

Post reply on HN