[GH STREAMING]Passion Rotary Mixer MIX Sound Check Condesa,MasterSound,RANE,Boazk,Varia Instruments
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ต.ค. 2021
- From
gh-streaming.com
GH STREAMING PASSION 第3弾：DJ MIXER ロータリー 比較編
以前はロータリーDJ MIXERと言うと、UREI 1620やBOZAK CMA 10-2DL等が定番でしたが、E&S等のハンドメイドのテーブルトップタイプが近年、各国の各社から開発、発売されています。音質や混ざりを重視したモデルが多くある中、比較できる資料も少なく、今回の検証を行うこととしました。
GH STREAMING会員のユーザー様は24BIT/96KHZの高音質で音声のみも視聴可能です。
LINE UP
Bozak AR-4
Condesa Carmen V
Mastersounds Radius 4V
Rane MP2015
Varia Instruments RDM40
Bozak -CMA 10-2DL
テストは3つの部門で行っています。
①内蔵PHONOの音質比較
②LINE入力の音質比較
③Mix（混ざり方）の比較 (当動画コンテンツ）
②LINE入力はCDJより解像度の高いレコードリッピングした音を用いています。上記機材をフォノイコライザーアンプを通し、オーディオンターフェイスにてダイレクト録音し、再生させた音を入力しています。
③ロータリーミキサーに興味のある方には定番の音源の2曲を使い、リニアにボリュームを上げていく時の混ざり具合を中心に検証しています。各チャンネルEQはミキサーにより有無がありますので、今回の検証では使用せずフラットのままMixしています。
録音機としてRME（ADI-2 Pro FS Black Edition）をAD/DAとして使用しています。
RECソフトはSteinberg社のWavelabを使用しています。
[使用機材]
AD/DAコンバーター：RME ADI-2 Pro FS Black Edition
ターンテーブル：YAMAHA GT-2000（ターンテーブル）
カートリッジ：SHURE V15 TypeⅢ
フォノイコライザーアンプ：REY AUDIO
[使用ケーブル類]
・USBケーブル
SAEC 0.7m SUPRA-USB2.0-0.7m
SAEC SUPRAシリーズ 高品質 High Speeed対応
・音声ケーブル
CANARE L-4E6S
端子はNEUTRIK NC3FXX-B及びNC3MXX-B、REAN NYS373
Bozak AR-4
Condesa Carmen V
Mastersounds Radius 4V
Rane MP2015
Varia Instruments RDM40
Bozak -CMA 10-2DL
[使用音源]
Earth People - Dance [Beats]
Black Coffee - Superman
Special Thanks To
Chee Shimizu
RONDO（レンタル）
eastaudio inc.
Sound source: 96kHz FLAC
REC: 96kHz WAV
RECORDING
RME+WAVLAB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSION SOUND CHECK 3rd: DJ MIXER Rotary Comparison
The DJ MIXER edition starts with the rotary DJ MIXER.
Previously, rotary DJ MIXERs such as UREI 1620 and BOZAK CMA 10-2DL were standard, but in recent years, handmade table top types such as E & S have been developed and released by various companies in each country. While there are many models that emphasize sound quality and mixing, there are few materials that can be compared, so we decided to perform this verification.
LINE UP
Bozak AR-4
Condesa Carmen V
Mastersounds Radius 4V
Rane MP2015
Varia Instruments RDM40
Bozak -CMA 10-2DL
The tests are conducted in three departments.
① Sound quality comparison of built-in PHONO
② LINE input sound quality comparison
③Comparison of Mixing (this video content)
(2) LINE input uses record ripped sound with a higher resolution than CDJ. The above equipment is passed through a phono equalizer amplifier, directly recorded with an audio interface, and the reproduced sound is input.
(3) For those who are interested in rotary mixers, we use two standard sound sources and verify the mixing condition when increasing the volume linearly. Since each channel EQ may or may not be used depending on the mixer, it is not used in this verification and is mixed flat.
RME (ADI-2 Pro FS Black Edition) is used as AD / DA as a recorder.
The REC software uses Wavelab from Steinberg.
[Equipment used]
AD / DA Converter: RME ADI-2 Pro FS Black Edition
Turntable: YAMAHA GT-2000 (Turntable)
Cartridge: SHURE V15 Type III
Phono Equalizer Amplifier: REY AUDIO
＃DJMIX,#RotaryDJMixer,#Bozak,#Condesa,#Mastersounds,#Rane,#VariaInstruments
gh-streaming.com/soundck/7-14... - เพลง
![[안방1열 풀캠4K] 베이비몬스터 'FOREVER' (BABYMONSTER FullCam)│@SBS Inkigayo 240707](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_2HL-ogzzBU/mqdefault.jpg)
Boazk best points and sweetest frequencies.🔥🔥
Not quite as good as a Rolls passive volume control knob array with just one channel knob turned all the way up, though ;-)
I think the Varia instruments had the best points of every mixer
Condessa @0:23
Master Sounds @4:26
Rane @8:23
Bozak (New) @12:06
Varia @16:10
Bozak (Vintage) 20:33
Bozak for sure !! Easily the richest colouration of all !!!!
Condesa is more bassy and with open highs.
Varia is less bassy but with detailed highs more hi-fi.
MasterSound and BOZAKs are very good too...
Unfortunately RANE disappointed me (!!!) The video is very well, but the music used is compressed by the producers & mastering engineers...
Classical music is better for such test. Double bass to check the low end, saxophone & violin for the midrange, flute & piccolo for the highs.
I think I would buy the Condesa, but RESOR's mixer is missing from the test.
CONDESA & RESOR accept CUSTOM orders but not VARIA.
If someone knows what it takes to make them sound even more better CONDESA & RESOR are the choices because of customization!
Thank you for the very good video!
Thank you, this was a huge help.
The Condesa was clearly the best for me, followed by the Varia Instruments.
why do u say that, just curious ?
sound comparison buttons: @00:24 @08:23 @12:06 @16:10
Good to see you`re also comparing rotaries Aaron! Made your choice yet?
@@Saltywax haha yes bro, lovely to meet again. I bought a nice offer 2nd hand rane mp2015 and we are using it now at our parties in vienna
@@Kaspar_Houser choicccce
you missed @4:26 and @20:32
1st) Condesa, 2nd) Varia
Haven't listened via headphones yet but have used most of these mixers and the Radius is easiest to use, really precise and intuitive.
The radius sound and bang per buck, it's easily the best, also the Xfader is a big help as well...
Get the PSU, it's even better.
I've had one for 2 months and it's amazing.
Awesome video, a lot of work went into this. Yes it’s not perfect due to all the reasons most of us interested in rotary’s will of course know but through good headphones it sounds pretty decent.
In reality all of the mixers in the video are top notch and in the same league, I’ve just gone for the Mastersounds 4v mk 2 as I just liked the features it has more than some of the others. 👍
Mastersounds
using the filters and isolators would have been amazing.
RESOR & WAX electronics are missing from this great test!
Possibly one of the best video ever… a dream video… for many years we ALL wanted a comparison video between these mixers… unfortunately… reduced to 💩 level by the track chosen to compare audio… ZERO DYNAMICS…
That’s dope a Yamaha gt-2000 was used. Can definitely notice a fuller sound compared to the standard sl-1200.
@8:30 vs @16:17
Can I connect an effects unit to any of these? like the RMX 1000
We want to know your top 3 cheers !!
And the winner is?
It wasn't easy characterize each mixer because of YT audio quality and each track had to different dynamic range where "Superman" on all mixers sounded qute compressed.
For me Radius 4V and MP2015 sounded most neutral.
Bozak AR4 had most colored sound.
Varia RDM40 sounded best for me with most balanced and musically rich sound character.
I believe with different audio material and source there maybe would be different results.
Thank you for video!
(Used Sony MDR-Z1 on Fioo M11plus)
The Rane's upper mids and overall transparency kicks the other mixers booties' into next week. The main reason the Bozaks sounds 'colored', though, is this dude doesn't know how to run them.
Explain how the Bozak should run please.
@@deepsoulfulsounds I just wrote, what I heard. I have no advice or special expertise on how things "should" be used. There are so much variables in Audio chain than (Digital file medium and format, TT's, needles, DAC's, cables, preamps and so on) One must look at each step and possibly optimise it to get best possible results. Usually, people who prefer to spend money for these type of gear, takes sound quality pretty seriously.✌
@@ingmarsjansons3665 Your post with the explanations of what you heard was amazing and appreciated! I'm interested in how @Reticuli would run the Bozak!
@@deepsoulfulsounds I was wrong. New Bozak is a cheapo IC design, so you can't knock its sound based on simply how he was running it exactly. New Bozak company had exaggerated its pedigree like it was just a tabletop version. They now are more honest about it.
My comment was based on the old Bozak's channel volumes' unity being at max, and if you are only running one channel, you crank it all the way up there and control the overall volume with the master. Otherwise, you get worse total dynamic range, damped transient attack, and roll off of the high frequencies.
Another thing to consider is whether or not the isolator on the mixer can be bypassed, because if it can't you're hearing its group delay effects at all times. If you use isolators and don't ever bypass them, comparing a mixer with either no iso or with a bypassable one in bypass mode to one that's always in the path is comparing apples to oranges.
Condesa or bozak!
Rane MP2015 sounds surprisingly full and holographic
Yes! It's crazy tight, clear, resolved, fast, and has the best upper midrange I've heard from any DJ mixer.
The Iso420 has similar measurements, slightly better in some areas and slightly worse in others, but trades the upper midrange 'inner light' on the MP2015 for a slightly less artificially-enhanced & contrast-y-ness that the MP2015 lends to everything. That boosted sense of forward contrast and slightly-hyped macro detail on the MP2015 (I only heard it in direct A-B comparisons to the original signal) could simply be the result of the small amount of group delay on the pseudo-FIR 2nd order Linkwitz-Riley tone control 'isos'. While the MP2015 channel tone controls are more transparent than the 4th-order IIR isolators that some other mixers use on their channels (and the MP2015 uses on the master iso), it's not as gentle on the signal as some EQ-style tone controls like on the Iso420 that produce zero group delay when they're centered. Might also be a little effect from the sample rate conversion maths, since it is a digital mixer, but I didn't hear much difference regardless of the rate of the SPDIF input.
I'd put the X1700 and then the DB4 as runner ups for best-sounding digital DJ mixers. The DB4 is interesting in that it definitely does not have any sense of boosted, forward contrast to the sound. So, perhaps that contrast-y characteristic is present on most floating point digital mixers, but most such mixers have so much more color to the sound (like the X1700) that you can't hear that trait. The DB4 is 48bit fixed point and hypothetically has more accurate low-level processing around the zero crossings than 32bit float. Very analog-sounding for a digital mixer. Can't match the MP2015's clarity, speed, or tightness, though.
Is it just me or are the condesa and vintage bozak extremely similar if not the same?
what is your impression, which did u find as the best ?
Never been a fan of the Rane volume curve... all the other mixers bring in the tracks very smoothly, the Bozak AR-4 especially. The Rane has a very steep decrease past the half way point.
Interesting. I don't recall noticing that on my MP2015s. Feels more gradual than the Xone 62 and especially the Mackie d.4 upfaders that I believe are just linear. Maybe the fader curves you like best are quadratic and the Ranes you used were only log?
I don't think the uploader set up the Rane's gain staging well. I find it sounds best at unity which is at 7 for the master volume and 0 db or below. The uploader has it peaking. He also has the individual channels up at 10 (too hot) but he should have been using it like he did the Bozak where you rarely go above 8.
@@labouie Old Bozak's unity on the channels is max. Rane MP2015 unity is also max on the channels' bottom volumes, session section, and all the outputs.
I'm also not quite sure what you mean by "0 dB". You mean the meters? That's called 'nominal', which is another word in audio levels for average. The top LED on a digital mixer is usually either digital brick wall clip or, especially if there's a limiter, -1dBFS from it. If you have the output pot at less than unity (max on the MP2015), then you're actually sort of cheating things. In that case, since the MP2015 is floating point, you can run crushed into the top meter LED and the only thing you're at risk of clipping is the headphones' DAC. That's a dumb way to run the mixer, though.
Best way to run a DJ mixer is to bounce the meters around the nominal zero point, with peaks & troughs symmetrically above & below. At the very least, don't intentionally go into the second-to-top LED, which you should use as your emergency safety. Once you're into the second-to-top meter LED, there's no way of knowing how close to the top LED you are. Very crushed, low-dynamics music probably shouldn't go much beyond the meter nominal zero since such signals won't bounce much.
The Rane MP2015 likes an overpowered system. I have mine always running in the green, at 25% of max power.
Condesa so fat sounding, best summing, sparkling highs, even with the obvious compression
Varia seems like a good balance between warmth and transparency but not as exciting as Condesa
3/4,5 - mastersounds / bozak - fat bass, rane
Bozak has inverted channels (L-R)
Varia Instruments too..
First two mixers have 1st track inverted channels...
Hi,for your ear ,what is the best price for quality?
These are all expensive. If you want the best sound among these, it's the MP2015. If you're on a budget, get an X1700.
The sound on the carmen is way superior tto the rest. No joke and im a mastersounds loving guy.
But Sorry condessa wins by far.
Stereo imagine is better.
And deeper.
While in the mix it retains a better mix and summing is out on its own league.
Sorry mastersounds you have allen short.
Why not too many varia instruments rd40 users.
Bozak CMa and rdm40 sounds best through my headphones. Why so many choose condesa ?
It sounds muddy. Is it a condesa cult following 😂
if you hear it in person it blows everything else out of the water
it's not transparent but it's so fat and musical
Rane currently does not have an analog mixer, the mixer used in the video is digital and cannot be compared with other mixers....but the original Rane mp2016 was a great mixer, but of course like everything in life, even though a mixer may be better than another that has achieved fame, it will be difficult to convince fanatics of brand x or y, people let themselves be influenced by the name on the brand, they are not objective and neutral when making an evaluation....
You're running some of these mixers wrong. The (old) Bozak and Condesa are both channel volume attenuators and passive mix bus, yet you're running the volumes never past a certain point, which turns them into low-pass filters.
Hahahaha
Sorry but the guy is running it normal.
The bozak and condessa have UNITY at around 7 or most comonly known as 3oclock.
Out of all mixers the condessa won.
Bozak is not Even a contender.
Best there where condessa and mastersounds.
Mastersounds is the Best Especially the mk2 with the added filter section but only with the lps Option.
@@mikedubz55767 is 2-2.30, not 3 o'clock, and you'd be surprised how often that claim of unity is false. I proved Rane in that fib. Nope, MP2015 is unity at max. Urei's were claimed to have unity at 7ish, but I've never bothered to check one for that.
I doubt Condesa is being honest about the real unity point on the channel volume. If it has no split cue, no PFL metering, and the master out volume affects the master meters & the headphone master feed (or lacks the latter), then all they have to do is fib and tell users to turn the master volume up more and the channel volume down to get unity sort of at 7.
Ditto on all the Pioneers prior to the V10. On the digital Pioneers, it really didn't matter, and you could put the master at max and literally run the DJM-1000 at 7 as unity with the exact same fidelity. With the rotary kit for it, that's what you were meant to do.
On an analog mixer even without the ability to immediately compare the signals with unimpeachable headphone or metering feeds, you can still prove unity with measurements, as you'll get the best total dynamic range when everything is at unity. On the passive pots, they also act as low-pass filters as the resistance increases as they're turned down from max. When in-the-mix and blending, though, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but with one channel all alone, it's certainly not ideal to run the volume lower on the channel.
The old Bozak is definitely unity at max on the channel 'faders', because the design is (ignoring the phono stage) just an input selector, active headphone splitter, passive volume attenuation where the pots wired together act as the sum bus, with another splitter routing bus for booth & master, and glorified microphone preamp as the master out section. Thus, when one channel is running alone, you have its volume at max, and you control the house volume with the master "gain". Honestly, it's a ludicrous power to put in a DJ's hands, but that's how it's designed, with many destroyed drivers to show for it.
Condesa claims they're using the old Bozak circuit design but 'voicing' it by ear instead of emphasizing matching parts systematically. That might explain why the Condesas have orders of magnitude more distortion than any other mixers, even tube mixers, they've been compared against. You also liked the 4V, so you clearly like the added distortion. I suspect this is linear harmonic distortion that's correlated to the signal and adding a euphonic 'warmth'. Condesa may also have JFETs in there somewhere instead of transistor amplifiers or certain resistors that the old Bozak use, as those can produce distortion like that, too.
The new Bozak AR-4 turns out to have little to do with the original Bozak and is just an analog IC design, so they could in fact have their unity anywhere they chose to design into it. Other than the inferior metering on the AR-4, it could potentially have similar topology to the oldest Rane and Biamp DJ mixers, or Urei for that matter, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it. It's also too bad that the channel tone controls don't show up in the PFL headphone or channel setting metering, as the lack of trim-gain knobs at the top could be compensated with that since they are channel isos.
are you guys serious about buying these mixers?
Yeah, quality matters and the not brand name, marketing is the science of fraud.
why not?
@@Musical.Maze.1 Often, but it can also be just about telling the truth.
So useless, because YouToube compress anything into Shit
Not really when you consider this is how 90%+ of music is being listened to
I mean,i had this conversation with this guy last year who was running his mouth about his system..I was like blah blah blah,everything gets compressed on YT...I guess the moron figured it out at some..You have to take the whole system into account in a live setting and be a skilled DJ or the mixer does not matter..
Though all the mixers in this have the same disadvantage. You're on the right track, though, because objective tests like the Lion & Lamb mixer test roundup is more useful, as running music through the mixers is just a subjective experience. I mean, I think some bands sound better recorded overly-hot onto tape. Certain jazzy stuff sounds way better to me through tube gear.
Don’t know what you’re trying to prove, all the mixer’s sound the same.
Or are you just trying to show how many mixers you have access to
lmao