Gains on the back are to stop IDIOT DJs turning them up and destroying sound systems.
Alan Heneghan > From: Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:36:48 +1000 > To: 'list 313' <313@hyperreal.org> > Subject: RE: (313) votes > > Doesn't the 32 have the gains on the back so you literally have to blindly > reach behind the mixer? Completely impractical. > > For fast and aggressive EQing and x/channel fading the Pioneer is far more > sturdy than A&H I find. For smooth, delicate mixing the 62 wins hands down. > This is comparing a 600 with a 62. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Benoît Pueyo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2007 6:25 AM > To: list 313 > Subject: Re: (313) votes > > I have A&H XONE 32. Except the fact it has 3 channels, it already beats > every pionner I got in hands (300,500,600) though i've never tried the 800. > > Anyways I dont think Pioneer have changed thier stupid EQs cutting > everything when you low too much the bass. A&H are soft, precise, and > still have punchy efft. Hooray for the filters aswell. > > So forget Pioneer... Now between 62 and 92 I would say 62 becasue its > cheaper, and for the extra $$$ 92 doesnt bring much more technically > talking (except if youre fan of all these hawtinesque concetual effects > and stuff). > -- > Benoît. > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : >> >> can I have your votes pls..? >> >> Allen & Heath 62 >> Allen & Heath 92 >> Pioneer DJM 800 >> >> ? >>
