Allen & Heath Xone 96 vs 92 - Is the 96 an improvement?

[@Davemech]

The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@Robertpardo89]

Finally a good review about these machines! thank you

[@nym053]

I could also hear difference between the 2 filters. Sounded like a steeper slope on the 92. Makes the 96 sound a bit more natural I think. Same goes for the eq. More natural sounding :)

[@Davemech]

I thought so too at first but it's highly dependent on the resonance setting. They have to be exactly at the same point. I couldn't really hear much of a difference when that was the case. The 96 does sound a bit better overall because of the updated circuitry etc. So that is a factor as well.

[@nym053]

Aarh okay that's why :)

[@DJWildstyle7997]

Excellent review! Bonus points for sounding like Fozzie from the Muppets!

[@JoshuaKane.]

haha there's a dude who reviews playstation games that sound like Kermit the frog , I'd love to have them do a review together!

[@jasonhardy142]

O my🤩

[@MrFunktone]

,🤣😂🤣

[@1Djsj135]

Lol

[@skoddeskoddesen4241]

Hi thanks for the great review! The EQs on the 96 is way better in my opinion. It sounds more smooth,full,open and balanced and dont take away too much in comparison to the EQs of the 92. I have been trying to decide for a week now if i should go for a Formula Sound FF2.2 L or the 96... Both has their ups and downs,but the EQs and the summing of the Formula Sound gets alot of positive feedback and thats the most imortant thing on a mixer after all...

[@Davemech]

EQ and Summing on the 96 is also very good. Would have to hear them side by side to see if it really makes any significant difference. At most it will be a choice between greater and greatest. So I'd still choose based on feature set.

[@spiegelkind2387]

The 96 has much a more musical EQ. Wouldn’t upgrade if I had a 92 just cause it’s already a solid piece of gear, but if you’re like me, saving up for a mixer I’d go for the 96.

[@Davemech]

Yeah that was my impression as well. The EQ is vastly improved.

[@pipuzz]

thank you! i really needed this!

[@djsarumawashi]

I was the 400 Like!!! ;-) Thank you for this content. Cheers

[@Davemech]

Haha :) thanks for watching and supporting !

[@Dbulkss]

Instill prefer the old school 92

[@borex9733]

great review thank you!Now to do a PLAY 1 Differently vs Xone 96 Review

[@tylon2999]

I had a Play Differently for 5 months but had to return it, rather than wait for a replacement I bought the 96 and I still have it. To hear the sound difference you need a quality sound system as they are very close. Where the PD excels is it is smaller, lighter, produces no heat and the eq's and and filters put it in a class of one. To compensate somewhat I purchased an isolator for for my 96.

[@aaronw4537]

@@tylon2999 Why did you have to return it? Did it break?

[@tylon2999]

@@aaronw4537 the paint on the face plate markings started wearing off after a few months use. I had one of the first ones so I think it was just an arbitration as Louie Vega's mixer looked fine.

[@mechanoid6152]

The Xone:96 is leagues ahead of 92. They did a great job with new features like dual soundcards, improved EQ, filters and layout as well. Currently my no 1 dj mixer :)

[@marknarain6617]

not really bro may be 5% better

[@anthonymattock4754]

@@marknarain6617 You can't plug two separate laptops into 92. If you want mix B2B sets with someone else running two instances of Traktor then the 96 is not just leagues ahead, but essential.

[@BradRadmusic]

Best review out there. Very pro review. Well.done.

[@Davemech]

Thank you kindly ❤️

[@syazwanali7094]

I like the Xone 92. Looks very flushed with my pair of XDJ-1000s. I keep the 92 in case for serious House & Techno events. Most of the time I use an XDJ-XZ or RX1.

[@alexfoertsch1]

This is a very good Review to the mixers. I really say thank you for this... 👏🏼🙏

[@Davemech]

Cheers, Alexander!

[@loichoendervangers6014]

This is just 96 propaganda

[@DJ_ACIDPUPPY]

Everything is awesome. except the fact that the LFO is missing?? ... I simply cant understand how this isnt one of the main features. This is what made me fall in love with Xone mixer

[@Davemech]

I think one of the reasons is because not a lot of people used it afaik. Plus they wanted less cramped A and B channels, extra C and D channels and a crunch function, dual usb capabilities etc. No room left really. The lfo was definitely a unique function and I would love to see mixers in the future with modulation capabilities. In eurorack there’s plenty already :)

[@albertopopescu7848]

Great review thanks!

[@Yanikikudon]

Super nice review Dave !

[@Davemech]

Cheers!

[@Ninja_Gaijin]

I willl keep my Xone 92. Why? Because both overheat. I have just spent a bunch modifying the PSU, replacing cheap caps, adding a heat sink and internal fan. Also an Innofader PNP2. I also have previously purchased a Radial Reamper, Radial JDI Duplex and Rolls MP222 mic preamp for adding options for the send/receive/aux/mic inputs, to keep gain structure sending from line level to guitar pedals etc. So I am already invested and happy with the Xone 92. I would like some of the features of the Xone 92, but I consider due to its added size, probably higher thermal signature and potentially higher repair cost (digital components), not fitting in my existing Xone 92 mixer case etc.. I will stick with the Xone 92 until I can afford a Formula Sound FF4.2L.

[@U2BROTHR]

I can't afford the 96. I appreciate the review. Rotary Xone 92 for life here.....

[@U2BROTHR]

aaaaaaaaan.... three years ago from this comment, I am now looking to own a 96. Go figure...

[@U2BROTHR]

and... now I finally bought a 96. Yippee!

[@ea11111]

@@U2BROTHR do you prefer it to the 92?

[@U2BROTHR]

@@ea11111- I love it compared to the 92. It sounds better. The channel eq’s are incredible. I miss the LFO on the 92, but otherwise, this is a way better sounding machine in my opinion. I was going to buy the LTD 92 and I’m glad I went straight to the 96. The 96 is built for the future. I don’t use the sound cards but I know that i have this option for me or other DJs.

[@U2BROTHR]

@@ea11111 Indeed. I do. I think it sounds even better and the channel eq's are tweeked to better frequency manipulation. The summation of the channels when mixing is refined and magical.

[@dominykasnuoboras5550]

What about the old xone 92 silver ? which was made in the UK, alot of people saying that the sound better of 92 silver than 92 black which was made in china ?! not talking about the new one. :)

[@Davemech]

A lot of people? I've yet to hear anyone claim such a thing. ;). Don't believe the whole 'things made in China are worse' argument. Unless someone can prove it scientifically, I don't buy it. :)

[@slaterbreaker]

Someone I know says this too...

[@dominykasnuoboras5550]

@@Davemech I heard this from sound engineers in my country, but yeah need the scientifically prove... ;)

[@Davemech]

@@dominykasnuoboras5550 certainly. I'd love to see results of a blind test between the two. I'm very sceptical about any noticeable difference.

[@Ninja_Gaijin]

@@Davemech the components on the Xone 92 out of china are pretty cheap / not the best caps etc. Have not seen a UK model to compare though, could have been the same. But I think it would have been better build quality

[@888berg]

Great work, saw your video on the DB4... were would the fit in with these... comparible?

[@Davemech]

Thank you! Not really comparable. Very different in almost everything :). Both have their purpose

[@909Mark]

Thank you for your explanation, very detailed.❤️

[@Wouterferdinand]

I don’t think you can compare the sound if both are playing at the same time right?

[@Davemech]

That will be difficult yes ;)

[@diegoamaro6159]

love the videos on your channel bro. quick question for you, im looking to get a mixer ( ideally that will last some years ) to go along with 2 denon sc6000. i was thinking about DB4 since its like all in one package but since its been discontinued and all that it kind of pulls me away but the massive fx processing is great. also was looking into the px5 but looks to simple and normal. in the other hand i see that the xone 96 is like beastmode and i feel that it will last quite a few years running the market. adding some FX pedals could make it boss. would you save up for a 96 + some guitar pedals or would you go another route? pioneer? ( personally not a big fan of pioneer mixers ) thanks for your time bro .

[@Davemech]

Thanks! Yeah I'd go with 96 plus pedals/desktop fx. It's what I'm doing now as well currently as it's easy to out a 96 on the rider in stead of having to bring the db4. And even though I really love the db4, I'm really liking the analog summing and 4 band eq.i do miss the looper per channel and input matrix. That combination is just genius. I hope they will create a new mixer with that functionality someday

[@mihalysipos]

DB 4 is great, but the fact that it does not work with apple products since the m1 chips, is really off putting. The other problem is that even though the fx is great, it is a closed world. No send returns, so no new exciting fx paths and no sending signal to samplers for real time sampling.

[@IamAvni]

Would had loved to hear some opinions on the phono and line input differences if there are any

[@Davemech]

Kind of impossible to do a comparison since vinyl in itself sounds different from any digital source.

[@danthebat666]

How did you have theses connected to the same system when doing the eq comparisons?

[@Davemech]

The 92 output is connected to the 96 which is used as the soundcard to record everything. This is the reason why I didn't do pure sound comparison between the two since I don't have the proper gear to do that. For the EQ comparison this doesn't matter though. The EQ sections are in fact different as the 96 has been tweaked on that front which I explain in the video.

[@pablodados]

Great comparison. The only thing I wish they'd kept from the 92 is the pre-fader option on the second fx send. Or maybe have the one pre button affect both sends (the Model 1 can be switched to work in this way). I would probably use the second fx send as a delay because I would never use it pre-fader in a mix. But the pre option would still be useful for cueing the effect in the headphones on the incoming track.

[@Davemech]

Yeah I agree. Would have been nice.

[@figitaltechno1699]

Ugh I wish the second send had the pre! I get burned on this sometimes.

[@gixerags750]

96 flogs the 92. Simples. Which track are you using ??😊

[@Davemech]

:) The track is mine. You can get it on my bandcamp. It’s called percussionism

[@gixerags750]

@@Davemech cheers.. !

[@modalflip]

Sorta curious, the 96 is quite a fair bit bigger than the 92 I've found, and doesn't fit in most normal 12" mixer flightcases that fit the 92. Have you found anything that would fit the 96?

[@Davemech]

To be honest no. I don't have the 96 anymore as I primarily use the db4 myself. Maybe ask xone support?

[@logan1194]

@@Davemech I use a Pelican case purchased from amazon and just cut the foam to fit exactly, FWIW for anyone looking.

[@mikedubz5576]

I keep going back to thinking i want a 96 but to be honnest. I truly think the sound on the xone 92 is superior in the filter delay filter sound and Especially in the eq. It sound more natural. The 96 is way to pronounced in its cutting frq and in boosting them. Nobody in their right mind would boost using the 4 band eq past 2oclock and Thats is dramatic i mean all 4 knobs past 1 you are way past hi fidelity. Best way is is to counter the frq you dont want and boos slightly the ones you want in order to shelve shape you sound sounding like a band pass high pass or low pass, also using the gain to boost sound in a 0 or +2db gain but keep the fader on the diagonal line indications in order to have natural sounding head room. I my self always kept doing these mistake using my xone 62 and xone 92 and continue to do the same with my xone v6. Alow your mixer to breath create a gap between the maximum level of faders or rotaries by working mixer at max 70-80 % of capacity use the gain to create the gap and while cutting frequencies use the fader or pot to increase desire sound to create elevation. Thats what i was thought by other high end big club touring dj's and i was mad using my mixers the other way around. LESS IS ALWAYS MORE. instead of boosting use this Method to cut undesired frequencies, use the rest to minor shape and by having fader movement left on slider to Move that to create the desired hype. Lastly i keep my filters always on cause using the resonance knob i use that to accent low Bass notes to counter i coming track or vs versa and then cut the resonance counterclockwise when i need to create the drop change. The popping of lfo is minute to me. The one bad or if i May say use less to me is the lfo on the xone 92. The xone 62 is the Best sounding then comes the 92 and Last Come the 96. And i say this cause no way the soundcard on the xone 96 is better Than my rme 400.

[@tylon2999]

Great tips, but the the Xone 96 is just a better sounding mixer than the Xone 92.The only liability I find with 96 it runs much hotter than the 92 so hot that I use a small fan with it.

[@borex9733]

Are you referring to the New edition Xone 62 , or the old Silver Xone 62?

[@mikedubz5576]

@@tylon2999 better in terms of flat response or in coloring the sound. I have all 3 xone 62 xone 92 and v6 and i can say the sound on the 62 Silver version is the Best. Also i guy i know that mods them told me that the internal on the old xone mixers have way better internals as far as capacitors and resistors. Now days its sell sell sell. I can assure you a good rme sound Card Will blow you 96 out the water. The 96 heats up cause it has cheap internals. Plus the Best sounding digital mixer is the rane 2015 by far Even better Than the Play differently. If i where to spend 4k on a mixer it better be a discrete circuitry like an alfa recording. Or a made to you specs condesa carmen v or my favorite condesa allegra with the vu meters and send return fx per channel and a Master 3 Band isolator. Now that is a serious mixer. I come from a full setup v6 Own a urei 1620le with 2 vf1 analogue filters And a rane mp2016 with the xp2016 expanssion. Also a djm850 A xone 62 And xone 92. Best sounding is v6 colored though due to valves Second is urei 1620le natural sounding The rane is 3rd 4rth is xone 62 And xone 92 The djm850 is Last its a tin can but versitile none the less.

[@mikedubz5576]

@@borex9733 old Silver xone 62 is a beast. I want to mod mine with rotary pots. My first love is the strongest.

[@mikedubz5576]

@@borex9733 i have the older 62 with the slider Master volume. Made in England not el China. They can have an opinion but reality is side by side i got them set up and to my ears the 62 is first Second the 92 then the 96.

[@ManglarMusic]

very very good comparison. Thanks a lot! good job

[@Davemech]

Thank you Manglar

[@cryptout]

Very nice video, is the signal to noise also improved? And how are the USB soundcards quality wise? Are the of RME quality? not much info on them so far except factory specs.

[@Davemech]

Soundcards are high quality. Very very low latency possible as long as your computer can handle it.

[@Davemech]

​@Martins Gorbacenoks Ehh. :) It's losing information how? Sorry to say but that makes no sense from a technical stand point. Only responding to this because I wouldn't want anyone being wrongly informed. The 96 sound cards do not sound crap. They are perfectly fine.

[@cryptout]

@@Davemech I'm sure they are okay, it would be nice if they give some specs about them though. The chip for example, which is used and what version. Not sharing the exact specs makes people suspicious. Driver support is also important, if Apple has a new OS out how long will it take for drivers to appear by A&H. With RME for example you can trust this will happen. Of course this is not aimed at you Dave but @ A&H. Right now I'm using a Xone 92 with RME Fireface so I am looking for an upgrade soonish..

[@Davemech]

@@cryptout Xone96 has class compliant USB audio interfaces so no driver needed ;)

[@ericpeters0n]

@ОТЕЦ DJ I'm also disappointed in the built-in soundcard in the 96 :( Did you keep the 96 in light of that? Wondering if a "downgrade" exchange to the 92 is in order --just to put the cash towards a nicer RME interface.

[@harryh3203]

Thanks for the in depth comparison. Quick question as someone moving from an all in one midi dj controller which had a soundcard, will I need a separate soundcard using both the 92 and 96?

[@Davemech]

Heya, The 96 has 2 (!) high quality sound cards build in. The 92 does not. Cheers and thanks for watching!

[@harryh3203]

@@Davemech Thanks for the info, looks like I will be buying a 96!

[@Davemech]

You'll love it. Enjoy!

[@martinjohnston4245]

Thank you for asking that question. I was thinking the same thing. Is this the 96 or 96 limited Edition one. Just wondering why the limited edition one was 2-3 hundred pounds cheaper. It makes me think it hasn't got a sound card.

[@martinjohnston4245]

​@@DavemechCan you tell me why the 96 Limted edition is nearly 300 pounds cheaper. What's the difference and does it have a sound card built in.

[@devintoner1160]

Xone 62 for life

[@manukkee]

I still prefer the 92, it is fully analog, smaller in size = easier to transport and less expensive...easy choice ! If you learn how to engage the filter, it will not make noises, its like beat matching, you feel it....and after a while you will not even think about it.

[@Davemech]

96 also has a fully analog signal path. And its EQ section is magnitudes better than the 92 :). Not to say the 92 isn't a great mixer, it is. But technically the 96 is just better.

[@manukkee]

@@Davemech I believe you, but a friend who works for a rental company said that the 96 sounds worse when pushed hard on a big system, compared to the 92. While i cant trust him 100% on this, you pay for a Digital interface that in few years will be OBSOLETE, so it better have higher sound quality. Still, there is no talk on the sound quality difference between the two, which is the most important aspect...yeah the EQ section, but what about the sound with EQ in the middle ? anyone compared the two at same gain level to confirm improvement ?

[@Davemech]

Untrue. The audio interfaces use class compliant USB. No drivers needed. So they will last for a very very long time, probably forever. It also doesn't take away the fact that 92 doesn't have an audio interface. So even if you don't use them on the 96 it's not as if that makes it worse than 92 on that front. And 96 doesn't sound worse mate :) trust me on this. I did a sound quality comparison and most of the difference is in the eq section which is a lot better on the 96. There are a few big names that are so used to 92 they keep using it but most pros that use xone happily use 96. Again, 92 is a great mixer but 96 is an improvement.

[@manukkee]

@@Davemech Thanks for the info man !

[@Davemech]

Anytime dude!

[@kliqueeject5050]

Thanks for the review. do you know if when you connect an effects unit to the new 96's Master Insert send and return, Does the effect come through the headphones or is it just the master and booth outs. I really need it to come out the headphones as i mix a lot mainly using headphones on all the time at home for recording mixes. Thank You :-)

[@figitaltechno1699]

how are you recording mixes with just headphones? Dual cue?

[@earnestgildon2704]

I just bought a Xone 92 and am now wishing I had gone with a DB4 or PX5... I don't love the 4 band EQ. It feels like a lot of work for not a lot of payoff. Also, I'm using a mix of analog and digital sources and I feel the highs and mids on the 92 are so pronounced and forward that I feel almost "beat up" by them. I'm having trouble balancing all of the sound characteristics in my setup. Thinking about some routing magic I can do to make things sound a little more full and also musical. I also miss not having a built in audio interface. :-(

[@Davemech]

Hi earnest, have you tried out the 96? The EQ section on that is a lot more balanced which has a lot of influence over the sound when mixing multiple sources. and it has two great audio interfaces built in. Might be a better fit for you. Px5 is also great. And db4, it's a magic box.

[@earnestgildon2704]

@@Davemech Thanks for replying! 😁 I need a mixer with a master midi clock which knocks the 96 out of the running. I originally wanted a PX5 and purchased one. But was then seduced by the idea / hype of the 4 channel eq, which, as it turns out is not that useful to me and my play style. I wish I had stuck with the PX5 (I read some terrible reliability reports here on KZbin) or saved up for the DB4.

[@earnestgildon2704]

​@@Davemech I solved my issue! The Phono preamps and the Line Level preamps are WORLDS apart (sound wise). I Just switched all of my gear (Turntables) to line level and now it all sounds fantastic! Thank you for all of your input!

[@AmbientWanderer]

@@earnestgildon2704 Sorry, but what do you mean by you switched all of my gear (Turntables) to line level?

[@909Mark]

Now I will choose xone96, dual usb is too convenient, I can connect a working computer and an entertainment computer at the same time, while saving the money for the soundcard and cable. Although xone92 is excellent and classic, I have used xone92. Personal opinion is strongly recommended to buy xone96, even if you already have xone92.

[@mrbass093]

Wait so you don’t need a soundcard to play with the xone 96?

[@sipage2240]

WHAT IS THAT GREAT TECHNO TUNE YOU ARE USING?

[@Davemech]

It's my own creation. Unreleased still. Still have to record it into a full production. Stay tuned, it will happen :)

[@TieBrothers]

Love it! Is it out now?

[@Davemech]

The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@Davemech]

@@TieBrothers The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@Dilivioofficial]

Hello Dave, is the low end being present when cutting the low, a normal thing? I mean it indicates infinite sign which should mean total low freq kill, right? I also feel that it has a little too much low when knob rotated to the left compared to xone92. Maybe a design flaw or this is how it should have been in the first place?

[@Davemech]

Certainly not a design flaw. They've tested extensively between 92 and 96. And the ew section of 96 is more balanced and musical. On the 92 the low cut acts like a 12db/Oct hi pass filter centered at 250hz. On the 96 it's centered at 180hz. So that could be the difference you are hearing. These are not isolators so there's never going to be a total kill of frequencies since there is always a slope. So it's how it is supposed to be :) you can always use one of the filters to kill the low end even further of course

[@Rustik1722]

Do you recommend any other mixers? Do you use the fx mixer in recording or only performance? What are you working on lately?

[@Davemech]

Hi Rustik, I use the db4 for live as well as recording lately as it's a significant part of my sound and how I build breaks etc. So I'm now recording tracks as a stereo file into my daw with the db4 acting as the audio interface. Then do some overall mixing on that stereo recording. The grooves already sound good when I play them live so it's kind of a waste of time to recreate that by recording everything seperately. And I love to create arrangements live in that way too, plus it's a very fast workflow :). Which mixer suits you really depends on what you are looking for.

[@Rustik1722]

@@Davemech Or what one could afford....LOL. AGREE on workflow! People over complicate things...I record the way I basically arrange and vice versa as well...I think it is like trying to remove a yolk from rest of egg...you basically are making a choice to use a literal mixer in lieu of say an Octatrack...correct?

[@Davemech]

@@Rustik1722 It's not really in stead of. For me the DB4 specifically was exactly what I was looking for. Although the octatrack could be used as a mixer, they are very different things. When it comes to sound quality as well. DB4 sound quality is great and its FX are studio grade. It's also a matter of having all the filters and fx controls right in front of you. Another thing is the mod-matrix, which is pretty unique. I used to DJ a lot back in the day so having a DJ mixer that's also a creative tool is just gravy :). For me there was never a moment when I was considering between the two really as I was looking for a DJ-type mixer for my live setup.

[@MsTrailerGuy]

I found the headphone cueing too soft on the 96

[@qasra1]

+1

[@ericpeters0n]

Agree. It's weird.

[@aestheticaudio6037]

The 92 have what appear to be unity gain markings on the faders. Has anyone ever noticed that? I always mix at unity. I feel like the only person on the planet who notices this. @DaveMech any ideas if this is a thing or if its just for aesthetic?

[@Davemech]

Do you mean you don't set the faders to the top? IMHO there's no reason why you shouldn't set faders to the highest point when a track is full in the mix. For level balancing between tracks trims are more useful. So you set the trim according to the fader being at the top. Makes life a lot easier :) I think the markers have something to do with the fader curve.

[@aestheticaudio6037]

@@Davemech thanks for your reply! The markings have always made me curious. You think it may be to do with the fader curve. Interesting. If you take a look at the markings, I'm not sure they line up with anything audible. Seems to be an upper, a lower and a central marking. I'm not sure how they correspond to the fader curve, Imo they do resemble unity markings that you would generally find on traditional mixing consoles though. I'm yet to find any info regarding these markings in the manuals or otherwise. Interesting to discuss this. Thank you.

[@RC75]

Ik hoor zoveel positiefs over de geluidskwaliteit van de 96 maar ik vraag me af of het tov de Nexus 2 de moeite loont aangezien ik met cdj’s speel waar mp3’s van Beatport op staan🤷‍♂️

[@Davemech]

Het zit m vooral in het summing gedeelte. Dus het mixen en layeren van tracks . Dat doet een analoge mixer op een hele prettige manier waardoor tracks echt samensmelten. Verder is de eq sectie heel erg goed en kun je vollop eigen FX er aan hangen als je die kant op wil. En de analoge filters zijn erg mooi. Ik zou voor een 96 gaan als de features je aanspreken, maar als je content bent met de Nexus dan is dat ook top toch? Probeer de 96 een keer uit zou ik zeggen :)

[@RC75]

@@Davemech Dat ga ik eens doen, anders blijft het toch in mijn hoofd spoken😉. Bedankt voor de snelle en duidelijke info!!👍🙏🙂

[@Davemech]

Graag gedaan :)

[@RC75]

@@Davemech Nog 1 vraagje als ik mag...🙂. Het samensmelten vd tracks, wat je zo mooi zegt, is dat effectief anders door het analoge geluid of door de EQ mogelijkheden? Ik speel vooral techno, van rustig tot relatief hard, en ik hou van de (drugsvrije) trance/sfeer die je kan krijgen.

[@Davemech]

Komt voornamelijk door hoe een analoge mixer signalen 'summed'. Dit gebeurd op een voor ons mensen prettige wijze :). Dus dat is waar de klank van de 96 er echt uit springt. De eq sectie geeft je gewoon veel meer controle , zeker met meer dan 2 tracks tegelijk, dan de 3 band van Pioneer. Cheers!

[@manueliribarne2326]

Hi dave, nice to meet you, im Manuel and ive one xone 96 but ihave got some problem with traktor scratch, i buy traktor in the past, and the original one have change about all versions, ive the new one but mi time code vinyl doest work, i read something and all post say the certifecated about Native works with scratch, but i dont have that lucky as tutorials on youtube....i upgrade the new firmware about xone 96 and traktor scratch ver. 2.11.11.03 the last one version, but doesent work....do you know why??? thanks a lot....Hug Manuel ps: sorry about my bad english

[@Davemech]

Hi Manuel, wish I could help you with this but I don't use traktor scratch. Best thing you can do is contact Xone support and/or post your problem in the Xone mixer group over on Facebook. Hope you get things sorted. Cheers

[@Dilivioofficial]

Press the white button for DVS, located next to the Phono port. Use the Phono port for DVS (remove the black caps). Enjoy.

[@hamadanemtescu668]

Can you please tell me the name of the track?

[@Davemech]

It's my own production and still unreleased. Keep an eye on my channel because I want to get that track released this year or early next year :)

[@Fantasticbeasts992]

Good track very nice groove hope you will get the release this year 🔥👌🏾

[@bustartoner]

Please give me this baby. 🖤

[@Davemech]

The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@Davemech]

@@Fantasticbeasts992 The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@BigJonsey]

Hey Dave is that you in the latest Andrew Huang video? Pretty sure it is. :) Thanks for the review/comparison!

[@Davemech]

Haha, not that I know of? :)

[@BigJonsey]

@@Davemech haha guess I was wrong. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3LOaWODpNtmpNU at 8:52 dude in sunglasses

[@Davemech]

Haha nope, wasn't me :)

[@extracrispymusic]

Sweet review, i currently have a xone 92 brand new sealed in the box but i’m debating just trying to sell it to buy a 96. is it worth doing this? im stuck at the crossroads haha

[@Davemech]

To me it really is. The eq section really is a lot better on the 96. And the sound cards are a great addition as well. :) And the parametric eq on the returns ;) and nicer buttons and faders (better feel) . Cheers :)

[@marknarain6617]

dox one 96 vs model 1.4

[@dankefurnichts]

the 96 is the perfect live act mixer ... i think 2021 i will grab one used :)

[@Davemech]

Yeah it's really good. I stickied with db4 because I use no laptop and really like the flexibility of the db4. But both great in tlwhat they can do.

[@dankefurnichts]

@@Davemech yea the db4 is also nice. but i use my fx direkt on my maschines and got a kp3 for extra fx so a pure mixer is a good soulution for me. it seems the EQ on the 92 is bit better tuned in total for what i can hear. well when i go to thomann next time i will test the 96 anyways :)

[@Davemech]

@@dankefurnichts 96 eq is much better :). Db4 EQ is 3band/isolator/hipass+lowpass filter so very very different. I use the hpf+lpf option on all channels. very nice way of blending stuff together. Lack of instert fx rules out the use of external fx though yeah. You'll love the 96 :) . PX5 might also be an interesting (cheaper) alternative for you.

[@user-dg6pf7xi1z]

Would never buy this type of equipment used worth paying an extra 500 for a brand new one with warranty

[@dankefurnichts]

@@user-dg6pf7xi1z i meant not from consumer market. i mean b-stock. that is with full warranty :)

[@yash9989]

Great comparison. Actually, separately, what's the track?

[@Davemech]

Late response, it's a creation of my own. Getg a lot of requests for it and will record it into a full track. Keep an eye on my instagram and youtube channel :)

[@garvald]

@@Davemech Dude release that track! I'll buy it

[@Davemech]

The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@Davemech]

@@garvald The track used in this video is finally released! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@garvald]

@@Davemech thanks for the DM. Took a listen and it's top notch. Will listen more on Sunday and purchase, cheers and congrats on the release

[@blessedjovan777]

Great tutorial but what track are you playing? 😄

[@Davemech]

Thanks haha. That is my own work. I'm currently working on finalizing this track so I can release it. As a lot of people have been asking for it.

[@Davemech]

I released it finally! You can buy it here davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@lucmermans37]

Hey, is the filter click on the Xone 92 really noticeable when playing on big speakers?

[@Davemech]

Yes. Soms dj's leave on and at zero but that can boost the bass slightly . 96 is better in that regard with the zero crossing thing

[@lucmermans37]

Dave Mech I usually slide the bass back in and then turn off the filter immediately . If the filter is all the way to the left will it also make that click noise? Or only if the change between filter on and off is big. (i’m used to playing on 96 btw but will play on a 92 soon)

[@Davemech]

@@lucmermans37 It's only when you turn filter on and off. If you leave it on, make sure you don't set it too wild otherwiser the bass boost will be pretty big

[@lucmermans37]

Dave Mech thanks!

[@lucmermans37]

@@Davemech Told them to get a Xone 96 lol. Not gonna bother with some clicks

[@kodymonroe2613]

I hate how if you change the filters you need to turn the filter knob from a different direction. It’s like they want you to mess up your set. Can’t see a single Advantage to that

[@Davemech]

The advantage is that it is logical and how filters work. A low pass cuts high frequencies. Therefore it is open at full CW. A high pass filter cuts low frequencies and therefore the filter is open when the cutoff frequency is at full CCW. A band pass filter is basically a combination of a HP and LP filter as it cute frequencies above and below the cutoff frequency. Thus it sweeps the frequency spectrum as expected. This is simply how filters work in music production, on synthesizers etc. And even on pioneer mixers. Where you have a combined HP and LP filter on one knob. 👍

[@brandon_expo]

Should i get a (Xone 92 and 2 xdj 1000s) OR ( Xone 96 and 2 xdj 700s)? Leaning toward the 96 and xdj 700's, would appreciate some opinions thank you!

[@jevvf3246]

What did you end up getting? I'm getting Xone 92 and 2 Xdjs, though I was thinking about the 1000s as well

[@brandon_expo]

Jevvf got the 96 and 2 700’s and I don’t regret it at all man this mixer is amazing and allows quick direct set up because it has the built in sound cards, compared to buying an ext interface and double the cabling. I’m not sure where you’re looking to purchase but give SweetWater a look if you haven’t they have unbeatable payment plan deals

[@dudemandudebro938]

Thanks for the good vid. So what do you use more now, the db4 or the 96?

[@Davemech]

Db4 is the mixer I use and will be using for quite some time until a new one is made :). It's the key piece of my live setup. I don't have the 96 anymore, but it's also a wonderful mixer. Both have their place as they are very different.

[@dudemandudebro938]

@@Davemech cool, I really do appreciate your input Dave

[@aktejas_2095]

@@Davemech How long has it been, i see nothing out doing the DB4, that is one beast of a mixer.

[@Davemech]

@@aktejas_2095 jup it's still on the lead. Going to check out the pioneer v10 soon, but myeah. Spec wise db4 still triumphs. :)

[@aktejas_2095]

@@Davemech from what I see it's a front house mixer with single effect layer for all channels, as any other djm mixer, in my opinion, materials and value are not on point for a $3000+ mixer, and certainly nothing to write home about, expect for the look and Design.

[@tomb.1537]

Good presentation and comparison. Track ID please ?

[@Davemech]

Cheers Tom, it's my own track. Unreleased. I get a lot of questions about this track so I'm going to do my best to record and release it within a few months ;)

[@20kvm]

@@Davemech Have you released it yet?:) Really dig it! And great video!

[@thibaud57]

@@Davemech is it released please ?

[@Davemech]

@@thibaud57 Not yet, this year went off the rails, but I did make a few recordings of it so I'm working on it. Stay tuned! And thanks for the interest :)

[@thibaud57]

@@Davemech ok thanks please message me when it's ok. Whish you the best for 2021

[@ACCOUNTANTB]

not actually...its only with DVS system built in.

[@DanteLara]

After having a Pioneer mixer for years... I just bought a Zone 92 tonight and I'm pretty stoked :) Living in LA as a DJ.. I have heard that the Zone 96 has had many factory issues from different sources. Plus Why PAY so much more if there still isn't even effects? I thought it was kind of silly that other cheaper models have tons of effects but not the 96? It's still pretty much the same having used both for plenty of sets over the years.

[@Davemech]

96 is rock solid. As with any product there are going to be some issues and people tend to voice those. Other than that it doesn’t really matter. 96 is pretty nice albeit a bit expensive currently. It’s definitely not pretty much the same as the 92 though as I’ve shown in this video ;). 92 is also great and certainly for the price. All good 👍

[@parisdontlikeyou]

Going on 2yrs with my 96 and no issues

[@TeunTeeVee]

Lekker nummertje man! nog van plan dit uit te brengen?

[@Davemech]

Dank Teun! Jazeker. Moet 'm nog steeds opnemen en tot volwaardige release maken. Wil 'm in 2020 uitbrengen. Zal ik zeker ook aankondigen door middel van ene video. Veel vraag naar deze track :)

[@Davemech]

Ha Teun de track is eindelijk gereleased! Kunt 'm hier kopen davemech.bandcamp.com/track/percussionism Cheers :)

[@TeunTeeVee]

@@Davemech Ow sick! ga hem straks even checken. Komt die wellicht op de USB te staan voor als ik weer eens mag draaien ;)

[@dalejail]

can you compare to v10

[@Davemech]

Don't have a V10 unfortunately.

[@dalejail]

@@Davemech i cant find any in depth comparison of these two mixers anywhere, im trying to figure out which sounds better when using analog rca from cdjs, into analog input/output of either mixer

[@Davemech]

​@@dalejailwell xone 96 is completely analog. Pioneer is digital. The analog summing of 96 is really nice. The filters and eq sound great as well. The V10 is pioneer's premium mixer so I'm sure it will also sound great. The upside of a fully analog mixer is the immense headroom and analog summing. .other than that I'd say that the features between these two mixers are so very different that that's really the thing to focus on imho. Which of these mixers speaks to you the most in terms of functionality. Go with that one. Because in the end your track selection and how you use a mixer is much more important than slight differences in sound imho. Because that will be the mixer that will translate your feeling to the crowd.

[@H4NDCRAFTED]

Do any of these send CC ?

[@Davemech]

Knobs on 96 yes

[@909Mark]

Do you know the model of xone96 AD/DA?

[@Davemech]

Nope, no idea. Support might be able to tell you

[@909Mark]

Dave Mech thanks

[@randomname3894]

Xone96 EQ sounds so much more useful.. I never liked the set frequencys of the high / mid part! Now you can really adjust the highs.. not just everything above vinyl hihats.

[@Davemech]

Yeap very well tuned on the 96!

[@davidwheatcroft7702]

track ID?

[@Davemech]

Unreleased track of my own. Going to send it to labels early 2020

[@nathanbocker5360]

Any update on this track?

[@sndrcve]

@@Davemech same here - would love to get this track

[@bubatzvertreiber]

@@Davemech Early 2020 is over - releeeeeaaaase! :D

[@Davemech]

@@bubatzvertreiber hahaha you are right I should really put this out there :P

[@surhun2707]

the 96 is full of extras but the same is true for the 92 :)

[@Steve_643]

The LFO is awesome on the 92 you just have to use it right!!!!!

[@Davemech]

Yeah it's nice ! Don't get me wrong :) it's a creative and nice touch, but is it worth the room on a dj/club mixer? You could do similar things externally using the send/returns.

[@Sp3z]

Great video! I have to get the 96 :D

[@Davemech]

:D enjoy!

[@3d_Ink_Oficial]

Ok im sold on the 96 lol I’m trading my 92 for a 96 with anyone

[@markyruss]

Yessshhh ya messsh

[@Reticuli]

X1800 did bigger first.

[@Rustik1722]

Dave, you wanna sell me yours and you get a new better one? LOL.

[@phantazzor]

you are bias in your video, for the filter it is actually better to have a bigger range between close and open, more detailed in my opinion

[@Davemech]

I cut out the filter sound comparison a little because it took up a lot of time and I actually couldn't hear a difference. Just the click part etc. I say that in the video as well. They sound the same. Bias? I guess. The 96 came out on top for me on most points. It's my opinion and what I heard and noticed. It is an improved 92, which is the whole point of the 96. So it's not very surprising :)

[@werter260]

Wow.... the 92 really is tighter than the 96 :(

[@qasra1]

Sheetiest mixer ever !!! I have a rental company of dj gear so i own : 10x cdj2000 nxs2 and dj mixers : xone23/xone42/xone62/xone92/xone96/djm600/djm800/djm900 nxs2/djm2000. I can tell you exactly what is wrong with this mixer : 1. Weakest channel faders ever, after 1 week of use, have changed 3 faders allready, yes you heared it - just in one week. Can't be compared with durability to xone92 faders, which i have for 3 years now and never had to change faders. Xone92 can take any type of playing style, but xone96 ? You can destroy faders in just 1 gig with little harsh playing, just little. Even faders from djm600 is stronger then this ! 2. The second issue is a cue in headphones ! It is not loud enough, lot's of djs decline xone96 for this reason and still asking for xone92 because of that. When cue/mst is on 12 o'clock, you don't get enough sound in your headphones when it's even on max level. I think it's a big problem while mixing on a big stage. 3. This mixer is getting fucking hot, so hot that you can burn your hand if you touch it's sides for more than 2 seconds... At first i thought my one was defective bacause i could not believe, that after so many years and after xone92, they offered us so cheap made mixer ... I exchanged it to another new xone96 and guess what : exactly same situation with new one... :( Then i found out it's made in China... After so many years they could engineer a magic mixer, but they made weakest sheet ever which faders feels expensive but inside is all plastic which brakes in 4-5 gigs ! You ll see it soon... i am so dissapointed... I owned almost all dj mixers and i never been so dissapointed before... Only good thing about this mixer i noticed and really worth mentioning is sound quality ! It will never become standard in clubs with this faders...And i don't know yet how it goes in long term use...

[@Jaacckko0]

hey, just wondering if you've got any updates on the xone96? Are those issues still causing trouble over time?

[@qasra1]

@@Jaacckko0 Issues still exist. It's still getting hot but i guess it's normal for this mixer because nothing happened so far... It's still declined very often by headliners because of it's weak headphone sound. And about faders : I somehow managed to make this channel faders last longer. After replacing old mixer to new one, from begining I made faders stronger, i put some material between fader and mixer's panel so it could not slide right or left during hard playing. They r not so soft anymore, but still playable. Prefer to have such faders than replacing them every week. Lot's of my friends are still having same issue with broken faders unfortunately.

[@Jaacckko0]

Qasra1 sounds concerning! I didn’t know the cueing was such a big issue either.. why aren’t there more people talking about these things? I’ve read almost everything I can find. Would you say the issues make the 92 a better choice despite the 96’s upgrades?

[@qasra1]

@@Jaacckko0 No i can't tell that xone92 is better choice because I also have Funktion-One Sound System, which i am using on festivals and when i am comparing them back to back, listening to xone96 is a one big pleasure... But as a renting machine, it's not as successful as xone92 and it's more problematic. I have done Boiler Room with my setups and many festivals... it's a common thing with xone96's that lot's of djs complaining about cueing. Some of them don't care or already used to it and still playing very well but i hear complains very often. I played on several xone96 and also felt same issue. It's more noticeable on a big stages on high volumes when stage vibrates more than usual (you r not in perfect conditions let's say) and you need sound isolation and decent power from headphones output... From it's price point i was expecting better build quality of channel faders and at least not worse cuing if not better...

[@Jaacckko0]

@@qasra1 sounds like you're running it in much higher production environments than i would be! But with that said, for the price we expect a very solid unit regardless of where it's being used. However, from everything I've seen and read it does still seem like the 96 is worth the extra money over the 92 despite the issues. Thanks a lot for your replies, hope all is well currently while the festivals etc. are not running for you. Take care Qasra, cheers!

[@luuk6718]

Goog review. Too much hands though.

[@Davemech]

Thanks 🙏 whoops another two

[@tigerdaytona]

Really a biased review in favour of 96

[@Davemech]

That's just like, your opinion man. I preferred the 96. One has to come out on top doesn't it? :)

[@tekoppentekoppen761]

Yup. Totally.

[@tekoppentekoppen761]

A 1200 dollar mixer that clicks. No thanks.

[@Davemech]

Well it is over 15 years old ;). 96 doesn't click :) and for 92 the work around is to simply leave the filter on at lowest resonance.

[@aaroninky]

the mixer was an industry standard for 15 years. tell me, how many club experiences did you have ruined by hearing a 25 ms pop? did you ever hear one? think about what you're saying ... you're paying $1000s of dollars for the analogue sound, the pre-amps, the gain staging and EQ. that's the meat of a mixer's quality. the audible click is a byproduct of this signal pathway that gives you a great, open, expansive sound. ultimately every high-end analogue mixer will have its quirks. think of it as a personality, most instruments have them ;)

[@EvanAvery-k7f]

This is so bias

[@Davemech]

Not really. I had no stake in either mixer. I don't own either currently and would recommend both mixers depending to someone's wishes. The differences and improvements I pointed out are really there. Some of it is subjective naturally but the difference in quality of the eq can literally be heard as I compare everything in detail. Take from it what you will :)