Pic of the new crest rotary mixer..

infradead

Moderator
hey ya'll found this while i was looking through the wave music forum...

crestRotary.jpg


more fun pics
 

Peasant Nikon

New member
It is a neat looking mixer, but the review I heard was that it was comparable to Peavey DJ gear. That was one of the main reasons that I chose to cowboy up and finally order a 2016...
-Peasant Nikon
 

gene-pool

New member
Finally took the plunge eh? Very cool. Don't forget to take lots of pics and review the thing when you set it up.

BTW did you also get the XP?

-Gene
 

furiouskitten

New member
Those were taken by Paul Bell, a good guy all around, likes bass, if anyone has the opportunity to hire him for a show, I would recommend it.

Look around for Rhino and their Bassmax cabinets for some cool bass bins, one of the best I would say, up there with CD18 from Nexo, Basstech 7 from Servodrive and the LABHorn.
 

sniff

New member
funny thing is everyone went wiggy when berringer came out with pioneer clones, nobodys dissing the crest 2016.

is there something here i missed?


ts
xp2016.gif

mp2016.gif
 
Last edited:

dynagroove

crackmonkey
is there something here i missed?

the crest and the rane are both high quality clones of the urei 1620. the urei 1620 is itself a copy of the bozak cma 10-2dl. the key phrase is "high quality." are you maybe saying that the behringer clones of the pioneer products are high quality? the list price on the rane and i'm certain the crest as well is higher than the price of the original mixer they are copying. while i am not a fan of the tascam X9, it was also based on a pioneer product and used higher end components - there weren't many complaints about ripping off pioneer, just it's design flaws. behringer not only copies to the T, they use shoddy components to boot. i really like my behringer monitors, but you won't catch me buying any behringer mixer - copy or not. - jeff h
 

gene-pool

New member
That's a good question Sniff. It is a bit hard to justify but I suppose you can look at it this way: Both Urei and Bozak mixers are no longer made so Rane tried to revive the old design because it saw a market for it. I think it would be different if they went ahead and copied some currently produced mixer. The other way you can look at it is that they aren't really copying a specific mixer but the general concept of what rotary mixers should be like. I see your point though.

-Gene
 

mattu

New member
Re: is there something here i missed?

dynagroove said:
the list price on the rane and i'm certain the crest as well is higher than the price of the original mixer they are copying

well, not really. if I remember correctly, the list price of the Urei back 1983 was in fact $1299, which is even today higher than the rane 2016 (w/o the expander unit), and given into account inflation etc etc it's well higher. the Crest is built with a certain price point in mind, I think I've heard $1200, so again it's cheaper. you're lucky to find a Urei 1620 in great shape (and with 3 phono cards) for less than $1800 today.

however, your points are very valid, and there's yet another difference in this, and that is that both Rane and Crest have attempted to improve on the Urei design, Behringer have not - they've just blatantly ripped off other designs, down to the EQ sweep, even.
I'd say that neither Rane nor Crest have in fact improved on the original design, definitely not sound-wise from what I hear, but at least they've tried to incorporate some new features. I especially like the 4-band program EQ on the Crest, and the expansion possibilities of both. It's just a shame the Rane souds so cold compared to the Urei, and that the Crest presumably is pretty sh!tty built.
 

Peasant Nikon

New member
Rotary Wars...

I think that copying designs in a small market by businesses is something that happens ALL the time. Take a look at entry-level turntables, especially on the underside and in the guts, and you will discover that they all use the exact same parts. I assume they are like milk; all bottled at the same place, and then they have respective labels put on. Anyway, my point is that everyone in this industry rips off designs (although this does not make it alright). Sometimes it is a good thing, and results in a revolutionary product (1620 anyone), and sometimes, in is just a blatant rip off, and cuts the market up (and convinces many to buy shoddy products). The latter case damages things for all of us. The high end gear available to us is great, but you have to realize that if the market was not so small, things would be vastly cheaper and probably better quality. Anyway, the size of the market, and the saturation of gear choices ensure cost cutting and copying. Also, the high end market is not very fluid. People bunker down with their expensive gear and are not willing to part with it for the next new thing. This makes it less lucrative to offer expensive new choices. We are a market full of obsessed tech heads with what would be considered ultra high expectations. As said in previous posts, some companies improve (or re-offer) designs, and some just rip off in order to profit by association. A concerned mass will weed out the **** gear soon enough, and the new classics will be cemented (in relativity).

On to rotary wars :). The Bozak CMA-10-2DL and the Urei 1620 are two examples of the cliché “they don’t build them like they used to”. Those are two hard boxes built by passionate people who are spread too thin and silenced in today’s global economy. Putnam and Bozak and their teams devoted more attention to their products than any robot will ever be able to. They were built in a different time, and the makers probably endured research/production costs and time periods unimaginable to a corporation today. I think it was a sad day in DJ land when the two brands stopped producing. Hopefully, talented individuals will be able to tackle DJ equipment production independent of market parameters again, but until someone has the money and the drive, don’t hold your breath. Anyway, enter into 2003 and you have the Rane MP 2016, Vestax R-1, A&H V6, and Crest 6210 (not to mention various others). Each one (except in my opinion, the Crest) is a good attempt by a corporation to emulate those good old hand-built days. However, none of them come close to sounding like the older boxes. I believe this is much more an issue of build quality than technology not being able to cut it. The new mixers (I have only used the Rane) seem to be great compared to today’s offerings, but they do pale in sound quality face offs with the old boxes. However, I think there are benefits to this. They seem to be great boxes, and the companies have taken baby steps in the right direction producing them. “It does not sound as good as a Bozak” can still mean that said mixer blows almost anything out of the water. Also, I mixer-quality arms race may have wonderful effects on the DJ market. There are only so many brands who can pull off great mixers anyway, so I do not think that the high end market will get as saturated as the low end, and competitors will be driven to innovate and tighten standards. Anyway, I have been typing forever, I kind of forgot where I wanted to take this, and I am sure very few or you are still reading so I am going to wrap it up. I really need more work to do or something... Feel free to tell me I am an ***. I would love to get in a lively discussion about this stuff.
-Peasant Nikon
 

catnap

Major Label Whore
Re: Rotary Wars...

Peasant Nikon said:
...Also, the high end market is not very fluid. People bunker down with their expensive gear and are not willing to part with it for the next new thing....

i would agree with you a lot on that point. mixers by Rane, Allen & Heath, etc. are made to survive decades of use, and the people who own them know this and usually bought them for that reason.

it is a shame that there is such a huge low-end market in DJ equipment. i think asking $800 for a new Empath is quite reasonable, but asking even $100 for a new Gemini is rediculous. there seems to be some attitude in the low-end DJ market that because something is a "DJ" product (turntable, mixer, etc.) they can slap a high price on it. most low-end gear is CRAP... utter and total junk that both damages the sound quality of your music and also makes learning how to spin more difficult.

i'd rather see DJ equipment stay high priced and limited in choices if it means the quality stays top notch.

-sim*n
 

gene-pool

New member
Uneducated consumers are the ones to get screwed over, that's obvious and happens with every product that has professional use. That's ok though! There's always going to be a market for high-end gear and there's no shortage of competition in that field either so I don't see any problem. Sure people are bound to get discouraged by starting out with crap gear but remember, if only expensive equipment was available they might not have even started it to look into djing. It's all a matter of doing research, once you're sure that you want to dj it's not hard to figure out what purchases to make.

-Gene
 

catnap

Major Label Whore
mehhhh.... call me grouchy but i'm still of the "the less dj's there are the better" mentality.

-s
 
Top