|
I rated this one quite a while ago not long after I bought it. I got mine for 70 quid off a friend and it was in more or less mint condition.
If looks can be deceptive, the DJX certainly sets the example. I guess to have built an identical system but without a built in amp and speaker system (electronically) into a lovely metal cabinet with blocks of wood on the end of it would have made it cost five times more than it's initial retail price. Its appearance would then match the sound it makes.
I was generally amazed by the quality of the sound. I have heard that the samples are done at 22kHz, but they sound OK to me. This is a synth-type machine after all so it just adds to the character of the sound. I have used the DJX connected up to an 88 note weighted piano keyboard and even the pianos aren't too bad. For dance music I prefer them to my Korg's piano sound. The control knobs on the front panel which cater for basic sound modifying of the factory presets are a definite plus point. Some of the preset string sounds had that "Yamaha home keyboard" style trait in them, but using the Q and Cutoff enabled me to filter that out so it sounded much more like a professionl synthesizer. One of my main gripes is not being able to alter the envelope. Some sounds have a constant envelope where it would be more appropriate to have a decaying envelope (the patch called "Atmosphere") comes to mind. A favourite sound ever since I first played the DJX is "Trance Pad" - this is just true synthesizer territory although some notes do have audible artefacts in the samples - but what the hell, this is what synths are all about.
Memory deficiency is my main gripe about the DJX. It has volatile RAM so everything disappears once you switch it off, but also there is another problem. Any changes you make to a patch must be stored in the performance memories else, on changing to a new patch, any edits you made (effects levels, A/D, Q, cutoff etc) will be lost. In my view there are just far too many parameters not to have a more sufficient memory - but then the cost would rise again...
The sampler? Well it's pretty limited and I harly use it. I sampled a talking calculator into it once and a few other things, but never used it for anything serious. The output level of the sampler is also quieter than the internal programs. The only cure for this is to reduce the level of all the internal sounds and leave the sample playing at maximum velocity. It's nice though how you can add effects and use the knobs to modify the sound. In effect then, the DJX can make an infinite number of sounds - it's just whether they are useable or not at the end of the day. This is a subjective decision as well - so is the sampler rubbish? Well, no, not really - just a bit limited.
I use the DJX in combination with my other synths. It has a presence which can cut through a mix. I have also used it as a standalone machine for my less serious compositions. I believe that the DJX is perfectly capable for professional use as an additional sound palette to any existing equipment in the studio.
The DJX is pretty good for the money. I can also quote an article from Sound On Sound in September 1998 which said that "It is hard to believe that you are not dealing with a �1500 workstation".
For the money my DJX was well worth it, and should be regarded as more than a toy which I've seen quite a bit in the reviews here. I imagine most of that to be manifest in the instrument's appearance rather than it's sound. I always imagine rebuilding the DJX into a nicer chassis which looks like a professional synth, but for the money, my DJX was more or less a giveaway.
|
