Jump to content

SL 1210 M5G vs. SL 1200 Mk. II


Rob G

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

 

SL 1210 M5G vs. SL 1200 Mk. II:


You thoughts. Plus's, or minus's for either of them. Also if you were freelancing at at a club which would you rather see in the DJ booth when you show up for work?


Rob G..

 

 

I have the 1200 MkII's at home and they are wonderful. They are the industry standard.

 

What the M5G's offer you is the ability to change the pitch range from +/- 8% to +/- 16%, which gives you more range on the pitch fader for doing beatmatching and things of the like. Also, the 1200 MKII's have a "notch" at 0% in the pitch control which can get kind of annoying when you trying to mix a track that needs adjustment around there on the pitch fader.

 

However, I don't think I've seen too many M5G's on any DJ's rider that comes into town. The vast majority are fine with the MKII's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I've been scratching and mixing for over 10 years and I'd go with the M5Gs. I recently bought a pair and they're just better than the old school 1200s. The +/-16% pitch is key. Plus, they really aren't that much more expensive once you start to wheel and deal. I got mine for $510 each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

bangpow,


So as far as your perspective reaches it's the SL1200 Mk II's. Thanks for your input.


Rob G..

 

 

I'm saying you can't really go wrong with either one, but you can save a few bucks and stick with the MKII's.

 

Sure, the M5G's have +/- 16%, but have you ever heard a track at +/- 16%. The vocals either sound like Barry White or the chipmunks. Also keep in mind that the pitch fader is the same lenght, so every little move on the pitch fader is going to exaggerated when you have the pitch at +/- 16%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I'm saying you can't really go wrong with either one, but you can save a few bucks and stick with the MKII's.


Sure, the M5G's have +/- 16%, but have you ever heard a track at +/- 16%. The vocals either sound like Barry White or the chipmunks. Also keep in mind that the pitch fader is the same lenght, so every little move on the pitch fader is going to exaggerated when you have the pitch at +/- 16%.

 

 

^^^^^^^^^^^

 

By the way, that is actually me. I will be using this username for now on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Call me old school. I prefer the Mk IIs. I just got so used to them that nothing else compares. For the record, I happen to love the zero notch on them. I would rather feel zero % pitch than see it (indicated on a LED) as I tend to visually focus on the mixer.

 

V.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

i'm not going to lie, I don't like the notch at 0. Which is why I went into my MKII's and removed them. You can put in the regular M5 pitch faders in them if you choose, but I found the light doesn't light up when you are at 0.

 

Since I used to be the repair tech for 1200's for our company, I figured out how to take out the ball bearing from the pitch fader. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I'm saying you can't really go wrong with either one, but you can save a few bucks and stick with the MKII's.


Sure, the M5G's have +/- 16%, but have you ever heard a track at +/- 16%. The vocals either sound like Barry White or the chipmunks. Also keep in mind that the pitch fader is the same lenght, so every little move on the pitch fader is going to exaggerated when you have the pitch at +/- 16%.

 

 

Um, you can switch back and forth between +/-8 and +/-16, so its like having an MKII where you have the option of hitting a button and the pitch range doubles.

 

If all you are doing is mixing songs with vocals then the added pitch range probably isn't worth it. If you're more into experimental stuff or scratching the pitch range is well worth it. In fact it would be nice if there was even more range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Um, you can switch back and forth between +/-8 and +/-16, so its like having an MKII where you have the option of hitting a button and the pitch range doubles.


If all you are doing is mixing songs with vocals then the added pitch range probably isn't worth it. If you're more into experimental stuff or scratching the pitch range is well worth it. In fact it would be nice if there was even more range.

 

 

I know you can switch back and forth. My point was that when you switch it to 16, every little movement on the pitch fader is now exaggerated because of the fact that the length of the pitch fader is still the same. So when you move the pitch fader a little bit, the fine tuning isn't as precise.

 

You would be screwed if you had MORE range. It would be very difficult to lock those beats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I know you can switch back and forth. My point was that when you switch it to 16, every little movement on the pitch fader is now exaggerated because of the fact that the length of the pitch fader is still the same. So when you move the pitch fader a little bit, the fine tuning isn't as precise.


You would be screwed if you had MORE range. It would be very difficult to lock those beats.

 

 

The added pitch is not just for mixing. When you're scratching, the ability to slow the platter down or speed it up allows you match your sample to widely varying BPMs. That's key for phrase scratching. I scratch with the sample pitched below -8 more than half the time.

 

When you are actaully manipulating the record instead of just letting it play getting the pitch exactly right doesn't matter nearly as much, you just want it in the ball park, and you want as much range as you can get. That's why vestax tables have +/-50%.

 

Also for pitching musical samples to make beats the added pitch range is key, especially when you're dealing with jazz records that are often very slow or very fast. Half of the fun of making beats is changing the way the original record sounds.

 

I will say this about mixing. It's not uncommon when +/- 8% is too little for me in mixing. I hate it when I run into that gap between +8% on 33rpm and -8 on 45 rpm (when you're trying to mix something and you go all the way to +8 on 33 and its too slow, but when you switch to 45 and go to -8 its too fast.) This usually happens when I want to mix a normal speed accapella with a beat that's too fast or too slow. On the M5G, when you go to +8 and it's not enough, you can switch over to the +/-16 range and increase to + 9, 10 or whathaveyou. The M5G doesn't take anything away from the MKII, it just gives you a few more options.

 

Anyway, like I said, if you're just doing tradtional mixing and trying to keep everything as close to the original recording as possible the M5G might be a waste of money, but when you're trying to use records beyond their intended capacity the M5G let's you take it a little further. Its a good table for those of us who want the added pitch range but don't want to use Vestax, Numark, Stanton tables because of quality and feel issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I quite often beatmatch for a normal mix using the +/-16 range on my M5G decks - with those tight and center-blip free sliders I dont really feel there is any loss of precision. TBH an M5G is way easier to match on +/-16 than a CDJ-1000Mk3 CD deck is even on +/-6%.

 

The big difference is remembering which range you are on if you tend to flick the pitch sliders to nudge (as I do) instead of dabbing the platter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...