I read this in the other thread, wasn’t aware either, can only say it makes a difference: “That’s one major difference between impedance and fully balanced connections: with a fully balanced connection you get an additional +6db volume boost, because the receiving side sums up twice the same signal (volume gets doubled).”
1 Like
So far I kept the Heat at rather modest settings, just to add a bit of saturation, then added a BPF, which allows some subtle sweeps in the master signal, and well, then there is still the EQ inside the Heat, which might be another plus to have to adjust the overall sound. Gonna figure out later this month, if this is suitable at the end or not. And since carrying already enough gear around, the heat is still portable - just hope I won’t have to bring the 96 along this time . . .
1 Like
I also keep it on sublte settings when recording/listening to the stereo output of a jam, slight drive with one of the 2 first circuits to the left.
then I use the setup for recording parts and there I tweak the settings to taste of the specific part. Basically everything that gets to the computer passes through the Xone 96 - great for EQ, filter as well, to shape the sound - and the heat, sometimes OFF but rarely.
Similar here as for the Xone 96, except my Elektron devices, going mostly in via Overbridge, and Typhon which recently got audio over USB with the latest firmware, everything else runs through it. The Xone 96 is the one piece of gear I wouldn’t wanna miss, though Analog Four and SP-16 are close, they are making sounds more than mixing it though. It’s such a versatile mixer in so many regards, only missing mute (on/off) buttons for studio use for channels 1-4 and return A/B, using them a lot on returns C/D.
Over the last two years, the Xone 96 has been shaping the way I have been mixing both in the studio and for DJ, live, or hybrid sets.
2 Likes
Been using the Strymon Timeline with the Xone 96, but ended up selling it, and replaced it with a damn cheap and tiny Zoom CDR70 as main pedal for my DJ sets. It does sound surprisingly good, and there are free editors available. Does good work mixing chorus, delay, and reverbs, though using it mainly for delays, with a bit of reverb. Unfortunately it doesn’t sync to MIDI clock.
Added the GFI System Specular Tempus recently, as it combines delay and reverb, plus offers sync to MIDI clock via 5pin MIDI in. Can still recommend the CDR70, not sure I’ll be using the Specular Tempus permanently for DJing, but for live and studio it’s very recommendable. Pedals are a very useful extension for a DJ setup, depends on you at the end what suits your sound aesthetic and workflow.
From my experience adding high end effects are not automatically making your sound high end, as most sound systems might not translate that. Hope that’s not too off-topic, but as the Xone 96 offers a lot of flexibility and ways of use, it might lead to a broad bandwidth of topics related.
1 Like
I decided to bring all through the Xone (also limits the amount of instruments I own) and this goes to my RME soundcard. A pair of outputs from the RME goes in the Xone so that I can use that chain for processing. There’s also a Space on a send on the Xone.
I don’t bother with USB audio nor Overbridge, complicates my life 
For me the Xone 96 is an essential piece and I’m so glad to have found it. I don’t miss mute buttons, I use the faders DJ style, they are really sutable for my use.
It’s hard to explain but I “feel” some devices and instruments and tend to only keep them, they bring me in a good zone to make music, like the DT, Sub37, a ND3, a new member is an OB6. Each brings me to a creative and emotional state, I love it!
3 Likes
I’m still waiting to buy the Xone 96. Have you noticed that it’s nowhere to be found (at least here in Europe) and that the price has risen considerably? In August it cost €1550 now around €1800!
In the meantime, the SSL Big Six has been announced which seems to be an excellent alternative / complement to 96.
1 Like
Agree, keep the gear and instruments that are talking to you. Some instantly do, others might require some time, and most won’t ever do.
Had two gigs recently with the 92, and though it was kind of ok, it’s essentially different, alone mixing with the filters, especially since you can engage them coupled on both, the 92 & 96, however, the sonic result is so different, that I tend to solely use the HPF on the 92 for my DJ sets, and the HPF in conjunction with the BPF on the 96, LPF isn’t my thing in the DJ booth anyway. The EQs are working slightly differently as well, different enough though, that I have to reflect their distinctive behavior when mixing in a live situation.
Long story short, the 96 is hands down the better experience for the studio, live and DJ, talking out of practice, not reviews or Youtube videos . . .
1 Like
The SSL Big Six looks more than interesting, and might end up in my studio at some point. I’d say it depends on your workflow and the amount of gear to handle. The 96 is primarily a performance / DJ mixer, working tremendously well in the studio, and also in conjunction with the SSL Big Six, which looks like a great choice for a project studio setup.
The great thing about the 96 is, that it offers a comprehensive and versatile package on a small footprint, and a very well sorted layout. Having two USB interfaces integrated sets it apart. I’m working on the 96 for around 2 years now, and didn’t waste a moment thinking about replacing it.
No idea about pricing, it’s an expensive item at where I live, though got it for a good deal via a friend who brought it over from Europe for me with tax refund. At that time I still spent my last money on it and with no regret. You may look for a second hand one as well. My philosophy about gear is simple, if I think it can enhance my workflow and creative output, I’ll buy it, if it doesn’t work, I immediately sell it, but I won’t dream about it for too long.
2 Likes
I agree, in fact my idea would be to take 96 together with the big six. The first I would use it for live jams in the studio. The Big instead would completely replace my main sound card, allowing me to sculpt the individual instruments in more detail (and to record the individual tracks). I would also use it to create sub mixes to be sent directly to 96. For example Model Samples + Model Cycles + Tr08 would create a sub-mix (eq + comp) on the Six and sent in a single 96 channel. 96 remains unbeatable for live set… if only I could find one to buy… 
For me it’s both, as I don’t have so many instruments (but am at capacity ). Well, not quite true, as I use an RME soundcard (main reason is convenience on the PC and the fact that I need to send an audio signal to an ERM Multiclock from my software for sync)
The one thing I miss right now on the Xone 96 - after two years - is an alternate output routing. I integrated an SP 404 MK2 in my setup and when I want to sample something, well, I can’t let it play on the speakers else I’d have the direct signal from the instrument I sample plus the one that comes into the 404, so I use headphones. Not a huge bummer but still…
1 Like
Can imagine a similar setup. Two great devices, each in its very own way. Good luck in finding a 96!
That’s how I do it with my SP-16: when intending to sample any signal from the 96 into my SP-16, I set Send 1 to pre-fader (and keeping the volume fader at zero), I can then monitor through the SP-16’s output, so only that signal will be audible, and that’s the one I aim to sample. Once I recorded, edited, etc., I can go back to post-fader at any moment. Moreover, I can send signals through Send 1 for saturation through the SP-16’s analog filters, etc. — did you try it this way yet?
1 Like
I thought about it but want to benefit from the EQ (which sends allow) AND filters. I often use them to massage the sound before sampling.
My wish would have been a switch to choose between Master 1 and 2, that, now, would have been amazing!
Agree, that would be awesome, the Master 2 is a bit crippled in its implementation, still, the purpose of the 96 is eventually not exactly how we’d like to use it.
A matter of preferences and workflow. I have an old D&R EQ from the 1970s/80s (?) for adding some touches to the signal before sampling—couldn’t find out anything online & having for ages — it’s more coloring than EQing, a kind of a filter more than an EQ, using that mainly on percussive sounds, and can insert via a patch bay. Also having an Analog Heat, but not yet using that way, shall give it a try.
1 Like
Yeah it’s a bit of a stretch for our use, but still, it works!
I do have an Analog Heat in the Insert circuit for the master. It is used with soft settings for the master, and when I record a take in the computer for one instrument I use it for sound design.
Now, that makes me think that anyway, I’m better using all this to treat my signal when I sample in the SP and use the headphones output of the SP while sampling. I don’t want to plug/unplug cables, speed is key for me (not that I’m fast to play but I’m fast to get out of the mood).
Yes, recall we talked about the AH in the main inserts. Was too lazy to take it out to the last gigs, so no club experience with this setup yet, been traveling 5k+ kilometers by train in a week, and couldn’t justify a single piece of gear on top.
And back to the topic, EQ and filter for me on the 96 are more for performance than recording. As mentioned, the same piece of gear, different purposes, different ways of using. Awesome.
Key and agree . . . not in the mood to change my setup every time going to the studio either— patch bays are your friend.
1 Like
While trying different things I notice something that puzzles me:
- I plug my headphones in the monitor section (the main one, on the top surface)
- The cue/master knob is completely to the left, on Cue
- I still hear signal from tracks that have their fader up. No cue switch is engaged
That’s not how it is supposed to work, right? Could someone try the same? I’m trying to only hear tracks that have Cue enabled, can’t seem to be able to achieve that. I hope my 96 isn’t defective, it was already in repair for 2 weeks (sends stopped working, they changed the whole board inside)
Answering to myself: that is only when there is no cue switch engaged. Then I hear what goes int he Master channel, even with the cue/master knob completely counter-clockwise. If I engage a cue switch, then I hear only that track that has Cue engaged.
Is that the expected behaviour?