Ok, I'll start
Upright wrote:1.Is the 2500 superior to the 2000xl and if is then why do most producers novice and experienced alike, seem to use the 2000xl?
Of course it is superior to the 2000XL - it is almost 10 years younger, which is ages in computer terms. The reason why experienced producers still use their 2000XL is, because they have it, and see no need yet to upgrade. And the "novice" use it, because they see the oldies rock it
By the way, novices use the 1000 actually
Upright wrote:2.What are some of the features that make the 2500 better than the 2000xl.
Well, just for a start... faster CPU (just compare the waveform view in Trim Mode), included CF reader, 8 outs, effects, possibility for internal harddrive and CD (making it a real stand-alone box, no need for external storage)...
Opinions on single features will vary depending on who you ask. Some find the Direct Recording feature great, which I don't really feel myself. Then there are the Q-Links, Grid Edit, highpass/bandpass filters, 1/4" footswitch jacks, interactive window button, larger screen...
So if you decide between a 2000XL with memory, 8 outs and effects and a 2500, which will cost about the same, get the 2500.
Cheers.