The expansion discussion is very simple. In every single high end pop performance the engineers make use of expanders for multiple instruments. They often use external hardware or software, but on some consoles they are ITB (see dLive recently). Saying it’s not needed is incorrect. Saying you might not need it is correct. Still, since the processing power between SQ and dLive changes only in terms of the amount of instances and not the capability of the single DEEP plugin on the single channel I don’t see how this can be discussed this much. If A&H will be able to port their Source Expander or Dual Expander to SQ it will be welcomed by many. Me first.
+1 for OptTronik and expander
This thread has been a dogmatic format for the inclusion of a source expansion plug in. For well over one year the specific dynamic range alteration required in some of today’s “pop genre” mixing has been made very clear. Perhaps Keith will see fit to let us all know the reason/reasons it was not included in the SQ line and whether of not the SQ’s 36 bus architecture will accommodate it’s addition.
The fact remains that the SQ5 is sonically a stand alone world class console with an entry level price point. The pragmatical reality that we are dealing with is, it is not a perfect solution for every need! Whether we are petitioning for inclusion of various D-Live enhancements or, in my case, paying for desk performance XLR inputs that I never use: an advanced custom option would be a very good idea to consider when the SQ line does not meet our needs. Consider the universal nature a processing controller loaded with all of the D-Live processing options and priced pursuant to size of the desk (as determined by the number of tactile controls) and plug-in licenses we purchase. The ability to buy only the specific tools you need when you need and can pay for them and to totally separate stage performance I/Os from the controlling desk would meet most of todays SR protocols. IMO this type of universal controlling processor would meet or exceed most all of our custom wants and wishes that the A&H brand does not currently deliver.
Hugh
I think it would be great if the expander that is now available on the DLive eventually made it to the SQ series as an optional paid plugin (like the other currently available options). There is nothing wrong with people expressing their desire for this functionality.
Where this thread has gone off the rails is when people start injecting their personal opinion as fact or making assumptions that because it is/isn’t needed for their situation that it is the same for everyone. Just because you may or may not want the expander to be included, it doesn’t mean your opinions are shared by others. Let’s try to remain civil and understand that there is a wide range of people using the SQ series of consoles in a wide range of environments and musical genre.
This thread has been a dogmatic format for the inclusion of a source expansion plug in. For well over one year the specific dynamic range alteration required in some of today’s “pop genre” mixing has been made very clear. Perhaps Keith will see fit to let us all know the reason/reasons it was not included in the SQ line and whether of not the SQ’s 36 bus architecture will accommodate it’s addition.
A Source Expander has just recently made it to the top of the line DLive model. Let that sink in…
Allen and Heath doesn’t have an unlimited R&D resources. The company clearly has to set priorities and goals for the company and they are working to execute those. In a perfect world, every plugin ever dreamed of would be available on every A&H console, but that isn’t reality. It hasn’t been available on the SQ series because they were working on bringing it to their flagship line first. Next I would expect it to be pushed out to the Avantis line. Only after that should anyone expect it to filter down to the SQ series.
Brian, it is also important to deal with the pragmatical realities of the fixed limitations that exists the SQ’s 36 bus architecture. To the best of my knowledge no official A&H info pursuant to the ability to provide the subject source expansion to the SQ line that has recently been made available with the D-live. There are obvious SR priorities at work in all of A&H’s XCIV core offerings and the future possibility of this or that D-Live feature being available in the future on either the AVANTIS OR SQ are speculative wishes at this point. Perhaps I have been derailing the collective demand for source expansion, and it is true that I have at hand a bevy of expansion tools in my Waves LV1 plug-ins that I never need to use. For this reason I have challenged Keith to officially explain the specific reasoning behind it’s absence in the original A&H offerings as well as the future possibilities for it’s inclusion as a license purchase in any of the other lines. I want everyone to be able to be able get what they want or need: however they need to clearly understand what is potentially available in the future and/or the limiting architecture guidelines of the SQ line.
The other matter where Brian and I have a great difference is the development of a custom Processing controller. It certainly is possible to put all of D-Lives processing and connectivity in a single small footprint desk. The ability to be able to purchase what you need when you need it would be a home run for the upscale market where A&H now resides. It not only is possible, IMO it is likely we will see it in the not too distant future.
Hugh
Hmm, and I thought we are talking about feature suggestions here. Hmm.
And A&H should decide whether it is possible to add an expander as alternative for the gate within the SQ range, not some of the users.
Mlfk0815 seems to be having a problem with the fact that A&H establishes priority decisions for the features each line will offer in terms of both hardware limitations and available software. This is pretty much the standard business protocol within the entire audio manufacturing industry. Lets begin with what we know to be true:
- The SQ5 hardware has a built in 36 bus functional limitation that is fixed and not a possible candidate for upgrade: it absolutely hit it’s target market and does not need a hardware reissue upgrade.
- The soft ware development priorities of plugins is responsive to user demand when possible within the existing desk hardware limitations.
- FPGA processors with XCIV cores now permit the use of expansion stage boxes: putting the I/Os and converters close to the stage source is clearly a no brainer! This evolution in today’s working protocol has rendered obsolete heavy copper snakes in favor of a single Cat 6 cable and also, when stage boxes are deployed, the desk performance XLR I/Os are no longer needed.
IMO a universal processing controller with all of D-Lives processing goodies available as license purchases when we need them along with pricing aligned with the desk size determined by number of faders & functional ports needed. This type of desk would better fit todays upscale audio market.
Hugh
Hmm, and what has that to do with an expander plugin as an alternative to the channel gate? No extra hardware, no special processing power (compared to noise gates) and nothing related to stageboxes and stuff like that. Just a simple option for the noise gate slot, like the alternatives to the stock compressor, eg 16T, Mighty…
3) FPGA processors with XCIV cores now permit the use of expansion stage boxes: putting the I/Os and converters close to the stage source is clearly a no brainer!
Hugh, a “Source Expander” is similar to a noise gate, and has nothing to do at all with physical connections. It is a dynamics processor, and is software based".
Scott, are you saying any amy and all software based processing is in no way limited by the SQ’s 36 bus design or it’s processing chip? That is a considerable departure from my understanding pursuant to fitting software to the existing processing limitations of any desk.
My effort to review the current knowns, pursuant to the SQ line, extended well beyond source expander plugins. Your selection of item #3, that illustrates the potential obsolescence of internal desk performance XLRs, is out of context. Item #2 describes my understanding of the A&H plugin priority process: if you possess information to the contrary please share it with us.
Please try to look at the entire question of future accommodation of any number of software and other related SR needs and/or wants. IMO the most likely device to achieve this end will be a universal processing controller that will enable a license purchase of any currently available plugin, when you need it. There will be expected price point intervals pursuant to the size of the desk, that will be determined by the number of faders and connective ports required.
It is an egregious mistake to limit the full range of high quality processing options exclusively to only large format consoles. Small & medium channel count applications vastly outnumber the need for large consoles, given the fact that today 48 expansion stage box inputs and needed outputs can be efficiently managed with 16 layered faders.
Hugh
I never said, nor implied that processing can’t reach processing limits. You are suggesting that SQ is at its current processing limit, which I seriously doubt. Anyway, if that were the case I’m sure that A&H would chime in and explain it, much like they did for the Dyn8 requests. Dyn8 is a different thing however, since it uses its own dedicated processing engine, which the SQ lacks. DEEP the SQ has which is what this thread was requesting. We will all just have to wait and see what A&H gives us in the SQ update. 
In my post of 05/03/22 this quote pursuant to a source expander request: “Perhaps Keith will see fit to let us know the reason/reasons it was not included in the SQ line and whether or not the SQ’s 36 bus architecture will accommodate it’s addition”
Asking for a an official response to a popular request that has been supported for more than 1 year is absolutely proper and timely. The absence of any official clarity from A&H does not obviate the importance of asking for the info.
Hugh
The source expander first showed up in dLive 1.9 which was released in Sep 2021, so not quite a year yet.
+1
In my post of 05/03/22 this quote pursuant to a source expander request: “Perhaps Keith will see fit to let us know the reason/reasons it was not included in the SQ line and whether or not the SQ’s 36 bus architecture will accommodate it’s addition”Asking for a an official response to a popular request that has been supported for more than 1 year is absolutely proper and timely. The absence of any official clarity from A&H does not obviate the importance of asking for the info.
Hugh
Hugh,
First, you can ask for an “official response from Allen and Heath” all you want. They may or may not reply to you. Actually they generally won’t reply unless it is to say that a request feature is outside of the capabilities of the device and therefore impossible to accommodate. They generally won’t reply to request otherwise - just like they won’t talk about upcoming features or release dates for firmware updates.
Second, while it’s been mentioned several times already, you either keep missing or don’t understand the point…Allen and Heath didn’t include a Source Expander on their SQ series for the same reason they didn’t include it in the top of the line DLive series or Avantis series - because they hadn’t emulated it in their software yet when any of these consoles were released. However that omission isn’t a indication of their desire (or lack of desire) to have a Source Expander. The fact that Allen and Heath released the Source Expander in Sept 2021 for their flagship DLive line and in June 2022 for the Avantis series seems to indicate they understand the demand/interest in it. Given all of this , it isn’t outside the realm of expectations that they would eventually release it to the SQ series as a paid deep processing plugin.
Finally, your question about whether or not the SQ 36 buss architecture can handle the plugin doesn’t make a lot of sense and honestly just shows your lack of understanding how these plugins work. These types of plugins have nothing to do with the “36 buss architecture”. A Source Expander would just replace the existing gate functionality of the console. It doesn’t take more processing power to run an expander than a gate (they both simply allow or stop audio from passing when the levels reach a set threshold value). Therefore the SQ has enough existing power to allow a user to substitute a Source Expander ANY PLACE it currently allows you to put a gate. This is exactly how the other deep plugins work too. The addon “deep” compressors don’t take more processing power than the default compressors, they just produce a different result and you simply substitute a deep plugin for a stock compressor. The addon dynamic processors don’t take more processing power than the existing FX rack options, they just produce different results and you simply substitute the dynamic processors for any of the stock FX racks.
Hi Hugh,
its me again – Tobias… You are again advocating which is not your job. If I do you wrong, and you have any internal knowledge about the technical platform of SQ (software and/or hardware) and you can proof any of the the capability-stuff you always talk about, then I am gonna excuse… until then: I again kindly ask you to stop bullying around – that is exactly what you often do. (You asked me for proof – here you again gave one)
And yes: one characteristic of bullies is: they don’t believe they are.
Best Regards,
Tobias
PS: I already gave my +1 here I think…
This is in the Feature Suggestions area so most of the discussion is simply irrelevant!
ANY suggestion is valid in this section, whether a particular individual would find a use for it or not. Whether the resources available in the console can handle it only A&H can answer.
If it’s not possible then A&H will generally respond. If it is possible then they normally let the requests thread run to see what the appetite for it is among the user base via +1s and/or ask for clarification or use cases where appropriate.
If you don’t see the use for it then simply move on.
Personally, I would welcome an expander option to substitute for the gate when needed so +1 from me.
There are two important distinctions to be made in my posts in this thread.
- If and when A&H finds it important to include an Expansion Option to the SQ line it will happen if the architecture design will accommodate it. To this end the only relevant opinion will ultimately come from A&H.
- Open unused mics on stage are the bane of acoustic music SR and a primary source of feedback in many cases. I do deploy carefully set Gate kills occasionally to “Mute” all mics on stage to eliminate all noise generated below performance level inputs. Variable noise suppression is better handled with the automated algorithms that are commonly deployed in the studio with DAWs. They are very good at automatically suppressing low level mechanical system noise with a touch of a button.
I have no objection to the inclusion of expanders for those of us that need to use them for live SR performance, however to assume anything close to a universal need to that end is a gross overreach.
Hugh
Hi all,
Firstly, please note the comments on forum etiquette here - https://community.allen-heath.com/forums/topic/ah-technical-support
Whilst we advocate for freedom of expression and encourage healthy debate, we will remove negative and/or personal posts.
(If some of this thread seems disjointed to you that might be why)
I’m not sure whether jumping in here will cause more confusion or not… but until development and test time is assigned to looking at an expander for the SQ, there isn’t an answer we can give either way.
We never promise something unless we are 100% sure it’s going to happen (e.g. AMM and Dante card support was not in the very first SQ release but both were announced)
On the other hand we do try to jump in if something definitely can’t be done to save people from thinking it might happen if enough people ask.
So…
An expander might be possible on the SQ. (MIGHT! I said MIGHT! I genuinely don’t know!)
If this is something you’d like us to prioritize over other suggestions here, feel free to add a +1, or even better a ‘this is why I want it and how I’d use it’.
If you’d rather we focused on something else, please add your voice there instead.
Thanks,
Keith.