Currently SQ supports only 3 Stereo/Mono Matrix. It will be a great help if you can add up another 3 Matrix in future releases.
Please consider this request. When we do in church setup, more Matrix are very much required to send the out to different locations and streaming.
I can understand, providing additional Matrix is a major change in core architecture. But it is very critical and essential feature.
All competitors are giving this feature (6-8 Matrix) in similar range of mixers.
If it is required you maybe bought the wrong product. One simple rule is still valid âbuy a product based on the available features and not based on features which may be build in in the far futureâ. I donât think that this feature will be available for the SQ, at least not for the next few years.
But why nobody thinks about a matrix mixer or a systemcontroller for a fixed installed audio system? That makes much more sense in environments, like churches, where a lot of volunteers, a.k.a persons with less skills for running audio systems, will operate the console. If you use the build in matrix as a replacement for a true system controller you will open the door for a lot of mistakes made by the operators of the console.
Morematrix busses would be fine but imho not for the mentioned use case.
+1
when similar budgeted mixers like X32 is giving 6 matrix,Donât get me wrong, I like the X32 and it has a lot of features I am missing at the SQ. But the X32 has 6 mono Matrix busses. When you want to run stereo matrix busses you also only have three of them. And even if the Si depre... ah, sorry, expression will hav 100 matrix busses I never would replace an X32 or SQ with that console ;-)
+1 minimum 6 Matrix are required
Several posts in this thread have been deleted as they originated from the same IP address and user profiles created within minutes, with no other post activity.
Faking user accounts to add multiple +1s is NOT the best strategy to get your feature requests through.
Agreed Nicola - but it would be nice if you or Keith would come back with a response if this is feasible or not.
I.e. if it is locked into the hardware then its probably not possible.
I would find the addition of at least 3 more Matrix channels very very useful - I can think of several applications in our current worship group setup that would benefit from this.
One other feature related to this would be an easier way of adjusting the input levels to the matrix.
Even if some of these could be pulled out to the programmable knobs if not the actual faders (which is probably a request too far).
+1 on the other comments that for its price, the SQ series is a very very well equipped desk.
Hi @JohnOC ,
The channel count is fixed by the architecture of the XCVI core, so it is related to hardware, but not in the same way as it might be with âold schoolâ DSP chip arrays.
To increase the number of matrices would require a complete core overhaul though, which is far from trivial and would require a lot of development and testing before weâd have any idea if it might be feasible.
Bear in mind that we spent years developing and working on the core in the first place (and didnât just chuck in what seemed right at the time), and hopefully youâll understand that itâs not a question we can provide an answer to at this time.
If there is massive demand (from different individuals!), then we will certainly investigate further, so as with any suggestions here, please do post/upvote/comment as weâll usually only jump in where somethingâs definitely not possible and/or where clarification or use cases might help.
On your comment about control - the SQ cannot route Input channels to Matrix (other than Mix Ext In), so Iâm not sure what your mean there unless talking about Mixes to Matrices.
In which case, the easiest/quickest method is to select the mix channel you with to send and hold the âCH to All Mixâ key to show send levels to Matrices on faders 
Hope this helps!
Keith.
Keith thanks for the detailed reply - always appreciate the clarity you bring to the conversation.
For info - I find the matrix channel very useful for
- Fill speakers (where I need to suppress specific group buses that go the MAIN (e.g. Radio mics)
- External house feeds (creche, outside hall) for similar reasons
- EQ for Bass bins avoiding the use of a crossover unit.
Have been able to get by with 3 but would be a real boon as stated to have extra.
That said - its is a superbly configured desk at that price point.
It has very easily swapped over to livestream use in recent times and I see no reason when the congregation returns that it wonât be able to support both use cases simultaneously.
Tx for the tip on the CH to All Mix - that helps and lot and will do the job nicely.
John
+1 for more matrices!
@Keith
Not sure if my thought here is possible, but I started thinking if it could be possible to make FX send 5-8 switchable into extra Matrixes?
I know it will still be a fairly large change in the code, but that âcouldâ be one way of doing it.
I may be misunderstanding you Søren, apologies if this is the case, but I donât think we have FX send 5-8 at all? FX sends 1-4 are only available from inputs & groups, not Mixes or L&R.
@Søren
- There are no FX Send busses 5-8 on the SQ, and FX sends 1-4 do not have mix processing (like matrices do).
A little more info on the ânon-trivialityâ:
There are a number of processing âblocksâ (channel processing) and a space to put them all in (the core), if there are no gaps that are the shape of the blocks, space may need to be made plus everything moved around to fit the blocks in.
The next complication for the core would be all the new routing crosspoints required.
Then when all the architecture/core/foundation work is complete, the control side of things would be next, working through all the show/scene compatibility questions across revisions past/present/future.
Finally, GUI and remote control options (MixPad) would all need to be updated and tied in to the changes.
As the foundations of the console would be different, there would be a lot of re-designing of test procedures (as every single unit goes through rigorous testing before shipping) and a large amount of testing/soaking (though we do this with each release anyway).
Still not saying itâs impossible. Just pointing out there is unfortunately no shortcut and that we always want to be working on things that satisfy as many users as possible (which could be this!).
So as with any feature, but especially with one at such low level, weâd just need to know this is at least near the top of the list for the majority of users before we commit any resource to it.
Cheers,
Keith.
Thanks for the deeper explanation, and I stand corrected about the FX⌠not quite sure where I had my mind getting that thought, so I will just blame it on Covid-brain then 
@KeithJ A&H
I have inferred a vague idea of your architecture but could you perhaps fill in some details.
After the A/D is everything software in FPGAs or are their also specialised hardware circuits for some functions?
Not up on modern FPGAs as I am very olde, so can FPGAs now mix software and hardware functions on one chip or module?
thanks
+1
@volounteer - Sorry that I wasnât very clear, I was referring to âvirtualâ architecture rather than different bits of hardware.
All audio channel processing, routing and summing does indeed take place in the XCVI core, other hardware deals with ADC, DAC, digital I/O, SRC and all the bidirectional control of the core (surface, remote, screen, LEDâs etcâŚ).
@KeithJ A&H
Thanks for that elaboration. It helps a lot.
just adding a thought; what if the (possible) extra matrix buses could be configured in the Bus Config section, and an extra matrix would simply cost a group or aux? Would there then be enough processing spots in the core without having to rebuild and test it all (or at least not as intensively)? I have had some cases where I would have been very happy with a few extra matrices and didnât use all my group/auxesâŚ
cheers & thanks!
Wouter