Having the QU series recently release new updated models,
is a new SQ series on the way you figure?
2 Likes
I hope not. I just bought one.
Iād imagine that if there is a new version going to come out, that it would be a simple change where it comes with Dante/Waves built in Ć” la Qu-5D/etcā¦
Interesting,
I would think they wouldnāt build it in. Itās a $500-1000 increase on cost on a board that already costs more without Dante than the QU. Higher end gear usually maintains modularity so that they are future proof, can be changed to different standards, etc.
What I would like to see on the SQ, is the SD recorder, and Iād like to see LCD strip akin to the Softube Console 1 LCDs.
the monochrome strip on the QU is a bit of a downer. Itās the only thing holding me back on it.
2 Likes
I do think the SQ lineup is ādueā for an upgrade over the next 2-4 years. I have no idea if it will really happen or not, but I feel that way based on a number of factors.
That being said, I donāt think Dante will be āaddedā into the SQ natively. It was added like that to the QU series consoles because those consoles donāt have an expansion card slot. The SQ has an expansion card slot, so it is far better to allow users to add whatever I/O card they might like to use.
4 Likes
What I would like to see on the SQ, is the SD recorder,
You can already record up to 32 Tracks to a SD Card on a SQ by attaching a SD Card Reader to the USB-A Port on top of the desk and using the SQ Drive Multitrack Feature. I do that with a 256GB SDXC Card, that was my way out of the āfinding a working USB Stick for SQ-Driveā Hell. Since last Firmware update you can also backup-record the same Tracks on a notebook in parallel by attaching that via the USB-Port on the Back.
2 Likes
It is a solution, I just hate USB sticks āstickingā out. More likely to get broken, and in general, USB sticks are more prone to damage, dirtiness, etc after repeated use. And with a a USB+SD card combo, that is two points of contact to fail (not including the boards port itself), adding another variable of confusion if there are problems.
What would be optimum on an update SQ, is a Dual SD card recorder with a couple redundancy modes: Parallel recording, channel split parallel recording, manual backup transfer, and perhaps even sequential recording based on amount of room left on one card
This would offer another level of redundancy for physical media of which SD cards can also go bad, and we all know how weird computers can beā¦ stranger things have happened than having two things fail.
heehee 
Wadaya know
What a step up! Iām jealous. Curious as to what the price point will be for it.
1 Like
Sweetwater has the new SQ+ consoles listed on their website. It seems like that are running $1000 more than the original. Perhaps $1200 more since the old versions seem to have a $200 discount right now. Iām not sure if that discount is permanent or not.
For example the SQ5 is currently $3799 (previously $3999) while the SQ5+ is $4999.
1 Like
Cheers for that.
Now I am home from work I have been able to take a look at pricing more relevant to my side of the water.
Currently the SQ5 (console only is at ā¬2990 on Thomann. It was ~ā¬3300 a couple of weeks ago.
Thomann has the SQ5+ for sale already at ā¬3600 (console only, in stock)
Total of ā¬600 difference, or only ā¬200 compared to the actual price the old version of the console was selling at which is NOT bad at all.
Definitely worth it for the plugins and UFX.
Just a shame that there was no improvement whatsoever to the Scribble Strips, or the physical per-channel metering. The other changes to the physical controls on the board seem nice though, and the GUI appears to be a possible improvement too.
1 Like
But dont forgetā¦you get the All plugins pack for freeā¦not the UFX. Its an extra ~$800.
On the Thomann listing it seems to suggest that it is included. 
https://www.allen-heath.com/series/sq-plus/?post_type=product
Just look aroundā¦ if that whole UFX pack already inside and available in the SQ+ then why is that on the shop?
In some regions they have discounts for example in U.S. you get a free RackUltra FX Reverb Pack (as i remember from an Instagram post). So noā¦ A&H loves marketing but us users needs to be carefullā¦
Side note: In a german video about SQ+ they said this āFree pluginsā are freeā¦but just in the first 6month 
Another side note about marketing and UFXā¦
They say everywhere that 0.7ms roundtrip latency is very big and good thingā¦OK
They say now everywhere that this UFX plugins are so greatā¦hmm..OK
Then add this two things together and look at this:
I am not an UFX user yet but i am sure you will not get the correct latency shown on the end of the each UFX slotā¦for maybe manual latency compensationā¦or something like that what you can do for example in SuperRack SoundGrid.
But maybe it is not a big deal in this type of effects.
The ā.7ms total internal latencyā has always been purely a āmarketingā thing. The actual latency running through the console is typically less than .7ms. Furthermore the actual internal latency of a source will change depending on the I/O source (is it local I/O, I/O connected through a digital stage box, or coming through a I/O expansion card slot, etc, etc, etc). Some FX (Dyn8, RUFX, etc) can also increase the overall latency beyond what is automatically compensated for in the console.
What I am trying to say is that these consoles have never run every source at exactly .7ms under every situation. The .7ms represents a ārounded upā internal latency time that is higher than what you would normally see - regardless of the I/O source or internal FX used. That hasnāt changed.
1 Like
So you say that I have a mic 1 input in local 1, without any processing goes to LR with Xms lateny. And i decide to use an another mic 2 on local input 2 but with for example a Vocal Gridder on it, what is goes to LR with 25msā¦then my mic 1 will also comes out with X+25ms latency?
I just want to understand and not misunderstand.
Ģ¶NĢ¶oĢ¶. EDIT - YES (I originally missed where you had āX+25msā for the latency of mic 2 in your post. I initially read it as both Mic 1 & 2 having a total latency of āXā. Thatās my mistake for reading too quickly!).
[Here is the rest of my initial reply, but it simply confirms what you were askingā¦]
The article that you posted earlier is accurate and refers to the latency of some of the RUFX plugins that are not automatically compensated for by the system. So if you have a Mic 1 running through the system with ānormalā processing, it will have the normal latency of .7ms.
If you also have Mic 2 going through the system, but you also run a vocal gridder RUFX plugin on it, it will have .7ms plus the 21-32ms additional latency that the vocal gridder RUFX plugin adds. In other words, that audio will be 21-32ms more latent than any other audio going through just the ānormalā processing/audio paths.
That difference in latency shouldnāt be a problem however because mic1 and mic2 will have different audio going through it. This means there isnāt going to be any destructive phase introduced by the two different latency times. The only time it would be a problem is if you double patch mic2 into two different inputs and run one input without the vocal gridder and one input with the vocal gridder and turn up both inputs in the mix at the same time. Outside of doing that, there isnāt any problem in having the vocal gridder add 20-30ms of additional latency on any āuniqueā (ie not double patched/routed) audio.
2 Likes