Something I heard that the X32 has - duplicate the same source to another channel, say for parallel compression.
Is it possible?
Alternately, a % mix for the compressor, like you would commonly see on fx.
did you end up actually buying a QU?
I have used the Qu series on a couple calls, but primarily work with our GLD and iLive rigs. My understanding is that the Qu series is built for 1-to-1 (1 channel strip per input). You cannot feed multiple channel strips with the same source. GLD and iLive both allow you to reconfig your audio paths. They also have parallel compression built into each channel strip. It’s efficient and quite handy. Sorry that this does not solve your problem, but you might need to move up to a GLD for the feature set you are requesting.
Of course, it may be possible for A&H to add the parallel compression feature into the Qu series’ channel strip (if it isn’t already there). This would accomplish your goal and still keep the series 1-to-1.
f428…
Either buy something or stop kicking the tires. The quibbling of a non-owner/user is tiresome to say the least.
dhak,
Nah, still considering and weighing the options.
dick rees,
I apologize, I didn’t know that research was outlawed in these forums. My purpose being so many question is to try and not repeat what I did 5 years ago. Looking back, I now realize all these features that I would find beneficial that I don’t have. Additionally, there are some aspects of my current console that just don’t work properly, so I’d like to avoid any of those issues if possible.
This is for personal use, so I can’t write it off and it is not tied to a business. Therefore, I am not making money from it and will live with it for the next 5 years or more. Instead, it’s for someone who records his own stuff and could be used on stage once in a blue moon.
I won’t ask any further questions.
You should not feel discouraged in researching the pros/cons of this desk. We are members of the forum because we believe in A&H and their products… we’re also here to improve the product line and understand it better. For your research purposes, there are a lot of great youtube videos by users and A&H that cover the feature set of the desk. For more specific questions, there’s no harm in asking.
If I can make a suggestion, it might help if you consolidate your questions into a single thread and title it more accurately (e.g. “potential buyer with specific questions about the QU series”). In contrast, you titled this thread a “feature request,” which is misleading and may frustrate some users who have a bigger stake in the product line. We all have features we would like to see included in future firmware updates. Frankly, I would like to see the feature set of the GLD at a QU price…but that’s unreasonable if quality is still paramount. Current owners have more to gain/lose with firmware updates, so I resonate with the sentiment that feature requests are best reserved for product owners. That’s not a rule, but it might explain other comments in this thread.
I think the majority of forum members are happy to help.
f428
you’re welcome to private message me about the QU series of mixers.
The growth level of digital mixers has been exponential this year.
I don’t think you can really compare digital mixers from 2 years ago.
And with PC or MAC driven mixers without actual surface control it will possibly all change again.
cheers
daveNZ
Dittos to what Focal said. We are glad to help. If you feel you want to private message a question that is fine also. If it is something I can’t answer there is probably someone who can. As a dealer I have both both GLD and QU demos.
Something I heard that the X32 has – duplicate the same source to another channel, say for parallel compression.
Not possible. But you can sacrifice a group to do parallel compression. I use the groups on mine for that purpose. The 4 DCA are fine for my other needs.
428…
You can ask all the questions you want. I just fail to see the point of citing features available on other mixers and wondering why the Qu doesn’t have them. If you must have those features, the simple and obvious answer is to buy the mixer that HAS the features you need.
Dick, if you don’t like those posts just close the browser window. What’s your point? Did you really NOT understand the question? I’m sure nobody is interested in which questions you consider appropriate and which not.
I can see some value in having copied channels (although obviously the preamp settings would be shared)
The question is whether A&H think it would be enough use to enough people to warrant the coding and testing effort, and in what order wrt other features.
In my case it would allow the use of the same mic for both singing and speech without having to go mad with EQ and FX settings during changes
In my case it would allow the use of the same mic for both singing and speech without having to go mad with EQ and FX settings during changes
In the meantime, you could use scenes for that.
While I encourage pre-purchase research (and I’m happy to answer questions), I still feel somewhat uncomfortable watching people buy a Qu, then complain it’s not got the feature set of a GLD…
Yes, I could use scenes, but it seems a bit over the top to faff with scenes just to have a speech channel. A direct out on aux out looped to another channel would probably work (assuming I can do that to the Aux Out, I don’t know)
Sometimes the “simple” option really is best, and having a second fader comes pretty high on the “simple” list.
Mervaka. I agree. I read all these posts and have to wonder. I especially get frustrated at the ones who look at the QU as a full fledged full service digital recording console. I spent a fortune for stuff over the years that came no where close to what it does. And recording is a lot different than live sound. I think AH built it first as a live sound mixer with some recording features. Not the other way around. I am sure there are those that will disagree.
Same sentiments here. The QU and GLD serve different purposes and the features separate them for a reason. The A&H product lines are broken down by i/o and flexibility. Some elements are shared (FX, dsnake, ME-1, preamps, etc.), but they are fundamentally different platforms. This debate has as much to do with what the QU/GLD CAN do and what they SHOULD do. It is in A&H’s best interest (and yours) that each series have specific boundaries. It protects product value and hardware longevity.
For QU owners looking for more flexibility, I see the value in a smaller GLD (rackmount) mixer that offers expanded i/o and flexibility. It would come with a price increase, but that should be expected. I think it would be great to have a rackmount GLD starting around the price of the QU32. It would give potential buyers the option to choose between platforms. Either buy-in at the top of the QU series or start with the bottom of the GLD series and expand later.
I don’t sense there is a large number of QU users who want to ditch the QU platform for something more advanced like the GLD. The Qu is built to be simple and straightforward…add too many features and it will lose a niche in the market. We all have our opinion about where the line is between “simple” and the “next level” (typically, it is determined by our workflow/comfort level). I just think some Qu owners are ready to move up to the GLD but choose not to because the price jump between the 2 series is so large. I think that is unfortunate.
Of course, that brings us back to GCumbee’s comments. The digital mixer market is offering features at a price point that was unheard of even 5 years ago. We all benefit from the market trends, but I’m not sure if manufacturers will be able to maintain the current pace for long. For those who have been in the game longer, I imagine the frenzy is alarming. New operators are entering the industry expecting features to be added for free in quarterly firmware updates. At some point, we will all need to adjust our expectations when the market stabilizes and the pace slows down… and when the time comes, we’ll have a better idea of which product line has both the features we want AND the build quality to last. So far, I’ve been impressed with our A&H products and expect them to perform well for years to come.
Quickly, in response to Bob, I think the difference between setting up 2 faders from a single source vs. setting up 2 scenes is negligible. It really comes down to workflow and familiarity with using scenes. I can understand your preference, but saying one is “simple” and implying the other is complicated isn’t completely accurate.
Focal Audio:
It depends how many other scenes you are using, the two are both valid approaches - My issue is more that you lose any “live” tweaks you make to the vocal channel between each use if you use scenes.
Personally I don’t think that a “Preamp copy” function would be that computationally expensive - although as I’ve pointed out before I don’t have insight into the architecture of the QU (depending on the architecture it might be much more expensive if it crosses an 8 channel boundary for instance) - and would therefore be a relatively “cheap” feature to add for those who would rather do things that way round.
Generally:
The QU is insanely powerful, and an excellent desk. People have different ways of working with them, and that’s what feature requests are for 
One thing I liked about the Mackie site is that they have a sort of “vote for features” list (where you have 5 votes or some such) and that means there is a pretty exhaustive list of things people have asked for - and an idea of how many people are looking for that feature. Makes it easy to not repeat requests, as well as giving people an idea if they are the only person banging on about a particular feature they think would be awesome…
The thing that I would have liked to have seen in the QU series when I made the purchase was a separation between the control surface and the i/o - I’d love an AR box, but can’t justify the cost when it basically means I’m buying (more than) half the desk all over again. A QU16r (r for remote) with just a Talkback, PAFL and maybe ST3 input locally would have been top of my list with an AR(something). As it is the iPad remote control now functions as my main control surface for my regular gigs, it’s only when I’m doing something that I consider risky/different that I’ll keep the console off the stage.
Going to an iLive was never an option in terms of cost, and actually the QU contains everything required, just drop the preamps and internal routing options to save cost on the desk, then don’t punch the holes in the case… It might be of course that the saving I imagine from that setup isn’t realistic.
Well said, Focal. Thx for elaborating.
To other forum members: I too think it is reasonable to say “just buy the features you need”. But at the moment there is often not the possibility of such a decision. If you need direct USB multitrack recording, for example, and you want a rack format hardware interface… Well, what are the options? If you then also need HPF’s on the auxes, or a keyed gate… the only hope is the mixer you invested in gets upgraded. I would have been ready to pay 1000€ more for a SiEx1 with a direct USB multitrack recording card. That mixer has everything I need or want including a very nice user interface. But then I’d have to always take a laptop with me what I definitely don’t want. Therefore I chose the Qu which is also good, and has four full parametric EQ bands. Everything else is better on the SiEx1 from my point of view (I don’t do home studio work).
I’m happy with my decision for the Qu only if I can keep the hope for some small features to come in the future. If I knew they would never come, I’d just be waiting for the next rack size mixer with direct USB multitrack recording to switch.
So, I’m one of those Focal wrote about, who are willing to upgrade. There is just no buying upgrade path in my case. The only upgrade path at the moment is the manufacturer upgrading the software. It would be even useful if there would be a software-only upgrade path with features being sold. Then I could live with the tiny lighted and all-same-color LR/FX/mix buttons in the Qu (this is something that bothers me everytime) and would invest in a better firmware for my needs or wishes.