The prices of old GLD-80 consoles keep coming down. The best deal I’ve found so far places a GLD-80 plus Dante card, plus stage box at about the same price as a new SQ5.
The SQ5 doesn’t need Dante to multitrack record, and if 16/8 is enough (usually plenty for small bands), the SQ5 can go onstage in the monitor position and you can use mixing station for FOH.
The GLD combination does provide a few more deployment options and is a nicer surface (bigger screen, better scribble strips, more FX, etc), but it is obviously out of production with limited support/repair options. The SQ is new, has a warranty, is more compact and transportable, and can link to another SQ without adding interface cards.
So if your application was only small bands, and the desk wasn’t being rented out, which would you pick and why?
I think, what I heard you say, is that in your particular scenario, the GLD and SQ5 would be the same net price. In that case I would go with the SQ5. Remember, these things are essentially computers with internal parts that wear (motors, fans, CPUs, SSD drive logical wear). Would you want a circa 2013 Mac Pro or a 2024 iMac?
Believe me, I’m a huge GLD fan and run both these consoles but my GLD has been in for service at least twice since I’ve owned it so I’d really hesitate to pick up a used one unless it were maybe 1/4 to 1/2 the cost of the SQ or someone well qualified had completely refurbished the GLD and put a new SSD in it.
As you said, the GLD is a better board in a lot of ways and, when I mix on the SQ, there are things I am longing for like I have on the GLD.
The marketing folks have done a good job giving us an affordable and well capable board with the SQ but still making us want an Advantis if we’re approaching that type of need or budget.
Thanks mfusa. I’m in 100% agreement with everything you said - I really like the GLD, but an older board would have to be way cheaper to make sense. The problem is that it both is and it isn’t. You can find a GLD-80 for a little over a grand these days. If you don’t need to multitrack record and already own a compatible stage box then that might be a good deal. But throw in an M-Dante card so you can multitrack and a stage box and you are at the price of an SQ5.
The thing that bugs me most about the SQ5 are those tiny scribble strips. My X-touch has nicer scribble strips, and the only nice things I have to say about it are it’s cheap and gets the job done. Like you, plenty of other things I prefer on the GLD, but the scribble scrips are my biggest concern.
Aside from longevity and repairs, the offline editor is my biggest concern about the GLD. I have to change my display settings to run it, and even then it is pretty clunky. What happens when I have to update to the latest OS, will it still run? The SQ editor/remote app is way nicer.
Advantis is a big improvement, but way beyond my budget for this project.
Honestly, what I want is a D-live like architecture (processing in the stage box, surface is control only - no audio has to be passed back), but only 48 channels - more SQ/GLD like. The QU-SB effectively does this with the remote app, though with a lower channel count and not the same level of processing as an SQ, plus you have to roll your own surface with software. Not sure why we can’t have an SQ rack with a control only surface.
All good points and I’ve heard people asking for a SQ like rack mixer before so we will see ?. Trade-offs and compromises abound I guess. We all have to figure out what the sweet spot is for us in our unique circumstance. Good luck in your choice.
Actually if A&H just made a CDM24 that was priced similar to the SQ5 I’d go that route. From what I can tell the CDM32 is about double the cost of a SQ5. Using an app and a midi fader surface is fine by me. I will never even come close to the channel capacity of the D-live, hence an “SQM24” or whatever they want to call it would be ideal.
I loved working with the GLD (mostly a 112) for a few years.
It is much more comfortable to use than an SQ.
In my opinion, it has many operating advantages:
8 encoder EQ (avoid band switching)
display of encoder positions
1 encoder per channel
more extensive channel displays
decent level displays per channel
mix buttons
2 encoder comp
better USB handling
better show and scene management
best headphone amplifier I know.
… and only a few disadvantages:
only 4 XLRs (if you might need more, e.g. for microphone receivers on the FOH)
larger and heavier
only 48 kHz (if you want 96 kHz)
If you buy a used one these days, you should look for one that has been used as little as possible - and if possible, a second one as a donor for spare parts such as faders and buttons.
Despite everything, I decided to go for an SQ (-6) because size and weight were the most important things for me.
I can do everything I need to do with it - with the best sound quality - just not as comfortable.
So if your application was only small bands, and the desk wasn’t being rented out, which would you pick and why?
For sound reinforcement for the same band every time, where everything is similar, an SQ would always be perfect.
For use at events where everything is unknown, e.g. with several different acts that you don’t know beforehand, and where you have work under time pressure, the GLD has clear operating advantages.
First, our church has had 3 major administration changes in the past 10-years. I inherited the GLD-80 which we have had since 2012. I admit we have used it to just keep us going with minimum understanding of what we are doing. I have been around A/V equipment since 1980 but most of my concentration is with our I/T operations. We have volunteers so we try to keep things simple.
Here’s my problem: After great service the GLD-80 decided not to power on. I’m told it is probably the internal Power Supply Unit. I work on PC’s all the time replacing components etc but doing this with a A/V board would be quite different.
1. I would like a painless transition board replacement without spending a ton of money. We did that the first time. I could get a used GLD-80 on eBay and restore our settings and be on my merry way. We have a stage box connected via dSnake and I don’t won’t to have to change a bunch of stuff.
2. Although we have 48-channels we use about 20 and don’t see any changes in the future. So, would the new A&H Qu-5 be a better deal? We could afford it.
1. Can I restore my scenes from the GLD-80 to the Qu-5?
2. We use remote tablet control – “Mixing Station” for Android. This is great for choir rehearsal. I see the App indicates it supports the Qu-5
3. Finally, whereas I’m impressed with the GLD-80, I could never figure out how to pan sound left to right. WHY THE NEED? When we have funerals and persons are making their emotional 2-minute spill very close to one of the output speakers, I need to move sound to other parts of the room to prevent squeals. Any ideas with Qu-5?
The user you’re replying to was only briefly active here 15 months ago, so it’s possible he won’t reply to you.
A certain number of channels doesn’t mean you have to connect that many microphones or other sources.
For example, it can be a wonderful luxury to be able to patch a microphone to two (or even more) channels to process it differently in different mixes.
The decisive advantage would be that it’s a new device with no wear and tear, but with warranty.
Otherwise, the GLD remains far ahead in terms of usability.
No, you can’t automatically transfer GLD scenes to the QU.
Like all other consoles, these two also have a pan function per channel, which you can use to pan a source left or right.
With the GLD, you can set the channel encoders for the pan function - the QU has a pan encoder for the selected channel.
I wouldn’t go for a second hand desk unless you knew how it had been used (or abused). Most used equipment comes with very limited warranty (if any at all).
Before we purchased our SQ, I downloaded the SQ Mix App and made a configuration that mirrored our workflow on our old desk. It look a couple of attempts to get a suitable configuration, but we prevailed.
I then arranged for a demonstration, and made a prior arrangement to ensure that I could push my configuration onto the desk as the last thing we did.
I persuaded a few members of our worship group to turn up at the allotted time and date so that we could run a ‘first cut’ live demo.
That convinced us of the validity of our choice of desk replacement.