I have purchased a Bricasti M7 and need assistance with the steps required to integrate it with my QU-16.
I am a 20+ year enterprise software platform expert but I have to say that this seems more complex to me.
Any assistance is greatly appreciated!
Thank you
Outboard FX - you need to send a signal (or two) and get them back in…
QU16 - so you are limited in terms of dedicated mixes. If you can use Mix1 (mono) or Mix9/10 (Stereo) then use them, if you can’t sacrifice those for whatever reason then you may have to sacrifice FX1(&2?) and only use the inbuilt effects as inserts or channel->return.
If you want to use the FX then you have to set up the Alt-Out routing to carry those mixes (they don’t have another ‘on desk’ output option) and feed that into your M7.
Take the output of the M7 an plug it into one of the Stereo inputs (ST1 seems reasonable) of course a mono FX box could use a mono input.
Bingo, just don’t push any of the ST1 signal back to the FX Mix(es)
Thank you very much Bob.
I have plenty of channels open and can use Fx 1&2.
The Bricasti uses XLR stereo LR in and out. How can I get XLR stereo LR back into the QU-16? If the answer is adapters that is fine, I would prefer to stay XLR if possible.
Thank you!
Steve
If you have XLR inputs free, (15 & 16 for example) then you can use those. You’ll probably want to keep the gain low and link the channels you use.
If you’re using the FX output via the alt out, you’ll need TRS to XLR(m) adaptor leads.
Thank you very much Mark. Knowing that I can link channels as stereo is extremely helpful.
I use UA, API and Pueblo Audio preamps and will not need to use mixer gain.
I was planning to use a mix output i.e. 9 & 10 stereo XLR to the outboard Bricasti, will that work; can I route an FX output with a Mix Output?
You can use mix out 9&10 to send to your Bricasti, no problem. That will keep it XLR leads throughout, which is easier.
It also means the inbuilt effects of the desk can still use the FX busses, which you may find useful.
Awesome help guys, thank you so much!
Now I need to see if I can make it work…
BTW, I love so many things about the QU-16; if you have used other mixers, are most mixers as seemingly complex for new users?
Most, if not all digital mixers seem quite complex at first. Analogue mixers are much simpler - but then they do less.
Biggest problem I have in teaching operators of consoles I sell is understanding the mix busses. They get the select button and most don’t mess with processing once I do a few services and get things dialed in. You know. Most church operators only know faders and mutes.
I try to instill in them that think of the mix busses in simple terms. Each button in a different console. Like having 8 different consoles. Forget about the layers or what’s going on you don’t see. That seems to be the biggest hang up. On analog they were used to the matrix of aux sends. They can’t get that concept out of their heads.
I am feeling the pain of your average operator.
I really need to get the concept of mix busses and this being like 8 different consoles.
But for now, as is also probably like your average operator, I just need to make the outboard stereo reverb unit, which uses XLR in and out, behave like an fx so that I can leverage it on channels.
Conceptually to me, I picture the outboard reverb behaving exactly like the onboard reverb with regard to channels, with the Bricasti being somewhat legendary in the quality of reverb and simplicity of operation by comparison with the onboard reverb.
As I mentioned at a very brief summary level earlier, I make a living helping Fortune 500 CFOs and CIOs make profound business improvements by empowering them with concepts leveraging complex technology. I just do not have a grasp on some of the building blocks of this currently complex-to-me digital mixer and have self-imposed deliverable deadlines that are keeping me up at night each time I want to use what would seem to be basic functionality.
I just finished reading some GS threads to be sure I had made a great decision on this mixer. As expected, it seems I am the bottleneck which is humbling.
If there is anything any of us can do we will be glad to help. I have done phone help if that would make a difference. It’s really not complicated once you grasp it.
I will add this. I have been in live sound and recording on a high end Nashville pro level over last 40+ years. I have and still own some of the most expensive effects/verbs you can buy. For me the ones in the QU and GLD are perfectly fine for 99% of any live application. That said I do tweak them up a little. Quite a few parameter adjustments. I think once you figure those out I really can’t imagine why you would want anything else. If that’s not good enough then you are obviously above my level.
I don’t think it’s been stated explicitly above, but the Jack inputs (and outputs) on the QU are TRS balanced, so you don’t lose that aspect of the connection when not burning XLR channels/mixes.
Personally I find digital desks easier to operate, but they take a learning curve to set up…
Certainly easier for novices, because there isn’t an array of buttons to navigate…
GCumbee, let’s work out arrangements as I am certain that I need professional assistance with specific configurations plus prioritized topical training to accomplish my goals. My current audio focus is recording vocals. I experimented with onboard reverb for a few hours but could not get the effect I was trying to duplicate so rather than learning the nuances, I opted for the Bricasti M7 which is well known for having exceptional presets.
BTW, I am based in a northern suburb of Atlanta on Lake Lanier. You mentioned Nashville and if you are located there it would be great to meet sometime as I travel to Nashville frequently to work with Bridgestone and Nissan.
Email: Steven_L_Morgan@yahoo.com
Bob, your point is well taken on the balanced TRS which shouldn’t be an obstacle, I just don’t have that cable/adapter combination at home right now and thought there must be a way to bring in XLR stereo.
Back in 1992, when I self-taught myself software and computing, I had specific tasks to accomplish and in the process of learning found it extremely challenging to find professional programmers who knew how to solve complex, real world problems that arose. It seemed many knew general programming concepts but could not roll up their sleeves to deliver solutions. As I look through the manual and see topic after topic that are new to me and frankly not covered in much depth, I know that I have a very steep learning curve and believe that focusing on accomplishing tasks with deadlines while learning and building knowledge on parallel concepts is once again going to be the best approach. What seems to be very different this time around is that there are experts like you who are willing to offer professional assistance.
You can’t imagine how pleased I am that you and GCumbee are providing extremely valuable solutions and insight through this forum, thank you and Happy New Year to both of you!
Some of us are pure amateurs 
I agree wrt programming btw - it’s even given a fancy name for newcomers to the art (or managers) - pair programming…
Having the appropriate adaptor is always half the challenge. If you’re not running short on channels the mix9/10 and Ch15/16 (linked in software) make a good setup.
Steven…
I think you’ll find that running the Qu and navigating the myriad pathways will be much simpler when the features are applied to specific purposes rather than learning the entire “map”, then using that knowledge. IOW, concentrating on the “why” will illuminate the “how” by giving you a working context.
It is the context that will be most important.
I play music on many different instruments and constantly receive requests for lessons. When I ask people what they want to play they often focus on the instrument. I refuse to teach the instrument independent of the music and I will offer to you that things will make sense on the Qu when you understand the “music”.
You"ll ned to study up on all facets of sound, acoustics, musical arrangement and mixing to take full advantage of any mixer. I express it thus:
Anyone can buy a Stradivarius. Only a violinist can play one.
You have to be that violinist. Good luck.
Thank you Dick and I agree.
While I was able to leverage the QU-16 for a live performance with 8 vocalists on MDCs, preamps, multi-tracks and K12s within literally one hour and record 7 vocalists with tube LDCs, preamps and studio monitors within a few hours, I understand that I am skimming the surface and my feeble attempt to create a realistic reverb and the addition of an outboard reverb with my specific use-cases has highlighted what I have not yet learned.
Hopefully working through consultations with George will unlock some of the myriad pathways for me.
GCumbee - would you be willing to post some of your vocal chain effects for the QU-32?
I am having a rough time finding anything that beats my TC Electronic M-One XL.
I want the QU-32 effects to be superior in tone and function over my M-One but I haven’t found that yet.
Hopefully you can help.
Thanks!
Hi Dr. J,
please bear with me…
if I may add my honest experience of… yikes! 40 some years of recording and mixing everything from the USA President Ronald Reagan to Sheryl Crow, I have always been a real lover of Lexicon reverbs, mainly the Lexicon 224 and 200. I still have my Lexicon 200 that I purchased at dealer cost ($4,100.00 USD) back in the eighties seen here, and YES it still works and sounds incredible.
Not necessarily off topic but, a little over a year ago, I replaced my Mackie DL1608 with a Mackie DL32R, and I love it. I use it mainly for jobs like wedding receptions and corporate events. I find I would always rather use my Qu24 and AR2412 with REAL FADERS and knobs as opposed to an iPad, but making life as easy as it can be as a priority, I use the Mackie iPad mixer much of the time unless of course it’s a concert, then I want the QU setup for sure.
When I had the DL1608 Mackie mixer, I could not believe how horrible the reverb sounded… worse than a Yamaha SPX90 if you can believe that. I just refused to use it, but I had a TC Electronics M-ONE dual processor reverb unit from a school sound system rehab job and used it because it was lightweight, and one rack-space. It provided a way for me to still be free to roam with the iPad but have access at any moment to two different reverbs, medium room on Aux five and big room for ballads on Aux six. While it did eat up two aux sends and two inputs for stereo return, it was superior to the built in crap from the Mackie.
I continued to use the TC M-ONE with the DL32R, but like everyone who purchased a DL32R, I too was expecting that the effects were alloted more memory compared to the little DL1608, but nope… same crappy reverb. The delay works and sounds great, but the reverb … OH MY WORD!! get me outta here.
So, you are NOT alone, I agree with you, even the Qu mixer’s reverb, and in fact the GLD reverb is poo poo in comparison
to the TC, and of course the Lexicon will make you cry. So, it’s not like all this cool new technology let’s us do jobs and fit everything into a car, I still carry around an external reverb because to me… the reverb must sound beautiful if it is naked and all alone at the end of a phrase or song. I have no idea what goes on under the hood of these digital consoles as far as memory is concerned, but I do know that the reverb demands a lot of memory if the reverb tail is going to be smooth and silky.
The posting of this video below is not to promote Mackie over Allen & Heath, nothing of the sort, but only to show how I personally use the TC with my DL32R setup. I have done some live concerts and used the built in QU reverb and it is just OK to me, but it does get me by, but most concerts still get the Lexicon 200 and PCM80 then I am a very happy camper 
Hey Dan! Very nice! Sweet Lexicon too… Yeah I just cannot get the qu onboard effects to respond the way my M-One does.
What I am hoping to accomplish though is to get some forum members here to exchange ideas and patches on the Qu series effects.
Where are the guys or girls at that programmed these effects? I see incredible detail go into this QU board but very little information on the parameters or the people that wrote the parameters…
Some of the parameters are way off the mark and are not natural at all… We really don’t need high pitch metallic sounding flutter / scatter going on with reverbs…
On my M-One XL - I use a parallel Serial configuration where delay is on input one and fed into the input of the reverb on 2… Using the engine 1 to Engine 2 feed parameter.
The effect is so smooth that you cannot really hear the delay because the repeats are mixed in with the reverb. Super lush smooth tail… And of course this can be abused if pushed too much but it can take a dry vocal and make it huge sounding… I cannot mix without it.
I have some qu settings that I thought we’re close to replicating my M-One but when I A/B them live - there is no comparison… The M-One take it. I will keep trying.