I meant one vote per feature per member.
Yep, although I’d suggest a limited number of votes total per member as well, force people to prioritise.
Maybe 5 votes, worth 1.2, 1.1, 1, .9, .8?
Sounds good too. Though I don’t think it’s comming anyway 
But you can keep trying. I’m waiting for the next NAMM, maybe there will be a new firmware by then. After that I don’t think anything more than details and bug corrections should be reasonably expected.
Unless… someone else comes out with a direct USB multitrack recording mixer with physical faders having the features we’re asking for. That might force some improvements. Other than that, I think it’s kind of futil to keep making suggestions here. That’s what the mixer is, I guess. We’ve written really a lot.
We have written a fair amount - most of it in the wrong thread (I started another for this discussion).
If a company has a feature suggestion section on a forum then I kind of expect them to be seriously looking at the features being suggested.
I bought the mixer with a few things I still wanted to see…
One of those has mostly been answered by the Qu-You app, although I’d still like to be able to hook up a second iPad remotely on the “metering” page (I tend to run that even if I’m using the mixer physically).
So I do have some optimism that features that are clearly possible could still be delivered by A&H. In the case of this thread I should point out that when I was speccing out the Church mixer we are now using I spent tens if not hundreds of hours with the Roland PC application - by the time we got the unit delivered (on a Friday, of course) I was in a position to flash the firmware and completely configure the desk in about 2 hours. Then I played with it physically for a long while, but all the major configuration was pre-done. I have done similar with a Berry desk.
I had to imagine my way around the QU with just the manual for guidance.
Whenever I take the QU out of stock I have to get it home early enough to make sure the mixer is in the state I have planned (on paper/spreadsheet) so that when I go to a gig it fires up and does what I want. I’d much rather be able to program it on a PC (or an iPad) at leisure and then just load it to the desk. I’d also suggest that people who aren’t as familiar with a variety of user interfaces would benefit from being able to have a virtual hands-on session…
+1
I would be prepared to “pay” for an off line editor for mac or PC with a serial code / email/ serial number of the unit (although I have 6 of these QU) to unlock the software
I thought the QU ran on its own OS system, neither mac, PC or Linux?
Then to design & build an off line editor would be a major undertaking?
After R&D of the QU
A&H surely must now be close to being a software company than ever before.
These are just some thoughts.
cheers
I started to write an offline editor for the Qu series a while back. I had all of the MIDI commands working in a class module (no user interface) but then I discovered that I could not rename any of the channels unless I used the TCP/IP Port. And, since the mixer only allows a single connection to that port (which is used buy the Qu-Pad App, it was rather pointless. The reason I wanted an editor in the first place was so I could set up a new scene for the next band while mixing the first. Nicola verified that renaming is not supported via the USB Port. After that, I lost interest.
Something which could write scene files would do the job, doesn’t necessarily need to go over the USB port if you have a stick available. I presume you’d stop any recording when reloading anyway…
Another supporting piece of software would add to the maintenence list for each release. An new version of the editor would need to be released alongside every firmware release. I suspect this is the reason why we don’t see an editor.
I really would like an Editor too. We also have iLive and GLD Systems in our stock and of course Allen & Heath could suggest to buy more expensive mixers to have the Editor feature and I can understand a decision like this. But i have all of these three Systems in my rental stock and I still hope to get the editor. Please have a look on your competitiors as for example the Yamaha 01v96. It´s much cheaper than a Qu and has a full Editor.
Best regards
Toby
After another set of back-to-back festivals, I humbly renew the request for an offline editor for the QU platform. Those are busy times, many times with bands showing up with a scribbled stage-plot hour(s) before taking to the stage. How nice it would be to be able to build a scene for that band while mixing the band already on stage. The 10-15 minute changeover is tight enough without trying to set scribble strips, and pre-setting library settings.
The saying “A failure to plan on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part” just does not work. More like “The show must go on” regardless of the number of cats being herded.
Please consider this for near-future implementation. Sure would be nice…
frank
+1
Editor → great!!
Even a simple utility to convert / validate scene file from / to, e.g. XML format would be useful.
If we can do that then someone else can write an editor…
Even a simple utility to convert / validate scene file from / to, e.g. XML format would be useful.
Yes, being able to get a print out of a scene would be really handy. For GLD too. I did have a look at the format, but it is a fairly archane binary dump format, which is not easy to parse 
+1
I’d also like the editor. Qu-Pad only gives you Wi-Fi access, which is not always reliable even at 5G. A laptop at FOH connected with Cat5e to a Qu-Pac! Does it get any smaller for a stable 32 channel setup? I have an iLive rig when the customer requires more processing.
We really need the editor!!! Please!!! It was quite painful programming the Qu-Pac…
+___We really need the editor!!!
Right, as it is very slowsome,
How has it for Soundcraft Yamaha