Hey Deeps,
The QU series are pretty user friendly and generally the workflow is good.
There are lots of features inside that you may not need but are there as you get familiarised with it.
The QU-16 has 4 mono and 3 stereo sends (10 sends in total, 7 different mixes basically) you could use for monitors.
If price isn’t an issue the QU is a better buy all day long
However, if you are totally new to the concept of mixing, the ZED will be an easier ride.
Having said that, if you’re buying from a dealer, a few hours spent with them on your QU will get you well versed in the basics.
There are plenty of people here, and videos on the net that should help too
Best regards,
Rob
Thanks
I buy direct from the agents but have always used analog as i believed it was faster then going through menus to adjust the aux etc
for shows we use the GL2800 which i love.
I have never worked on a digital mixer so just concerned that you cant work as fast as one could on a analog mixer.
I recently ( I keep saying that - it’s nearly three years ago now) upgraded our church to a Roland M300 desk.
It’s bonkers compicated compared with the QU - but essentially it’s simple to use, because the complexity is hidden behind menus.
For normal operation the menus are almost never touched, most of the eq etc isn’t touched either - fully half of the aux/matrix outputs are absolutely never touched - although the various monitor mixes are…
I’d suggest working out your I/O requirements (although be descriptive in the outputs - the QU doesn’t need outputs for a recording mix for example, but a hearing loop wants it’s own mix…
Then work out where the church wants to be in 10 years time - does the mixer stand that kind of growth?
It would be nice for the screen to have a colour feature to remind you when you are in FOH/Group/Matrix/Mix modes, but that’s something you get used to checking.