I am a 28 year A&H owner and user: I do not see any real advantage of the SQ rack version over the ubiquitous SQ5! A significant difference in form factor, processing or I/O limitations certainly does not exist between these devices. The entry level CQ20b has much better SD card record & play back options options and if the 16/8 I/O limitation is within your work flow the CQ20b is a no brainer (@ 1/3rd the investment) for exclusive “Mixing on Glass”. Truth told over the past 3 months my highly sucessful experience with a CQ20b led to replacing my prized DX32 loaded with prime I/Os and an SQ5 with a new LV1 Classic desk from Waves. The new Waves desk has been in development for a long time and their dilligence has really paid off. It is a much better fit with my A/V recording activity in both live and studio work however the tiny CQ20b is my go to for Quick set-up, small venue solo &/or Bluegrass gigs. I looked at the SQ rack info and for the life of me there is no advantage over my current CQ’s limited small gig function.
Hugh
I too have been an Allen and Heath guy for many years. I do own two of the CQ20b and love them. I am however on the waiting list for the SQ Rack to ship. I like the output count better for IEM needs and being S Link capable is a plus. If the CQ were expandable, I would lean closer to your opinion!
Another classic Hugh post…
You don’t see a difference in form factor between the SQ 5/6/7 and the SQ Rack? Perhaps you need to check again…
Hugh, how many years have you been DEMANDING a smaller form factor SQ console that you could use your Prime Cards with? It’s a lot, with multiple posts asking for the same thing over and over again. Yet now that A&H finally released it, you immediately reject it along with the your “prized” Prime cards for something that is quite a bit more expensive (ie it’s not in the same “class” as the SQ series) and yet has worse preamps than the Prime cards. I’ve said it nearly every post that you have every made here, but Hugh you make no sense and are constantly contradicting yourself. Even then, you have certainly outdone yourself this time.
Brian has every right to disagree with my SQ Rack post: however he does not have any right to distort my past pleas for an advanced small footprint desk with an internal 12/8 I/O, a dozen faders with an advanced Avantis type of screen.
Brian obviously is ignorant about the relative quality of the outstanding Waves IONIC pre-amps. Trust me when I tell you I very carefully compared them both here in my studio and the Waves Pre-amps are absolutely equal to, if not better than the A&H Primes. It is also worth mentioning the fact that the new Waves Classic desk is an 8K Avantis killer with a powerful internal server that will adequately manage its internal 16 pres and 12 buss design with 17 world class faders that can accommodate 64 /44 I/Os with IONIC expansion stage boxes.
Brian is very well versed in most all things A&H however he does not help his case when he provides half baked opinions about gear he does not own or apparently ever had extensive experience working with!
I set up a complete Waves /Digirid project studio about 9 years ago. It is IMO with out question the best audio recording production protolcol available anywhere: however the only reason I bought the SQ5 and the DX32 loaded with Primes 5 years ago was the component Waves LV1 was a pain in the ass to transport and set up for live gigs. The New Waves Classic desk puts it all in one easy to transport foot print that is a bit larger than my old SQ5 , but a lot smaller and much less expensive than the Avantis.
As I previously stated I still use the CQ20b for small venue solo gigs. It’s limitations do not present a problem for me in this regard.
Hugh
Sure, if you’re happy about what CQ does for you, there is no need for SQ-Rack. But if you’re looking for more channels, buses and processing in a compact footprint, then…
I would also add that if you’re already in an A&H evrionment for other desks, you can easily integrate a SQ Rack as a Monitor/IEM desk or broadcast/ utility mix, using either the native S-Link or with an I/O slot. Some HoW would definitely be into tossing one in a rack and not having to relinquish additional floor/table desk space, especially if mixing via external controller.
I think CQ is a great option as a Touchmix, Mackie DL or XR18 killer but SQ Rack opens up a lot of additonal possibilities because of the I/O slot and remote I/O options.
I see the rack version being used in a small venue, restaurant, or a bar with it mounted in a back room and used with the Control App on an Ipad mounted to the wall allowing for control over things such as house music and also allowing it to be used for a small band or a guy with a mic and guitar and not have to worry about removing tables and where to place a console.
Over the past 4 years there have been many posts requesting a rack version of the SQ5. The point I have tried to make is that it is not now and never will be a replacement for the orriginal SQ5. There are obvious limitations with a “mixing on glass protocol” that the SQ rack version cannot overcome. Thus it is not a replacement of the SQ5 but it is an ancillary tool that can find a few very useful applications. To this end it’s utilitarian value is much less than the Ubiquitous SQ5.
Hugh
Personally, I am amped up about the SQ Rack. I’ve used all the other brands and if the SQ Rack is in line with the rest of the SQ line, it’s going to be the monster I’ve been waiting on! Those CQ boxes are pretty amazing so the SQ Rack should be the bee’s knees! I just need them to ship so I can get to work!