This general discussion forum has not had amy new activity for a week so to keep Keith employed I will float a new cover on an old plea.
The A&H Avantis offers a 42 bus processing controller for expansion stage boxes. It features 24 faders but reduced the internal XLR I/Os to 12. With two ancillary ports along with connections to accommodate more than one expansion box: it is a perfect fit for todays SR protocols.
For those of us that function very well with the SQ’s 36 bus architecture, a smaller footprint, scaled down version of the Avantis processing controller, IMO, has a much bigger market than the current Avantis. Reduce the XLR I/O count to 4 in & 4 Out with D-Live pres and keep the balance of the Avantis back end. The SQ5 face for the desk will keep a small footprint that is real important to maintain.
There is a huge potential demand for a small format desk that is specifically designed to accommodate todays preferred front end stage and studio capture protocols. The Avantis is the first A&H offering to accommodate todays expansion stage box preferences and it needs to be extended to those of us that do not need 64 stage inputs but function very well with 48 or less. This is where the biggest market really is.
Hugh
Rather than an sq format with Avantis feature set, I would rather see an Avantis with one screen, and 12 faders. I’m okay with the 4in/4out like you mentioned, as long as I can keep my two card slots and all the other I/O that comes on the console. The biggest thing that I miss from the Avantis when I step up to an sq, is the large touch screen, and so I would rather keep the format of the Avantis, even if it’s a smaller console that could fit in the width of a standard rack.
Thank you IraBob for asking for a clarification of these terms.
SR protocols is a short reference to " established sound re-enforcement practices" (the work we do when at a console controlling the Front of House speaker stacks for live performance sound distribution)
Front end stage and/or studio capture protocols are the various gear and processing elements necessary to deliver usable audio signals to speaker stacks or recording systems. The mics, converters, processing and monitoring needs are essentially the same process for both live performance or studio recording work.
Today, for several reasons, expansion stage boxes, on stage or out in the tracking room, have replaced internal console XLR inputs for most professional protocols. Locating the pre & Output amps along with their A/D & D/A converters at the source, on stage, is pretty much a no brainer.
Analog consoles required individual wiring between the mics and the console, (when the copper wire was bundled into snakes of various lengths the weight, expense and the effort to manage was considerable) they have been replaced today with the subject expansion stage boxes that require only one very small cat 6 cable for connection to the digital console.
Another factor that has increased the use of A&H DX expansion boxes is that a DX168, featuring D-Live pres and converters, are a strong up grade from the stock SQ pres. The “prime” I/Os that require a DX32 housing require a considerable investment, however they offer a new world sonic standard for detailed transparency.
Hugh
AdamsFlys and I agree about double I/O card slots. I am not able to render an opinion about a single Avantis large screen since I have never worked with one, however I do use two 24 inch touch screens in my studio control room for Waves and DAW mixing activities. Given the small track count, generally less than 8, I could get by with 8 faders however I think it will be important to maintain a 36 bus limitation in order to clearly separate the lower channel count needs of a mini class Avantis. The unknown critical factors about the elements a 42 bus design offers, prevents for the most part much speculation about the increased processing options the Avantis offers over the SQ, and for that matter the degree to which they will be important to small channel count users Like me.
My SQ5 offers more than I need for my live and studio capture needs. My primary complaint with the SQ is the fact that the internal pres, outs and converters are not up to par with my DX168 sonically. In the event A&H will recognize the importance of up grading the internal pres to the DX168 D-Live standard, a small footprint mini Avantis will be a marketing home run. Ultra high sonic quality at approachable price points has become the A&H standard and it needs to be retro fitted to fit the small channel count, discriminating user market.
Hugh
Hi Hugh,
I am a but confused… I thought the sonic quality of the SQ is to such an excent outstanding great, that no improvement of any kind is needed?? You are really confusing me right now…
Also I would be interested what data you have analysed regarding the needs of the market.
Tobi,The A&H SQ5 that I own and use offers “World Class Processing” and good but not the best Pre/Out amp and converter system that A&H offers. (The DX168 with D-Live I/O system & DX32 with the “Primes” are much better) This has consistently been my posted opinion since my first posts several years ago in this and other forums. Apparently I have not worded my post in this thread with enough clarity: or, you have difficulty comprehending the English language. In either case read my posts in this thread again, a bit more carefully.
The fact that A&H DX expansion boxes are not available for immediate purchase and a 6 month up to more than one year waiting list exists is a very strong premise for assessing their market demand. For those of us that have, or will, purchase the subject DX expansion boxes, wasting the “A” level of faders on the internal I/Os that we do not use is far less than ideal. The deductive reasoning inference is that a comparable market for a “Mini Avantis” processing controller, (Such as the one I have described) will have a similar, if not greater, market potential especially if the D-Live pre system is featured in it’s limited number of internal XLR I/Os.
The assumption that I am making is that a high quality, small footprint, 36 bus mini Avantis will have a market potential well beyond the existing SQ5. I will welcome any well thought out and clearly worded opposition to this premise.
Hugh
Shortage of things is currently not something for the market-analysis… maybe you have heard, that there is something called “chip shortage” around for some time?
So – If you just want a DX32 with PRIMES, then no Mini-Avantis is needed. Get some and use with SQ.
I can see the advantages of a “half size Avantis.” It could fit nicely between the SQ5 and the DLive with a C3500 - just like the regular Avantis fits well between the SQ series and DLive.
I doubt Allen and Heath has any interest in building one. It seems like it would only take sales away from existing consoles and not create any new demand, but that is just my personal opinion and I have no idea what motivates A&H.
Thank you Brian for your thoughts about the possibility of a new mini Avantis. You correctly assessed the reality of uncertainty pursuant to A&H new product development, however the fact remains that they do endeavor to address gaps in their product line up. The Avantis is a clear testament to this fact as it offers a much bigger foot print with bigger double screens than the SQ line however the primary difference is, it introduced a dedicated processing controller for expansion stage boxes. My plea for a mini Avantis is centered around the following observations.
A&H currently is the industry leader in offering world class XCIV FPGA processing and optional D-live pres in their DX168 or even better cutting edge detailed transparent capture with their new “prime I/O system”. These sonic wonders are delivered with approachable price points.
The second consideration is the reality of scale as related to demand for a mid sized, 42 bus, 64 input processing console as opposed to a much smaller footprint 36 bus desk that would be a better fit for most project studios and the live performance needs of most week end performers. Think about the market potential of a mini Avantis that could be optionally ordered with either 16 internal D-Live pres (Like the DX168) or 8 Prime I/Os or, preferably, even smaller configurations of these wonderful pres that A&H might choose to offer.
None of us should ever under estimate the market demand for world class sonic performance in small format packages and the buyers ability to pay for it.
Hugh
I like AdamsFlys idea of the mini advantis with the beautiful screen. i’m currently in the market for a digital mixer and would jump at something like that if priced right. Happy to use stage boxes rather than drag cables back to the mixer anyways.
Tom, We are all pretty much fishing in the dark trying to land the perfect desk to accommodate our work. A scaled down version of the Avantis will need to offer a footprint half, or less of the original and obviously fewer functional features. The touchscreen that is more than twice the 7 inch version offered in the SQ enables the new “continuity UI” processing controls A&H has developed. I have not had an opportunity to work with this system but it looks very promising; perhaps Keith could bring us up to date with relevant data about it’s reliability &/or performance track record. I think it could be a very big improvement over the SQ’s older processing screen system.
Reducing the inputs from 64 down to 48 with a 36 bus design is a no brainer but maintaining the ability to reach 48 inputs with expansion stage boxes will need two I/O ports. One for a DX exp. card and the other for either a Waves or Dante card. If we cut the Avantis in half we will still have 12 faders with 6 layers assignable for 48 inputs, 8 DCAs &/or other groupings. The stereo single AES in with two out seems about right and I manage quite well with the SQ’s 8 soft keys. Identical multiple point metering & peak detection, the existing HP circuit with a talk back XLR along with the A&H internal USB recording protocol will be needed. It must also be said that the remote WIfi control has become a ubiquitous necessity for trolling the room after the crowd is seated and the concert begins.
I am totally convinced a secondary factor needs to be deployed with a mini Avantis for discriminating small channel count users. We already have an entry level SQ5 so a mini Avantis will not be a competing entry level desk with it’s technological feature up grades and to that end: Offer 8 internal DX I/Os with the stock Mini and a 2K up grade to 8 “Prime” I/Os for world class sonic delivery in either a project studio or for live concert work. For performers that control their own SR from the stage this feature option will be a home run. This will put the mini in at about the 6 to 8 K MSRP price point range that is about half of the Avantis 14K. Pricing speculation is always a shot in the dark, but it sure is fun to talk about it.
Hugh
“My primary complaint with the SQ is the fact that the internal pres, outs and converters are not up to par with my DX168 sonically.”
Are there any measurements showing the difference in performance? Back when the M32 came out there was a decent review and write up in one of the European magazines showing some performance differences between the X32 and M32. I’m wondering if there is something like that available for these AH products?
Given what I know about human perception, I tend to need some kind of quantifiable differences on paper to show that it’s not just my wishful (or remorseful) thinking that is driving my dissatisfaction with a given product.
Thank you Mr. knobs for your post: The need for an internal linear front end capture capability is the primary reason I have been requesting a revised small footprint processing controller for several years. Unfortunately the detailed info you require is most unlikely to come from A&H, the only source that would be credible. There are several factors to be considered;
The SQ line is a bold entry level product that introduced FPGA/XCIV core world class processing at an entry level price point. IMO it never was intended to sonically be a small entry level D-Live. Several years ago when I ordered my SQ5 and DX168, the official A&H line pursuant to the SQ I/O system was “it is a new design specifically for the SQ, it is good but not the same as the D-Live I/Os in the DX168”. Adding a DX168 EXP Stg Box pretty much brings the SQ up to the D-Live sonically for limited channel counts.
Another factor to consider is the fact that A&H is always actively exploring improved elements that can have major effects on product performance. Case in point is their 32 bit "Prime"converters in their new “Prime” I/O system. It is optimized to be a perfect match for their FPGA/XCIV core processing. It stands alone as a new sonic world standard for detailed transparency: however much of todays music production will not be improved with this level of clarity or for that matter a DX168. The 24/48K Behringer world is testament to that fact.
The variables involved between measurable VxS perceivable have often been debated in these threads but IMO “If it sounds good, it is Good” is my mantra. I placed one of my KV2 EX10 wedge monitors 16 ft. from a Flea 47 next mic and found I could get a cleaner, and considerably hotter out put with the DX168 as opposed to the std SQ I/O system. After adding a DX32 loaded with Prime I/Os, the increase in detailed transparency was instantly obvious.
I use the primes for about all of the recording in my project studio but for several reasons I prefer the DX168 for live concert SR and recording. I have been working with high level acoustic performers for more than 50 years and the brutal irony is I did not have this quality of gear to record Doc Watson, Tony Rice or J D Crowe in their best, most productive years. It is abundantly clear to me that A&H is establishing a strong foothold in the discriminating acoustic music world and given the fact that this activity seldom if ever requires more than 48 channels their best future market potential is in high quality, small packaged options. A small mini Avantis with 8 “prime I/Os” will be a no brainer for Symphony recording or high end project studios. Discriminating week end acoustic performers may prefer A DX168 and possibly as few as 4 internal I/Os on their mini deck, either way the ability to optionally style their mini desk to their needs already exists in the A&H product line Quiver.
Hugh
Tom, The QL1 is a very disappointing re-entry in the small footprint console market. Not that Yamaha will give a damn about my opinion but after a 30 month “time out” I expected at least a little bit better than yesterdays 24/48K digital processing and where are the the promised vastly improved pre amps given their price point at almost 10K. That is paying one hell of a big premium for convenience connectivity. If we have learned nothing else from Behringer’s brand buying spree, big name (Neve in this case) influence may or may not get the job done. Yamaha has, in the past, offered the worst internal pre amps of any major manufacturer: they have a lot of ground in this regard to make up. For some unknown reason they are not providing much, if any, info about their new I/Os and converters in the QL 1. Furthermore IMO the QL 1 cannot sonically compete with an SQ5 and given the fact that the SQ5 has a MSRP 4K price point the price/value comparative metric is a no brainer.
The Mini Avantis I described would be a unique product with out a competitor any where close to it’s assumed price point. Thats how a Brand/Market Share foothold is developed and expanded.
Hugh
I respect your opinion, but I can’t agree with you on your assessment. If you cut an avantis in half, it would have a striking comparison to a QL1.
One big screen
More info to display on that screen (compared to something like an SQ)
Similar form factor
Similar fader count
Both made by major console companies
Both have expansion options (yamaha has a lot more here with their MY cards)
Pricing in the ball park.
I’m not sure how many people get excited in the diff btw 48k and 96k.
Can’t agree with you on trashing yamaha preamps either. Heck, you and I have both seen posts on Gearslutz with a golden eared well known recordist using TF preamps.
You might not make that comparison, but I suspect a number of consumers would. The real question is, “what does Allen and Heath think?”
Tom, I am glad to have a reasoned discussion pursuant to the two existing subject small consoles. (QL1 & SQ5) I respect differing opinions however strongly believe it is important to quantify the historical progress that has occurred in all digital audio processing since the QL1 was released in March 2013. This is at the core of my less than favorable comments about the QL1’s re entry in the console market after the Yamaha 2+year “covid time out”.
The QL1 does have a much bigger processing screen than the SQ5.
Form factor & fader count in both are very similar and they are both offered by stable corporate entities.
QL1 does have more expansion card slots.
The MSRP price points: SQ5 $4,000. QL1 $10,000. (No where close to the same, The QL1 has a two and a half times greater price point)
The SQ5 was released in Oct. 2017, three and a half years after the QL1, with a new pre amp design to optimize the new 24/96K FPGA XCIV core processing. IMO the sonic quality difference alone makes the SQ5 a much better value but after plugging in the price difference it becomes a no brainer…
Tom, IMO this is where the rubber hits the road: the Steinberg D pres and Neve designed Steinberg processing Yamaha console core is still centered around first generation digital technology. The SQ line has expansion options that features D-Live I/Os or their new “Prime” I/O system that introduced a new world standard for detail and transparency and absolutely optimized their new generation leading FPGA XCIV core processing.
The Yamaha flagship LS9 had the worst pres of any name brand console, there isn’t much disagreement about that fact, and this was the basis for my comment about the ground they needed to make up. The Steinberg “D” pres are a big up grade from the LS9 pre amp disaster however doubling the I/O transistors is not exactly in the same area code with the d-live system or most certainly the incredible Prime I/Os.
I replace a grand piano with a Yamaha Stage piano in my studio years ago and I am delighted with the it’s dependable, maintenance free performance: however my experience with Yamaha consoles has not been as good. My grandson summed it up the best, He is the FOH mixer for a large church with a CL desk and his comment to me was “it is rather Clunky” to manage when compared to his personal A&H QU gear that also has yesterdays 24/48K technology.
If Yamaha is going to stay relevant in the audio console market, they will need to forgo their past commitment to closed brand connectivity and develop better expansion options. The new Avantis IL screen is cutting edge technology that is light years ahead of the OL and with 24 faders to manage 64 inputs, it has 12 internal inputs and for the desk alone it is priced at 10K: adding a GX4816 expansion stage box and D pack adds $5,400. bringing it’s MSRP total 16K. The QL5 has a MSRP of 18K before needed expansion boxes are acquired. The main two points I want to make are: 1) The Yamaha desks are not readily adaptable to todays live scaled needs & 2) They are Way over priced for yesterdays technology.
Hugh
I love my Avantis but sometimes it is a struggle to fit it in a venue, a half sized version of the Avantis (single screen one fader bank) would be amazing especially if it kept the basic functionality and cross compatibility with show files. Also for big shows, having a smaller version (that can fit in what little space I have left in my van) that could plug and play if it’s big brother went down would be invaluable for a small operator like me.
Cohesive has perfectly described the need for a “Mini Avantis”: my initial request was never aimed at replacing the wonderful SQ5 entry level desk. It is now, and always has been, a plea for a small footprint, full processing Avantis with half of the tactile controls and very limited local I/Os. IMO the market demand for a “Mini” is far greater than for the full sized Avantis. Large scale touring riders will generally spec, for very good reasons, the D-Live flagship line. The Avantis is a “tweaner offering” that misses the scaled down target market of most plug up and play road gear.
World class sonic quality and processing does not necessarily need to be in a large scale footprint or a big channel count in it’s application.
Hugh