I kind of agree with your post: More and cheaper addons would be great.
But there are some things that add to the costs of the wave plugins:
The SQ Multiband is $89. You don´t need anything else.
Waves C6 (I love that sucker. And R-Bass!) is $44, BUT to proper use it (with low latency) live you need
a Computer/Laptop (most of us have, but still),
a Waves Card: $559
a Gigabit Switch $45,90
Waves MultiRack $373,- or LiveProfessor (haven´t tried yet)
a WavesServer: $795 (if you take the cheapest SG Mobile Server)
Makes $1772,90 + C6
If you see it that way, the SQ Addons are not that badly priced.
But I´m glad if you could show me I´m wrong.
I have a wavescard myself. Mainly to record 48 Channels in 48kHz via Ethernet. I was thinking about getting a server, Multirack, etc, but Xtra cost for all that stuff holds me back. And I actually don´t wanna toss more equipment around. And I only have one MacBook that I´m using for recording. If I´d want to run I would need a second Laptop or am I wrong?
I’m sorry that it has felt like some sort of bait and switch as this was never our intention.
We’re not trying to get one over on anyone, and have actually tried hard to be upfront with pricing, along with what you can and cannot do with the add-ons.
Even when it kind of negative! (i.e. pointing out you cannot insert a GEQ on an input, or that RackFX add-ons have a maximum of 8 instances - both priced accordingly btw).
In response to the comparisons on pricing, as Andre has pointed out, you’re talking only about the plugin itself, and are comparing two different methods of plugin.
Personally, I feel this has maybe come from us calling these add-ons ‘plugins’. It gets across what they are without going into too much detail, but invites comparisons with ‘audio plugins’ of any type, with the most common of course being those from Waves.
Waves plugins are great! There’s a huge number to choose from and you can run them on lots of different systems, but you’ve omitted the fact that they are heavily discounted (fair enough), require external hardware and add latency (unlike DEEP add-ons for example).
There are lots of users like yourself who have chosen to use Waves or other plugins with their SQ either via USB-B or often (for the lower latency) with the Waves option card, and that’s great!
The processing and add-ons for SQ however, are not from Waves, or anyone else. We have not taken some code and made it run in the SQ.
So whilst the character/GUI/functionality of some of the processing is similar to others, it is not the same thing and you are not comparing like-for-like.
I know I have used silly analogies before, but…
Why do cars cost different amounts? They perform the same function and even look pretty similar too right?
Your argument for lower pricing is based on your perception that you are comparing like-for-like. You are not.
If you want to pay less for the plugins themselves and run hundreds but with extra hardware and latency, then there are options available.
Similarly, if you want to have everything in the box, then we have provided that option too.
Sorry if this comes across as rude or blunt, but I feel the need to say it in this way or we’ll just keep going in circles!
Well, @KeithJ A&H, that summs up my opinion quit nicely!
But the temptation to go down the Waves route is strong in me. I can feel it clearly . I´d really like to have more addons (They shall never be called plugins again). I have the waves card. BUT will there be more addons ever? Or can I spend my money on waves plugins, without regretting it, because in 2 Month (around NAMM) there won´t be any new addons?
@Andre_S
While yes, you do need additional hardware and costs, the fact you can use it on a ton of consoles, DAW’s, and utilize it in the studio, kind of makes owning a server even more enticing.
MultiRack allows for 8 plugins per chain, so with a Waves SQ card, you could run 512 plugins simultaneously (64 channels of audio with each channel using 8 plugins).
Also, if you have a server, it will host your plugins and free up your CPU for recording on a single machine. This is actually supported by Waves (1 computer doing both MultiRack SoundGrid, and Tracks Live).
@KeithJ
Didn’t come off rude or blunt, I appreciate the honest response.
As I just mentioned to Andre, yes there is extra hardware needed, but when you realize that that same hardware can be moved around to many, many consoles, DAW’s, studios, it’s value outweighs it’s cost and almost becomes a no-brainer. Like owning a laptop, it becomes another accessory you become adapt to always having around.
As for the latency, the SQ does 0.7ms, a SoundGrid setup with it’s latency cranked down is 0.8ms. So full round-trip the signal path is about 1.5ms which is perfectly fine to mix IEM’s on (the most latency sensitive situation) so pointing out latency doesn’t really apply here.
My argument is talking about two pieces of coding that do nearly identical things, split audio into frequency dependant sections and compress them. Regardless of it being Allen & Heath, Waves, or FabFilter, they are all accomplishing the same task, just with a different GUI.
You stand by the pricing and how/why it is where it’s at. I disagree and feel it’s overpriced compared to similar offerings.
So we’ll just put the conversation to sleep and agree to disagree.
I love my SQ, and I’ll continue on using it for many years. This is one of a very few gripes I have about the console and I voiced it. I’ll put add-on pricing arguments to bed and move along.
The wing have some nice concepts and features. I don‘t want to explain them in detail. Just to say that the flexible channel processing with a lot of good sounding replacements of the stock effects as well as the well equipped FX Racks and some nice ideas are a really good starting point.
On the other hand there are a lot of missing functionality but we know similar from the very beginning of the SQ two years ago. But most of them are luxury functions like remote control, DAW integration, full featured show management. Also some promised FXes like the VSS3 reverb are not available at the moment.
The sound is fine but the SQ is a little bit better. If the live sound is bad, blame the operator not one of the two products.
in my opinion it is fair to ask for money for additional software. however, there should be a possibility to move the license. I will buy the 3rd sq console shortly - however, like the 2nd console, it will not get any plugins. for that the licenses are not portable they are simply too expensive.
i like the sq consoles as well as the new functions and the plugins.
You said earlier:
<< The overall aim with any of our products is to provide the best possible product for the best possible price. >>
That is logically impossible to do both at once. Ask your math prof from the uni if you missed that in your graduate classes.
You can provide a very good product for a fixed price.
You can provide the cheapest price for a given product.
But worse, it is still logically impossible to say one product is better than another unless it can beat the other one in absolutely every parameter and consideration that the potential user has.
And for different users you would often still get different results.
I would suggest all y’all would be more successful if your marketing folks would tell engineering to provide a product at price $xxxx.yz which would satisfy the most users based on surveys to determine what that set of features. which they tell engineering should be, at that price point.
Or to tell them to architect and design prduct ‘Y’ with the specified capabilities at the least cost while still meeting all the specified NON-functional characteristics such as reliability, ease of use, yada yada, again determined by survey of customers.
Just wanted to say I am really happy with my SQ-5. It took a bit of settling in, but 1.5 firmware will add the features I need the most - Low pass filter and RTA on EQ. Audio interface ‘noise’ has long gone on my set up. The wing doesn’t do anything that makes me regret my SQ purchase one bit.
I’m only a bedroom producer, so I do find the SQ plugins expensive. I understand they’re probably not aimed at me, and they are probably more than affordable for professionals that use this desk, but I would seriously consider buying them if they were closer to the £100 mark for the lot, which is probably far too much to ask, as I’m sure a lot of work has gone into them.
The main point I want to make is: it’s kind of annoying that ‘locked’ content is in the plugin library. If I haven’t paid for it (but paid £2k+ for the desk), don’t make me sieve through things I don’t own. Aside from that, I’m happy!
Definitely agree about the price being too high (I’ve bought all packs so far as I would say I need them). Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t all of the addons so far (and from what I’ve seen in 1.5) just ported from older a&h units? I feel like there’s not much new research and development that has gone into them save for the tube preamp. I mean when I bought the units I expected all the addons to be all about the deep processing (every channel) like the preamp and the compressor (and I suppose the graphic though it’s only the mix bus was which if it was the case I wouldn’t mind paying the price that I have for the trio.
Here’s to hoping there’s more deep processing plugins/addons available soon!
On the behringer note I’ve used the x32 and hate the workflow, it just doesn’t make sense to me and I doubt they’ve changed a lot when it comes to that. Features are killer but given the choice id take the sq everytime even without the addons.
was which if it was the case I wouldn’t mind paying the price that I have for the trio.