A&H, are there any features you know you are definitely not adding to SQ? Either because the product won’t support it, or because it’s a feature you want to reserve for a more expensive line like DLive? This information would probably help a lot of us make purchasing decisions and keep us from repeatedly requesting feature you have already decided not to pursue.
In my opinion if the sq now misses features that you think that you will need to do you job, then the sq isn’t the right board for you.
If you need features of the dlive than you have to buy dlive.
Otherwise the gld is also a good board.
In my opinion if the sq now misses features that you think that you will need to do you job, then the sq isn't the right board for you.If you need features of the dlive than you have to buy dlive.
Otherwise the gld is also a good board.
I disagree. FYI, I have 2 GLDs and an SQ.
The SQ is in its infancy. It has had only one firmware update since release. History says that a new design will have substantial capabilities added in in the first few years.
There are many capabilities not yet exploited in the SQ hardware/software.
A&H says there will be an update in Q3. I would wait for that before jumping to conclusions.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Also, as said many times, there are some very basic features still missing. Only few words if they’ll ever come and the next firmware is still about two months in the future if I read that correctly.
There have been features requested here that A&H might want to limit to a higher price range, multi-band compression or a 6 band parametric eq for example. Obviously the SQ can’t have all the features of more expensive consoles, so it would be helpful to know how A&H sees different features being implemented.
In my opinion the question should not be if features like multiband compressor should be kept to the higher priced systems, the question should be “does the competition in the price range have it?” The answer in that case is yes, the competition has that in the SQs price range. Same for 6band PEQs.
We bought a dLive system, not because it has multiband compressor and the cheaper systems don’t, but for completely other reasons, like much better expandability, nicer workflow when dealing with lots of channels, redundancy and so on. THESE are things I’d never expect from cheaper systems (even though Yamahas TF series even allows for redundancy with Dante).
In my opinion, SQ really corners the market for their price range. Nothing else has the channel count or routing flexibility.
It isn’t any company’s job to play catch-up and deliver the exact same features as others. They usually put effort into developing something their competitors don’t have and using that to set themselves apart.
I’m also curious to know what consoles in the price range have multi-band compression and 6 band eq on the inputs. Not that I don’t believe you, I’m just interested to know.
Hello i have had the sq5 for a while now but haven’t used it live yet. I’m still kinda new to digital mixers my first one was a digital rack mount mixer from another company that i bought based on the promise of an eventual update for recording over avb instead of firewire, that never happened and never will for that mixer ,it was a unusual situation. not here to bash any companys . i am putting faith in allen and heath and the sq mixer because it seems to me their has been a lot of thought put into this mixer for ease of use especially setup and menus. as for compressors eq’s effects and other features, if it meant paying for those i would if it helped to open up the possibilities of getting the add on fx comp’s eq’s that wouldn’t normally be considered with updates.i am looking forward to using this mixer live and i feel like it will be better FOR ME than lots of others have looked at. Anyway just my thoughts .
Maybe you are not sofimiliar with the price range up to, lets say, 4000€. Then you find out that the Si Expression can handle more input channels and busses. Ok, they sound not that good and have also other disadvantages but they can handle more signals. And the X-Series of B have 6 band PEQ on any bus (nobody requested 6 bands on input afaik), including high and low cut and also some extra filter types for the matrix to build a poor mans crossover. There you also find a multiband compressor (ok the price for such mixer is 250€ up to 2500€).
We are talking of a dynamic changing product group. It is similar to the automotive industries. While in the 80‘ ABS was a feature only found in the high class, and high price, vehicles nowadays ABS is standard also for entry level cars.
The same is true for mixing consoles. When you go back six years the Presonus studio live 24 was the cheapest digital console for live sound for approx 4000€. The next level was the Si Compact and the LS9 for 7500 and 9500€ (32 channels and without options). Now you can have better sounding consoles with far more features for a little bit more than 2000€. Buildin features which I am missing at the SQ series.
I made in the beginning of the year the transition from a M32 to the SQ6. This transition is still ok for me. But I also still do not understand why the SQ do not come with already developed Effects (from the GLD and the dLive, i desperatly missing the transient designer and the dyn8), a better scene management. routable PAFL, high and low cuts on all PEQs… nothing which would mean that the have to completly develop from the scratch, like the RTA and Spectrograph as an EQ overlay.
Ok thats my point of view so far. Let‘s see what comes at the end of Q3 with the next feature update. In the summer I willdo the most jobs with my dLive which has far more features but still not all I had on the M32;-)
Ryan, nothing is a company’s “duty” in that matter. But why should I buy a product if it is missing features I like and the competition in the same price range offers? It’s in the company’s interest to make the product appeal to as many consumers as possible without giving them TOO much of the big series features. And how do you do that? Do you honestly think it’s best if they decide that internally without a look at the same priced competition? I don’t. How do you want to get people to sell their old mixing desk and buy an SQ, when SQ is not at least AS GOOD in every aspect?
For the rest of the argument let me pull up some facts:
Yamaha TF
44 input channels
Multiband compressors
8 FX units
DCA spill/roll out
Dante as audio network standard (huge bonus), including possible redundancy
channel displays far better readable and far more informative than SQs and even dLives
drwabacks: less GEQs with fewer useable bands at once, bus routing and overall workflow not as “standard” as they could be
Soundcraft Si Performer
64 input channels
Rotaries for “everything”
cheaper, rack mountable stage boxes
drawbacks: only four FX units, only four inserts possible, slightly worse channel displays than SQ, lousy iPad app
Midas M32/Behringer X32
6 PEQs per output
drawbacks: lots… and still the potential X32 to SQ “upgraders” are asking for 6band PEQs in the outputs.
We have a Yamaha TF, which we want to trade for an SQ because of the “non-standard workflow” which makes it a little less accepted with band technicians. For now, just too many things are missing on SQ to proceed with that, and even then I will sorely miss the channel displays.