ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??  (Read 8095 times)

Ned Ward

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1491
  • Redondo Beach, CA
    • Our band's page on Facebook
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2018, 05:32:07 PM »

I would not use the IEM's.  If you can't afford proper radio's use wired IEM's.  They work better than any wireless at $30.00US each.  Inexpensive earbuds are also not going to get your where you need to be.  There are some better units and comply tips is a starting place however ear molds is where you need to end up.

How many musicians are really mobile?


this. Get the Rolls PM50s with "More me" XLR thru control, and save yourself money and get better quality. A $10 XLR cable will win out over wireless unless you get in to the big bucks.

Logged

frank kayser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1658
  • Maryland suburbs of Washington DC
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2018, 07:01:09 PM »

I own a A&H QU16 and a QU-PAC.  One band I work with has the QU SB.
About four years ago, I spec'd a QSC Touchmix 16 for the cafe because I felt it would be easier for volunteers to work with, and did not require an iPad or Android device to control.  So, I'm constantly between the two systems - actually more on the Touchmix than the A&H.


I've found the TM16 to be quite versatile, and suits just about all of the cafe's needs, including minimal training of volunteers (and a basic setup scene that will produce decent sound in mains and monitors).  Not as flexible as the A&H gear, but good enough (and sounding good enough) that at least two bands coming through have subsequently purchased one for their band.


Major complaint has to do with gain trims... Gain knobs run from 8o'clock to 4'oclock.  Normal gain is around 3 o'clock.  The pots get very sensitive there - the low end of the gain range is almost never used.  There is a trim gain within the interface that can adjust the gain remotely to a small extent. 


Gain - anything above 3 o'clock and there is noise from the preamps that is quite noticeable. For a SM58 with an average singer, hardware gain is on 3 o'clock and about 6db of software trim gain to drive the channel fully.


The Helpinstall pickup (for the upright piano) needed a preamp (http://tritonaudio.com/fethead-phantom.html) to get enough gain, and keep another preamp in the bag for situations where the channel is not driven fully - i.e., one drummer has a headset mic (allegedly from SHURE) that cannot drive the channel fully.


Reliability.  We use this mixer six nights a week. Purchased Dec of 14.
1) We got an early one that I managed to brick which was running some early software.  QSC sent a prepaid lable and overnighted a new mixer once the package was accepted by UPS.
2) We lost phantom on channel 13.  Same deal, prepaid label and O/N ship of replacement unit.
3.) There were some spec problems with the power-brick to mixer which could cause random reboots.  Replaced by QSC (O/N).


Since we're dark on Mondays, the exchange has not created problems.


The Newest firmware changed the interface in a big way - a huge improvement.  Many things are much easier to reach.  Most of the layout and improvements came from their 30 channel version.


Right now we are experiencing loss of effects - a power-off and power-on solves that.  Annoying, but as we use minimal effects, it is workable.  Reboot during break, or if I'm lucky, if I notice the dead effects meters, before the show.  Will contact QSC someday soon.


Unike the Behringer, the Touchmix does not have a downward expander.  But neither does the QU series. Very little routing capability.  I run the IEMs mono, so I use one of the auxes - six mono (more than the QU).  I have on many occasions used the stereo auxes to drive digital tape decks, and a Sennheiser ENG transmitter for video.  No problem there.


One huge plus - mixer built-in interface is touchscreen - and the display of that (and the hardware buttons) is nearly identical on the iPad and Android apps, unlike the QU-16 (and most other mixers with a surface) There is a lag in controls that one becomes used to - mostly, and the screen is not multi-touch.   


For that venue, I'd buy it again.  Perfect. No. Quite usable. 

Hope this helps.

frank


change: Correct fact that Behringer mixers DO contain effective downward expanders
« Last Edit: July 05, 2018, 09:11:33 AM by frank kayser »
Logged

Thomas Le

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1145
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #22 on: July 02, 2018, 09:34:09 PM »

Take this with a grain of salt, but I was at banjo mart today to get a MIDI cable for my UR22, and happen to come across the TM30 which was on display. Just moving my finger up and down on a channel fader with the fader following after a few milliseconds, I kinda chuckled. Either get an iPad on the TM or in this case, have a look at the behringer XR18?
Logged

Stephen Kirby

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3006
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #23 on: July 03, 2018, 12:51:58 AM »

Take this with a grain of salt, but I was at banjo mart today to get a MIDI cable for my UR22, and happen to come across the TM30 which was on display. Just moving my finger up and down on a channel fader with the fader following after a few milliseconds, I kinda chuckled. Either get an iPad on the TM or in this case, have a look at the behringer XR18?
I did a few restaurant/bar gigs where the keyboard player bought a TM16.  There was no way he could play and manage it at the same time.  Monitors were jumping all over the place, eq on the wrong mix, etc.  So it ended up next to me.  Even just trying to make adjustments between songs was pretty disruptive.  For someone who knows it well and can put all their attention on it maybe.  Or a set and forget thing.  But with a large band constantly complaining about one thing or another (many 2nd tier bar bands) it was a total headache.  Give me a Peavey top box any day.
Logged

Alec Spence

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 647
  • Herts, UK
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #24 on: July 03, 2018, 05:56:29 AM »

Like the Behringer, it does not have a downward expander.  But neither does the QU series.
The Behringer XR and X32 line do have expanders...

I did a few restaurant/bar gigs where the keyboard player bought a TM16.  There was no way he could play and manage it at the same time.  Monitors were jumping all over the place, eq on the wrong mix, etc.  So it ended up next to me.  Even just trying to make adjustments between songs was pretty disruptive.  For someone who knows it well and can put all their attention on it maybe.  Or a set and forget thing.  But with a large band constantly complaining about one thing or another (many 2nd tier bar bands) it was a total headache.  Give me a Peavey top box any day.
I wonder how much of this is down to personal preferences?  These software controlled mixers are definitely less tactile than hardware control surfaces.  But, significantly, they're hugely more capable, so there's more control to take up your attention compared with a small analog mixer.

A lot will depend on how demanding the band/mix is, though
Logged

Kev Jones

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2018, 04:35:46 AM »

Many thanks to everybody for their help and advice. It's great to be able to benefit from your experiences and informed opinions. 

Lots for me to think about and check out.

Thanks again,
Kev
Logged

Chris Grimshaw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1826
  • Sheffield, UK
    • Grimshaw Audio
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #26 on: July 05, 2018, 05:14:02 AM »

For what it's worth, I did a bit of a write-up of my TM16 here: http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,151651.msg1531918.html#msg1531918

I wouldn't recommend one for a band managing their own sound - it's a small screen that has some latency. iPads are much better in that regard. I've heard of iPad 2s running the app okay. I use a 3rd gen, which does fine.
The biggest surprise for me was the multi-track recording and how much I've actually used it to go back over and see what I did, what worked, what didn't, and also do some portable recording setups for musician friends who want to get their music out there.

Chris
Logged
Sheffield-based sound engineering.
www.grimshawaudio.com

frank kayser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1658
  • Maryland suburbs of Washington DC
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #27 on: July 05, 2018, 09:05:42 AM »

The Behringer XR and X32 line do have expanders...
I wonder how much of this is down to personal preferences?  These software controlled mixers are definitely less tactile than hardware control surfaces.  But, significantly, they're hugely more capable, so there's more control to take up your attention compared with a small analog mixer.

A lot will depend on how demanding the band/mix is, though
Yeah, I reread what I posted...  Very poor use of the language on my part.  :-[  The Behringer mixers have a very useful downward expander.  I'll repair the post...
Thanks for setting the record straight, Alec!

frank
« Last Edit: July 05, 2018, 09:17:16 AM by frank kayser »
Logged

Scott Bolt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1768
Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2018, 07:59:11 PM »

I run sound from stage myself.  I lead sing and play rhythm guitar.  Here is how the show works for a 4 person band using an X32 Rack:

First, I use a DCA for the following:

1)  Drums
2)  Vocals
3)  Bass
4)  Guitars
5)  Vocal 1
6)  Vocal 2
7)  Vocal 3
8)  Lead Guitar

I know, it looks weird .... but here is what I do with them live.

The "Base" mix is done with the normal channels.  This doesn't change throughout the show, but is tweaked at the beginning.

The first 4 DCA's are used in the show if any one of the 4 main groups are off at the venue (which they shouldn't be), or a specific song requires a mix change (more drums, more bass, etc).

The second 4 DCA's are used for snipits.  A "Snipit" on an X32 is a set of specific changes you want done to the mix.  In this case, if vocal 2 sings lead on a song, I have a "Vocal 2" snipit which raises Vocal 2 UP, and Vocal 1 and 3 DOWN.  No other changes are made when this is done.

I have a special "Lead" snipit which raises the lead DCA fader UP and another snipit "Lead End" that moves it back.

All of these snipits can be accessed with a press of a button in the PRO version of Mixing Station on an Android tablet.

For me, having the ability to use snipits to automate my show is a real winning feature that no other mixer in this class has.

If I weren't going to use an X32 Rack, I would likely use a Ui24.  For me, the touchmix analog gain stage, and the small LCD screen are a real put-off.
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: QSC Touchmix 16 versus A&H Qu16??
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2018, 07:59:11 PM »


Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 24 queries.