Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Michael Lawrence]

I haven't played with the SQ series yet and have only had to deal with QU.
So I might like them! I just dislike QU.

I did a test-drive of the SQ7 right when it was first coming out. I think it's a great desk for the money. They've done some interesting things with the design, and I really like what they did with the faders. They feel solid and smooth and they will likely hold up a long time. They're mounted on their sides so anything falling in doesn't get ground into the tracks, it just drops out. Smart. And the cycle rating is much higher than many other desks in the price range.

Overall I think it's a solid investment.  I didn't love everything about the desk (can't swap Dyn and EQ order, for one) and I'm not a HUGE fan of the workflow but that's purely a personal preference. With time I think I would get used to it. I was in the market at the time and I strongly considered investing in the SQ7.

That being said, all told you're going to be spending a bit more than an X32 so depending on the financial reality of the individual, it may or may not be considered a viable alternative.

[brian maddox]

I did a test-drive of the SQ7 right when it was first coming out. I think it's a great desk for the money. They've done some interesting things with the design, and I really like what they did with the faders. They feel solid and smooth and they will likely hold up a long time. They're mounted on their sides so anything falling in doesn't get ground into the tracks, it just drops out. Smart. And the cycle rating is much higher than many other desks in the price range.

Overall I think it's a solid investment.  I didn't love everything about the desk (can't swap Dyn and EQ order, for one) and I'm not a HUGE fan of the workflow but that's purely a personal preference. With time I think I would get used to it. I was in the market at the time and I strongly considered investing in the SQ7.

That being said, all told you're going to be spending a bit more than an X32 so depending on the financial reality of the individual, it may or may not be considered a viable alternative.

Yeah, in interest of full disclosure, i too have't actually laid hands on the SQ series and may like it a bit more than i expect to.

I do think that A&H offers a LOT for the money.  I've just not loved the basic workflow of the desks i've worked with in the past.  Totally a subjective thing though.  Not really based on any significant reservations as to their value.

[Rob Spence]

Thank you, Brian! Happy to be on the forums.
In A&H's defense, I haven't played with the SQ series yet and have only had to deal with QU.
So I might like them! I just dislike QU.

Good to e-meet you, so long as we continue to mutually agree on opinions

I have both an SQ & a GLD and while there are some differences they are both great. A friend has a QU and I am not a fan of the input routing restrictions.

Now that I have the SQ I need to sell one GLD as I don’t need two of them.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Matthias McCready]

In A&H's defense, I haven't played with the SQ series yet and have only had to deal with QU.
So I might like them! I just dislike QU.

I am not a fan of QU series, I would not mix on them by choice, would take an X32 over it any day.

[Michael Lawrence]

Totally a subjective thing though.  Not really based on any significant reservations as to their value.

That's pretty much it, isn't it? Objectively, it's how many inputs and what's your budget, but beyond that it pretty much reduces to what the operator feels most comfortable working on. So much back and forth over consoles these days, and it seems to me much like arguing over what type of sandwich is best.

I own the consoles I own because I like working with them. I could never tell another human what is a good fit for them, only share my experiences and preferences.

[Barry Reynolds]

The OP has made his/her decision.  For those following this thread, I will add the following, while admitting I'm an A&H guy from original Mixwiz thru QU-16, QU-SB, and now SQ5...

The total cost of operation goes well beyond the mixer.  In fact, one could argue that mixer brains could be configured as Loss Leaders, sort of like digital printers, where the real cost is ink!  With mixer brand decisions, one must get some projection of the performance and costs of some combination of stage-boxes, IEM systems, Dante connectivity, analog connectivity, cabling, racking, wireless,  etc.

From a performance perspective, rather than strictly cost, the total system may be limited by the weakest link in the chain.  A good number of these band and church posters seem to mention a current IEM use or an expectation of moving to IEMs.  The brand and model must supply enough mixes right out of the box, or the user must purchase add-ons.

As other have suggested, the whole A&H SQ line is WAY more flexible in routing than the QU.   That being said, I can provide six stereo IEM mixes out of a QU-SB costing $900 street, assuming one already has a tablet like IPad.  I do this by changing groups to mixes, which can be left alone by volunteers or band members or edited via free phone apps.  For wireless IEMs, I use MiPro Mi-909s, which could be discussion for another thread.  For wired IEMs, one could use any number Me-1 or Me-500 units.  Of course, the cost of all this stuff begins to dwarf the initial cost of the mixer.   

I have read in this thread and in other forums a fair bit of dissatisfaction with the Behringer P16 personal monitor mixer.  Is that a weak link in the Behringer chain that tips the balance in favor of something more expensive like A&H?  For me, YES.  For others, it is your decision to make. 

Maybe with Dante or other universal connectivity advances, we will get to the point where one can mix and match the best stuff at a variety of price points, but many Dante enabled add-ons are so currently expensive that it makes the initial worrying about the cost of a mixer kinda ludicrous.

Not difficult to understand why someone would have trouble pulling the trigger.

[Fred Dorado]

Agreed, this was part of the decision also. With the SQ5 the ME series would not be an option. We planned on going with rack mount headphone amp and still will. I am going to pick up a p16 to try out, because now we have lots of room for other stuff.

I have played with the SQ5 and had my hands on one yesterday, I know I would have preferred that. If the Behringer doesn't work out, we can return/sell it and get the SQ5.

I am now starting to look at some other things we could use.

I also just found the right case for the x32 on craiglist for 140 vs 350 new.

Now I can get some new mics, try and figure out power,  etc

The OP has made his/her decision.  For those following this thread, I will add the following, while admitting I'm an A&H guy from original Mixwiz thru QU-16, QU-SB, and now SQ5...

The total cost of operation goes well beyond the mixer.  In fact, one could argue that mixer brains could be configured as Loss Leaders, sort of like digital printers, where the real cost is ink!  With mixer brand decisions, one must get some projection of the performance and costs of some combination of stage-boxes, IEM systems, Dante connectivity, analog connectivity, cabling, racking, wireless,  etc.

From a performance perspective, rather than strictly cost, the total system may be limited by the weakest link in the chain.  A good number of these band and church posters seem to mention a current IEM use or an expectation of moving to IEMs.  The brand and model must supply enough mixes right out of the box, or the user must purchase add-ons.

As other have suggested, the whole A&H SQ line is WAY more flexible in routing than the QU.   That being said, I can provide six stereo IEM mixes out of a QU-SB costing $900 street, assuming one already has a tablet like IPad.  I do this by changing groups to mixes, which can be left alone by volunteers or band members or edited via free phone apps.  For wireless IEMs, I use MiPro Mi-909s, which could be discussion for another thread.  For wired IEMs, one could use any number Me-1 or Me-500 units.  Of course, the cost of all this stuff begins to dwarf the initial cost of the mixer.   

I have read in this thread and in other forums a fair bit of dissatisfaction with the Behringer P16 personal monitor mixer.  Is that a weak link in the Behringer chain that tips the balance in favor of something more expensive like A&H?  For me, YES.  For others, it is your decision to make. 

Maybe with Dante or other universal connectivity advances, we will get to the point where one can mix and match the best stuff at a variety of price points, but many Dante enabled add-ons are so currently expensive that it makes the initial worrying about the cost of a mixer kinda ludicrous.

Not difficult to understand why someone would have trouble pulling the trigger.

[brian maddox]

There's been a couple of folks on here that have had less than positive experiences with the P16, but my experience has been pretty favorable, especially when compared to the Aviom16II.  The individual EQ per channel is worth it's weight alone.

It does require a little more training, especially with it's "Master Volume" that is separate from the headphone level control.  And yeah, you can certainly break them if you try.  But again, they are so cheap relative to the competition that it is still a pretty compelling option in a lot of cases [as you appear to be discovering].

Good Luck.  Let us know how it goes.

[Barry Reynolds]

Me series monitor mixers ARE definitely an option in the SQ series, either directly connected to Slink, connected to an additional SLink card, or connected to an AR2412 or AB168.  Slink operates at either 48kHz or 96KHz, depending on what is attached.  SQ operates internally at 96K, regardless of what is attached.

[Fred Dorado]

to clarify, not an option because of higher cost of board and higher cost of ME series.

The X32 leaves me money if I want to try the p16

Me series monitor mixers ARE definitely an option in the SQ series, either directly connected to Slink, connected to an additional SLink card, or connected to an AR2412 or AB168.  Slink operates at either 48kHz or 96KHz, depending on what is attached.  SQ operates internally at 96K, regardless of what is attached.

[ProSoundWeb Community]