QU-16 Editor?

Forums Forums Qu Forums Qu feature suggestions QU-16 Editor?

Tagged: 

This topic contains 90 replies, has 34 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of garyh garyh 16 hours, 41 minutes ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 91 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #49404
    Profile photo of fxk
    fxk
    Participant

    The x32 platform is not your old Behringer.
    Uli has come up with a great sounding board with lots of flexibility and at the time, a feature/price ration then unheard of. Lots of folks whose opinions I respect swear by them.
    Be that as it may, I am enjoying the QU16. Things can always be improved, though.
    I do wish A&H would break radio silence on this subject, however.

    #49413
    Profile photo of [XAP]Bob
    [XAP]Bob
    Participant

    My old Berry was a great bit of kit. I was sorely tempted by the X32 – they actually sound pretty good.

    And I could have bought a spare….

    Not knocking A&H (after all it’s what I bought), but the X32 series is impressive, and doesn’t deserve the insults thrown at it…

    #56379
    Profile photo of JTrindle
    JTrindle
    Participant

    I’ve made some small progress toward this goal (reading/writing DAT files for offline editing), after entering and managing 92 scenes for our production of RENT, the first on our new Qu32. I can dump out several of the channel fields.

    However, there’s a CRC-32 or similar code value in the last 4 bytes of the DAT file, and I can’t make the mixer load patched files unless I can regenerate a new CRC. “File corrupted”.

    If anyone has made any progress on their own please let me know via message, if reviving this thread is impolite.

    …John Trindle, Williamsburg, VA

    #56380
    Profile photo of [XAP]Bob
    [XAP]Bob
    Participant

    Can you document the progress you have made?
    I wonder if the files will be version specific…

    4 Bytes is a sizeable CRC, which is good – but lets have at some of the valid data you can generate…

    #56408
    Profile photo of JTrindle
    JTrindle
    Participant

    I have been able to find mute buttons, channel names, and main fader levels for 60 channels in the SCENE/NVDATA file structure, plus scene names and scene numbers in the SCENE header. All this from minimally different files generated on my QU32, and the QU16 samples in the user library here.

    I’ve concluded that bytes 25884,5,6,7 (the last 4 bytes of a standard file) are the CRC, and that it is computed based on all but the first four bytes and last four bytes of the file, since the NVDATA.DAT and SCENE000.DAT files have identical checksums but differ in the first four bytes (from the QU16 show files in the user library here).

    Based on this, I’ve tried the following CRC algorithms (from the CRC Wiki page) without matching, using initial values of 0xFFFFFFFF and 0x00000000:

    CRC-32 HDLC, ANSI X3.66, ITU-T V.42, Ethernet, Serial ATA, MPEG-2, PKZIP, Gzip, Bzip2, PNG,[32] many others
    0x04C11DB7 0xEDB88320 0x82608EDB[10]

    CRC-32C (Castagnoli) iSCSI, SCTP, G.hn payload, SSE4.2, Btrfs, ext4, Ceph
    0x1EDC6F41 0x82F63B78 0x8F6E37A0[10]

    CRC-32K (Koopman {1,3,28})
    0x741B8CD7 0xEB31D82E 0xBA0DC66B[10]

    CRC-32K2 (Koopman {1,1,30})
    0x32583499 0x992C1A4C 0x992C1A4C[10]

    CRC-32Q aviation; AIXM[33]
    0x814141AB 0xD5828281 0xC0A0A0D5

    I suspect the file format does change between version *sometimes*, but not every time, since you can read your show files after updating the firmware.

    #56426
    Profile photo of Ryan
    Ryan
    Participant

    Its unlikely you’ll get the CRC algorithm by just trying different things. The file format staying the same between versions and CRC covering all but the first/last four bytes seems to be correct from what I’ve seen.

    #58434
    Profile photo of Steffen R
    Steffen R
    Participant

    +1

    #58438
    Profile photo of [XAP]Bob
    [XAP]Bob
    Participant

    Its unlikely you’ll get the CRC algorithm by just trying different things.

    Whereas it’s certain you won’t get it if you try nothing…

    #58527
    Profile photo of Ryan
    Ryan
    Participant

    Interesting to see that interpretation of it. I was getting at that trying random CRC algorithms found online is almost certainly not going to result in finding the right one.

    Whereas it’s certain you won’t get it if you try nothing…

    Never said I was doing nothing. 😉

    #58528
    Profile photo of [XAP]Bob
    [XAP]Bob
    Participant

    It wouldn’t be that surprising to find a common CRC algo being used…
    Why invent a new one after all.

    Didn’t mean to imply that anyone was doing nothing 🙂

    #58539
    Profile photo of fxk
    fxk
    Participant

    I think it has become obvious that A&H has no intentions of providing their own off-line editor or helping an outside developer such as JTrindle to make one available.

    That is a shame. The QU platform is a good platform, but is sorely lacking that functionality. Im guessing that A&H is protecting their higher lines, but IMO are harming themselves overall, given the abundance of mixers out there like Soundcraft and Behringer that do have off-line editors at a similar price-point.

    I have given up all hope…

    #59109
    Profile photo of daubi
    daubi
    Participant

    It is really strange, A&H does not response at all to this feature request.
    As I work once a year for a very low budget production I have to lent the Qu-24
    and only a little time to prepare 9 Scenes with 23 inputs, this year.

    Reverse engineering their file format could be a hard job.
    And they might change little details every release.
    Knowing the basic idea / concept of their file store could help a lot.

    The CRC issue could be checked by changing 1 piece (letter in a name or so)
    and compare both files with diff.
    Once you see, which values are changing you can make assumptions.

    Their might be no CRC at all. Just a length field. CRC is typical on file system level.

    I get my Qu-24 end of November ..but than my time is limited.
    May be I will save some scenes and analyze details later.

    #61459
    Profile photo of grantr22
    grantr22
    Participant

    My decision for dropping the QU-32 from my ‘which to buy’ shortlist is based SOLELY on the lack of offline editor, I like everything else about the desk and I really wanted one until I discovered this omission.

    Soundcraft Si Expression, Midas M32, Behringer X32 left to choose from.

    Listen up A&H, this is costing you sales!

    #61460
    Profile photo of Dick Rees
    Dick Rees
    Participant

    Grant…

    Seriously? Well, good luck. We’ll miss you.

    #61461
    Profile photo of grantr22
    grantr22
    Participant

    For mobile/touring Theatre-style use an offline edit facility is very valuable if not essential.

    And taking my first stride from analogue to digital, there will obviously be an amount of ‘getting to know you’ and trial and error time, so to be able to do this away from the venue in calm surroundings would be good too.

    Don’t get me wrong it wasn’t an open and close decision, especially as choice is quite limited at this price range. Having studied and compared closely and read many complimentary reviews (not to mention knowing the A&H brand is one of quality) I’d grown close to making the purchase, then it was surprise and disappointment to discover that offline editing wasn’t part of the existing available apps. So when the competition has this..

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 91 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.