Firmware Update 2024

[peterzoetermeerParticipant]

why is the Sq5 update taking so long 🙂 we have wishes 🙂 but will there still be a major update? or not ?

[Some1elseParticipant]

Guess not that there will be any major update including new features. Why? With software updates you cannot earn money.

Lets put a few more dollars in and upgrade our SQs to the new Avantis solo. That is what makes the vendors happy 🙃

[TobiParticipant]

At least a fix for the destroyed-show-files-bug would be (more than) nice…

[SQuserParticipant]

> With software updates you cannot earn money.
Why not?
Add-ons are also software updates.

We shouldn’t blame a manufacturer in this regard, because the fact is that companies want and need to make money with their work.
It’s the same for most of us.
Of course, firmware bugs should be fixed free of charge and A&H has usually done that so far.
This means we have a fairly sophisticated and stable functioning console.

But this is now about a large number of additional wishes and extras.
Why should the manufacturer invest here again and again only to give it away?
The desk has been on the market for a few years now and so it would be feared that they would actually no longer want to provide a function update.
But the good thing is, SQ has become a bit of a standard.
In this respect, it could be interesting for A&H to offer a 1.6 (or 2.0) for sale.
In any case, it would be an incentive for the company to put our ideas and special requests into practice.
Of course, it shouldn’t be outrageously expensive, because if the majority of users bought it, it would be more worthwhile for A&H and they would not lose any sympathies.

What do you all mean?

[HughParticipant]

I went through a long look at the Solo because it offered a couple of attractive features, (Tactile structure & large comprehensive screen) but in a final analysis the Solo did not offer an appreciable upgrade from my SQ5 equipped with a waves card. I never will need to deploy 64 inputs so the 48 I currently have available in the SQ5 is way more than sufficient for my work flow. The deal breaker for me was the V3 Waves card $2,500 price point, with a 6 month back order, that did not offer any thing I need beyond the $600. Waves card I use every day in my SQ5. After much Q&A with Brian it became very clear to me that my SQ5 is now the most appropriate gear for my work flow: Unfortunately our Info exchange did not personally end well.

To their credit, A&H does not abandon many of their older products like many of their competitors do. Most are still in the catalog and are fully supported. SQuser has offered some well thought out observations that cast a pragmatical light on the long and in some cases persistent wish lists we see every day in this forum. This post brings to mind the old Henry Ford line “give them any color they want as long as it’s black” comes to mind. The digital age has created a possibility of greatly reducing yesterdays obsolescence marketing.
At this point I personally would prefer a varied selection of hardware configurations that the user could equip with a defined number of software features available for purchase when needed. Sizing your Hardware purchase to fit anticipated input and processing loads would be the initial primary factors to consider.
Hugh

[richhickeyParticipant]

> Why should the manufacturer invest here again and again only to give it away?

Because satisfied and engaged customers are the best salespeople. Also, software updates are a much cheaper way to improve the product offering for new customers vs hardware innovation.

[BrianParticipant]

First let me make sure everyone knows that I have no ties to A&H other than being a vocal user and I have no “secret knowledge” of the doings of A&H. That being said, A&H hasn’t dropped support for the SQ series and we should continue to see firmware releases from them in the future – some maintenance updates, but feature updates as well. All of the A&H systems have gone through a pretty extended period of time without any meaningful updates. Personally I think this is due to many reasons……

Most importantly, A&H has been forced to redesign a lot of systems/components due to part shortages coming out of COVID. Everything from consoles and stageboxes to I/O cards seem to have gone through a redesign recently. Functionality hasn’t changed, but some of the parts have under the hood and I think some of these redesigned (like the Dante cards) have been pretty extensive and time consuming. This is why some items have been unavailable for a long time. The good news is that I think this backlog is finally cleared. Even the Waves V3 DLive cards are currently available.

A&H has also released several new consoles recently (Solo and CQ series). The CQ series is obviously completely new with a “ground up” design. The Solo is a redesign off the Avantis, but it still takes time to produce a new product like that. Obviously there was firmware updates that needed to happen under the hood to support the Solo, so it wasn’t just a new chassis that had to be designed. All that development takes resources away from other advancements/improvements.

A&H isn’t a company with unlimited resources and personnel. I think they have had to allocate their resources where it would be utilized the most and I don’t think pushing new features down to their existing consoles was high on that list. I hope now that the list is smaller, we will start to see an emphasis on new features again over time.

[SQuserParticipant]

Thanks for your opinions.
And I also (unfortunately) have no connection to A&H at all.

> Also, software updates are a much cheaper way to improve the product offering for new customers vs hardware innovation.
Even with professional software, it is quite common for upgrades with new, interesting functions to come at a price.
And those are also “just” bits and bytes.
Nevertheless, their existing customers also pay for it because they can then work better or more easily with it.

My opinion is simply that a company might prefer to develop numerous additional functions for a good working thing, if the effort is somehow worth it.
It’s not just the development, everything has to be tested as thoroughly as possible.
If something no longer works correctly afterwards, the outcry is likely to be justifiably loud.

[westlawParticipant]

I’m also not affiliated with Allen & Heath, but I talked to someone at Allen & Heath in early January 2024, and he told me that the SQ is still supported and that a feature release is planned for this year.

So this might be a beacon of hope to all the SQ owners 🙂

[peterzoetermeerParticipant]

We have replaced our Sq5’s with Yamaha DM3, and we like them, we will soon put our SQ5’s up for sale and we will switch completely to Yamaha, Dm7 compact is also on the wish list, I no longer expect Allen Heath’s SQ5 to come with new gadgets. add

[HughParticipant]

Over the past two months I have pondered the available entry level digital desk offerings and some of the not so entry level price point products that A&H and Yamaha have introduced. An important part of this research deals with following the CQ, SQ, and Solo forum posts with particular attention to various software features available with other models or brands. The Yamaha DM3 that peter now loves better that the SQ5 is nowhere close to the older SQ5 in terms of sonic quality, expansion potential and more importantly processing flexibility.
The new CQ line is absolutely a high quality entry level bargain option @ it’s 1K price point: however there is a lot of discussion about third party tactile controls that pretty much reduces it’s “mixing on glass” efficiencies. However it’s primary limitation is the same as the DM3: there is no provision for expansion stage boxes.
The Avantis “solo” is a 64 input channel design and it is priced accordingly: so once again perhaps A&H would be well advised to add another choice filling the gap between the CQ/DM3 and the “SOLO”. An Avantis Mini desk offering a 32 input channel design with 8 faders and a master fader with 4 layers. 8 onboard pres and 4 onboard outputs with S-Link to accommodate DX expansion stage boxes. Most all of the SQ5, or probably better, ancillary functionality would be needed. None of know whether or not any major firmware upgrade will be advanced for the SQ5s that we all used to love, and some folks like me still do.
The CQ is a home run for the market it is designed to fit: however it is a long way from the needs and flexibility of a small footprint professional tool to manage todays SR challenges and in all fairness the DM3 is marginally better however it carries more than twice the price point.
Hugh

[TobiParticipant]

This is not easy for me but I have to agree with Hugh…

Seriously — DM3 over SQ??? Never… How can you replace an SQ with an DM3 — that is simply not possible.

DM7 Compact over Avantis? Probably — but both above my league…

Best Regards,
Tobias

[peterzoetermeerParticipant]

There is nothing wrong with dm3, great sound and for me good enough

[TobiParticipant]

I dont doubt that. But really, coming from SQ I would Miss a Lot of Processing Power. The specifications of dm3 do really Not Match SQ.

[tourtelotParticipant]

A non-starter if you need to record from the board. Yamaha really missed the boat with not offering on-board multi-track recording capability.

D.

[Author]

Posts