Please help me to choose

[Anonymous]

hi guys anyone tell me which is the best bdigital board currently to buy?? I’m confused between allen n heath Qu32 and Yamaha’s new Tf5 please help me to choose.

[Dick Rees]

Try before you buy.

[Andreas]

Yes, try it. Decision probably highly depends on your needs and preferences. The Tf5 provides more inputs if you add a Dante card which is also required to use a digital snake. What I’d miss from the Tf5 block diagrams would be Groups and the Matrix outs. On the other hand the Tf5 seems to be more flexible on the Aux outputs but only has two FX paths.
A “best board” probably does not exist, some may better match your needs, others less.

[eotsskleet]

I played around the other day on a TF5 in a store… Build-Quality seems quite weak! Can’t tell in terms of sound and reliability!
Agree to everyone else: try them yourself!
P.S.: GLD80 isn’t an option?

[Dick Rees]

I played around the other day on a TF5 in a store… Build-Quality seems quite weak! Can’t tell in terms of sound and reliability!

You couldn’t be more wrong. Well, you could, but then I’d have to shoot you.

[debzdoodle]

I have to say I kinda agree about the build quality – I own Yamaha products and am very partial but I too ‘played around’ with a TF5 in GC the other day and the faders didn’t feel very high quality compered to my QU16, they didnt feel as smooth or have as much resistance. I couldnt spend much time on it so didnt get to hear it either.

[GCumbee]

Correct me if I am wrong but it doesn’t have an EQ, Comp, gate FAT channel does it? That alone would be a deal breaker for me. I have a close friend Yamaha dealer who said he and his guys don’t like it for several reasons. He won’t go below QL series in promoting.

[Andreas]

From the block diagram input (Gain/HPF/4bandEQ/Gate/Comp) and aux/mix (4bandEQ/GEQ/Comp) channels seem to offer similar functionality as to Qu, but the TF5 has metering taps between each stage. …plus an additional Sub output (LPF/2bandEQ/Comp).

[GCumbee]

But aren’t the EQ,etc on screen. Not dedicated knobs?

[Andreas]

Indeed, operation happens more on the display, but it seems to support multi-touch and you dial in the EQ directly on the display like moving anchor points with the mouse.
Yes, on the Qu you have these additional knobs, but I frequently find myself to prefer the single encoder next to the display since I do not need to find the right knob first, just touch the parameter of interest…

[airickess]

GC, you’re correct. They’ve removed even more knobs on the surface of the TF, making it almost exclusively operational via the touchscreen (which, as Andreas has pointed out, is multi-touch) or via a tablet. One has to go through a lot of screens to get to things – the screens don’t appear to be laid out for easy and quick access to things, unlike a Qu. The screen on the TF3 is about the same size as the Qu-16, so for me multi-touch seems almost pointless on such a small screen.
On the physical surface of the TF3, to the left of the touchscreen, is just a blank surface where you can set a tablet (or post-it notes or stickers or a sandwich). I think that’s a waste of space and much prefer the Qu layout. I like having the knobs right there.
I have not had a chance to hear the console in action.

[GCumbee]

I don’t see a thing about the TF series that I would pick over QU. I just sold 3 QU24’s with AR2412 boxes. It is quite a popular mixer.

[Showtime]

I gave the tf mixer a closer look at the prolight & sound, i miss a lot at the board, it to me plastic fantastic.

+1 for qu

Richard

[Author]

Posts