QU16 or ZED22FX

[deeps]

Hi guys

I need some assistance at our church we are looking at upgrading the mixer from a Yamaha EMX5016fx

I know the two mixers we looking at is on two different playing feels, but what I wanted to find out is

How user friendly is the QU Mixer
How many aux sends can be used for monitors is it 10 or 4 as it has 4 mono sends

I have to make a choice by Monday and im aware that the QU has much better features
but we dont have a lot of techs

[robbocurry]

Hey Deeps,
The QU series are pretty user friendly and generally the workflow is good.
There are lots of features inside that you may not need but are there as you get familiarised with it.

The QU-16 has 4 mono and 3 stereo sends (10 sends in total, 7 different mixes basically) you could use for monitors.

If price isn’t an issue the QU is a better buy all day long 🙂
However, if you are totally new to the concept of mixing, the ZED will be an easier ride.
Having said that, if you’re buying from a dealer, a few hours spent with them on your QU will get you well versed in the basics.
There are plenty of people here, and videos on the net that should help too 🙂
Best regards,
Rob

[deeps]

Thanks
I buy direct from the agents but have always used analog as i believed it was faster then going through menus to adjust the aux etc
for shows we use the GL2800 which i love.
I have never worked on a digital mixer so just concerned that you cant work as fast as one could on a analog mixer.

[robbocurry]

Oh no it’s quick, it won’t slow you down! 🙂

[deeps]

thanks for the info

Does the mixer back lit color change when you change from main, aux, fx etc?

[Anonymous]

I find it’s quicker to hit the mix nbutton (i.e. select an aux) and use the faders.

The backlight doesn’t change – but the buttons on the left have bright LEDs…

The QU16 is an excellent little desk – why the Monday deadline?

Also – where are you?

[Anonymous]

I recently ( I keep saying that – it’s nearly three years ago now) upgraded our church to a Roland M300 desk.

It’s bonkers compicated compared with the QU – but essentially it’s simple to use, because the complexity is hidden behind menus.

For normal operation the menus are almost never touched, most of the eq etc isn’t touched either – fully half of the aux/matrix outputs are absolutely never touched – although the various monitor mixes are…

I’d suggest working out your I/O requirements (although be descriptive in the outputs – the QU doesn’t need outputs for a recording mix for example, but a hearing loop wants it’s own mix…
Then work out where the church wants to be in 10 years time – does the mixer stand that kind of growth?

[deeps]

The deadline is due to supplier having limited stock and has reserved one till Monday

Im in South Africa UTC – GMT +2

In terms of Growth we have a GL2800

[deeps]

Hi

We have gone for the QU and enjoying it so far
Had a bit of an issue with FX not playing through mix 1 and 2 but sorted now

I do feel it lacks one main feature which is back lit fader like soundcraft expression

[Anonymous]

A small desk lamp should resolve that though 😉

It would be nice for the screen to have a colour feature to remind you when you are in FOH/Group/Matrix/Mix modes, but that’s something you get used to checking.

[deeps]

That’s a clever idea
hope they do that

I like the lighting on the soundcraft and fx but the qu was better us

[Author]

Posts