Forums › Forums › SQ Forums › SQ general discussions › RE: SQ5 as a DAW Front-end & Other Qs…
This topic contains 8 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by 
-
AuthorPosts
-
2020/03/10 at 12:34 pm #90177
I’m looking hard at this unit and whether or not to keep my Apollo. I’ve read the exchanges about using SQ as a front-end which seem to boil down to some latency issues and minor quibbles around certain features (jog/arm track, etc.). I would be using this with Logic Pro X and I would either keep the Apollo and use at mixdown for summing stems (using onboard and Logic plugs going back in). Or, completely replace my Apollo and a good deal of my outboard. Would love to hear more about those who have done similar and any things I should be aware of. Would LOVE if A&H would consider a TB3 or USB3 card as I’ve heard that Dante is laggy and comes with issues of its own. Many thanks in advance.
Wheels2020/03/10 at 6:10 pm #90198I’ve had good success with SQ for 32 track liv recording into Cubase. USB B obviously. This is with a 10 year old Windows 10 I7 laptop. I use gx4816 as my preamps. Even on my new home I9 desktop, I make a point of attaching the usb B to a USB 2 input. No noticeable latency or other issues during live band tracking or overdubs back home.
For workflow and other reasons, I edit, process, and mix totally within Softube Console 1 inside Cubase, and merely use the SQ as a 2 channel control room playback machine (after the initial tracking). Plus I use some room correcting EQ to my monitors.
Would the Apollo have better sounding pres? Don’t know, and I would like to hear from anybody with an opinion. I kinda doubt it. I hear that UAD has nice amp modeling for Tracking, and AFAIK, SQ has nothing like that. I’ve added amp plug-ins during mixdown in Cubase.
Would a TB3 card actually provide more than 32 tracks? USB2 works fine for 32 track limit at 96K.
2020/03/11 at 1:28 pm #90211Thanks, Barry.
Best,
Wheels2020/03/11 at 4:01 pm #90221Would LOVE if A&H would consider a TB3 or USB3 card as I’ve heard that Dante is laggy and comes with issues of its own. Many thanks in advance.
this would be a stupid decision, since the USB 4.0 standard is around the corner that contains TB4 as part of it… first device hopefully arrive at the end of summer
DANTE works much better then some might say… Yamaha consoles use it as the default Audio Network with success since years
If you would use DANTE for tracking in the studio the best solution would a dedicated DANTE Card,
this gives you latency around 1ms and high track counts
but it costs more than 1k$2020/03/11 at 4:59 pm #90223@SteffenR
Really?
New standards and implementations are too full of bugs to jump on them day one.
It would be far better to wait on USB4 since is STILL around the corner and NOT HERE YET;
and use something solid and proven for the current WIP about to be released designs.2020/03/11 at 7:01 pm #90226Dante latency is very low. Even with DVS (which is the slowest) you will be looking at a few more milliseconds. Hardware options can be expensive. But they also have other advantages besides latency, like redundant options. Maybe look at the Focusrite Rednet products.
2020/03/12 at 5:12 pm #90246Wheels:
I use an SQ-5 as the front end for my DAW. My experience with latency is that you have to look at the entire system. There is no silver bullet that kills the monster! Latency is manageable with a good computer (multi-core processor, lots of RAM, fast hard drives etc.), a DAW that supports resource allocation (ie 4 cores for recording, 4 cores for plugins) and an operator willing to take responsibility for learning the process for tweaking the system. I have toyed with the idea of adding either a Waves Soundgrid or Danta card but found that by optimizing my system they were not required. Will I buy one? Probably…I live for gear. The SQ is an absolute beast! The longer I use it the more I’ve come to respect it’s flexibility. Turns out the limiting factor in this equation was me! Good luck!2020/03/15 at 12:01 pm #90294Many thanks for the wisdom, Wes.
Best,
Wheels2020/03/16 at 2:23 pm #90318Quick question, as I read the documentation and do my research it isn’t clear to me how/if you can bypass the internal pres in favor of boutiques. From what I’ve read the stereo ins which can be broken out by mono would be one way. Curious if in the digital input page there’s a function to assign that channel to line, pre or instrument, etc.
Best,
Wheels -
AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
