Topic: Really liked the QU16 But.. | Allen & Heath Digital Community

Really liked the QU16 But..

This topic contains 9 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by mervaka 10 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

Author

Posts
2014/02/13 at 6:03 pm #37724

strat
Participant

I own a ilive system and owned a qu16 system, I absolutely love the allen & heath brand, So when I heard that the qu24 was coming out I was excited about it, But for me there has always been an issue with channel naming & I could not take the chance that the qu24 would not have that either, I know that these are fairly inexpensive consoles, But for this small rig that I have, I work with alot of different bands, It is great that you can save scenes, But if I have not worked with a certain band for a couple of months and now it is time to recall their scene, I do not remember what is in a certain channel, So I went to an x32, It has all of the options that I need .. So still love the A&H Brand, But for me I had to move away from the qu16 .. Take care all.

2014/02/18 at 8:03 pm #37793

Jimmydrummer
Participant

Shame, as it I’m sure it wouldn’t be that hard to implement. I’m hoping they do sort this in the future. X32 is so highly specified it’s hard to not like. It is bloody massive though!

2014/02/19 at 3:06 pm #37815

GR-PDX
Participant

Based on the pace of bringing to market even features that were promised from the beginning, I may soon be wishing I had taken advantage of the return 45-day return period on my Qu, and gotten a bloody Behringer instead. I hope A&H proves me wrong there soon, but the latest release does not bode well in that regard from my perspective.

2014/02/19 at 3:08 pm #37817

GR-PDX
Participant

^^^^^ this is why I keep ending up in the forum spam filter. 😉

2014/02/19 at 6:35 pm #37825

mervaka
Participant

Channel naming was never promised in the first place though, it was just demanded by a vocal minority. There’s no need to cry wolf about refunds on here, it doesn’t make your requested feature any more urgent. Qu already seems popular, so I don’t think we’ve seen the last feature release just yet..

2014/02/19 at 9:09 pm #37830

Anonymous

I don’t get your argumentation. How can you say channel naming wasn’t promised if having scenes was promised? What is the sense of having scenes in which you can store everything but… the channel names!?!? And then say “ohh, no that was never promised”? It’s like being able to store files on your computer but… names? Oh, no, we never said you could name that.

Nevertheless, user permissions are still not there. The firmware is unfinished in terms of what has been promised since the beginning. I’m giving up my fight against the Bellringer too. And one big reason for me? Channel naming!

I don’t believe there will ever be any other parameters for the compressor, or a de-esser, or EQ band colors, etc.

And: I’m happy I returned my Qu-16. And I think others should be allowed to write what they think or feel. It’s easy to see that the regrets expressed are sincere. That is called complaining and there is nothing wrong with it. You dont’ have to like it, though.

2014/02/20 at 12:07 am #37833

mervaka
Participant

I’m happy you returned your Qu-16 too. Shame you didn’t leave it at that, though. Its the same few people making new threads about the same old rubbish..

2014/02/20 at 12:53 am #37835

Anonymous

I wrote I’m happy I returned the unit because I still can decide. It seems you didn’t understand that (as well as GR-PDX’s post).

Why is it that you chime in to state something but then not continue the discussion but just complaint about others complaining?
What about taking the arguments seriously? Complaining about others complaining doesn’t add anything.

2014/02/20 at 4:10 pm #37841

GR-PDX
Participant

Mervaka,

I wasn’t talking about channel naming, which was not promised. As pointed out, its lack causes some other features to be less than particularly useful. It was pretty trivial to put in the iPad app, and probably would be on the main screen as well, but the real estate is pretty limited.

And as pointed out, there are other key features that were promised and that are still missing.

My main point is that I think it is risky for a company to go to market without a full feature set as promised, and riskier still to not quickly follow up the release with those promised features. In fact, it might make more sense to focus on those first, and on other not-promised user requests later. To do otherwise is bound to have an effect on trust in that company. It certainly has on mine, although I am sympathetic to the plight of struggling to be first to market.

2014/02/20 at 8:36 pm #37851

mervaka
Participant

So, what promised features remain outstanding? User permissions, Windows drivers. I don’t think there’s much else is there?

Your point about real estate is a very good thought. Think about all the places where you see “CHxx” or “Mixyy” etc. While it would seem trivial to put names in the top left corner of the main processing screen, there are other places (such as the Qu drive and meter screens) where it would seem impossible to implement naming.

I’m just quietly confident I’ll soon enough get everything I want. Qu’s come a hell of a long way since the first release, and it’s already a pleasure to work with. I’d like to say we all want the same things, but my main gripe was with how some people are expressing their impatience.
Author

Posts