SQ models comparison

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ general discussions SQ models comparison

This topic contains 5 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Trunkdog Trunkdog 1 year, 2 months ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #82478
    Profile photo of Trunkdog
    Trunkdog
    Participant

    Is there a FAQ or access to a document “detailing” the differences between the SQ series models? I understand the I/O – Fader differences. It’s the functional differences I am interested in. Specifically how the omission / inclusion of rotary encoders and softkeys affect workflow.

    (I’ll assume there is no forum posting preview)

    #82500
    Profile photo of Scott
    Scott
    Participant

    The SQ reference guide gets into the differences in the models, but as far as how softkey and rotary counts effect the workflow would vary from individual to individual, and situation to situation. The softkey and rotary functionality are also covered in the guide. Again, how much you need these comes down to personal preferences and needs.

    -Scott

    #82501
    Profile photo of Trunkdog
    Trunkdog
    Participant

    Thank you for taking the time to respond. Actually I am soliciting comments from anyone who had crossed this creek before, one of those “individual situations”. I can and have certainly read the manual, a generic as that is. So if anyone in the ether has researched these units, choosing one over the other your feedback would be apprecated. Oh well, the internet…

    #82503
    Profile photo of MarkPAman
    MarkPAman
    Participant

    Part of the reason I decided to go for a 6 rather than a 5 was the soft rotaries, though wanting about 20 faders so often on my Qu-16 was a bigger reason!

    I find that (as yet) I’m probably not using them quite as much as I thought I would, though they are certainly useful for some things.

    So for I’ve used them (not all on the same show) for:
    DCA levels (but I like faders better and I’ve got 6×24 of them available)
    BGM & Compere’s mic volume (quite useful to tell helper/promoter/lighting bod where they are)
    Various specific monitor sends (tended to find I go for sends on fader anyway)
    Selected channel monitor sends (very good for setting mons during a soundcheck – not quite so much during the gig)
    Lead vocal’s reverb send & reverb time (very useful)

    There’s probably other useful stuff I’ve not thought of/done yet. At the moment my default tends to be a combination of the last two (changing setting after the sound check). If I had to use an SQ5 I’d miss them a bit, but I’d probably soon get over it.

    What are other people using them for?

    #82504
    Profile photo of Mfk0815
    Mfk0815
    Participant

    I have both, the SQ5 as well as the SQ6, and two DX168. So the number of local inputs is in the all my cases not that issue. The biggest advantage of the SQ6 are the 24 faders because it allows me to have all possible faders available on the first four layers and two customizable layers remaining. In my workflow i use less of the soft keys. Onle some for mutegroups and the tap tempo. The main reason is that for me there are not so much useful functions available for the soft keys. I use the rotaries now, since the last update, for reverb time and delay feedback settings. But I think there is a lot of potential for the soft controls but A&H have to do their homework (same also for the dLive).

    #82505
    Profile photo of Trunkdog
    Trunkdog
    Participant

    @markpaman / Mfk0815

    Thanks so very much for the input. I’m gathering the occasional (or not so occasional) FX tweak is aided by the rotaries. How would this be accomplished on the SQ5? Channel Select>FX>Edit? In otherwords the Softkey / Rotary mimics an analoq edit, quick and direct.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.