SQ-Sb please!

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ feature suggestions SQ-Sb please!

Tagged: 

This topic contains 15 replies, has 12 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Mfk0815 Mfk0815 2 weeks, 4 days ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #80358
    Profile photo of Barryjam
    Barryjam
    Participant

    Rack mount SQ version similar to QU-sb would be wonderful for a growing number of bands who are imbracing separate monitor mixers, especially IEMs. Since I play in the band, I have little need for the physical faders, and, I could even fly with the mixer in one carry-on and the IEM setup (wireless and Me) in another. SQ options for all those stereo mixes is a real advantage over QU. Not to mention Dante and other means to connect with a variety of FOH systems we encounter.

    This is probably in A&H future plans. Anybody else like to see this happen sooner rather than later?

    Barry

    #80359
    Profile photo of Barryjam
    Barryjam
    Participant

    Embracing not imbracing. Spelling challenged.

    #95517
    Profile photo of Alex_Petrov_59
    Alex_Petrov_59
    Participant

    Dear A&H!!! Please, make SQ-SB!!! It will be bomb now. All small groups would be to buy it.
    Please, make it! We are waiting…

    #95905
    Profile photo of maw92
    maw92
    Participant

    +1

    #96489
    Profile photo of MRD_Sound
    MRD_Sound
    Participant

    This would be great, anyone from Allen& Heath able to say whether one will ever arrive?

    #96512
    Profile photo of Alex_Petrov_59
    Alex_Petrov_59
    Participant

    Yes, it would be great! Only our activity can attract attention of A&H to this point! Please, be active!

    #97315
    Profile photo of Bruce
    Bruce
    Participant

    +1

    #97327
    Profile photo of Mike C
    Mike C
    Participant

    I would like an SQ Pac version based on the form factor of the Qu Pac.

    That said I could really be tempted with a “SQ Mini” something with maybe
    8 faders, 6 layers,8 local inputs and outputs, D Link jack, one card slot and a
    couple 1/4 inch IO jacks.
    Physical back panel space could be a limiting factor!!

    #97335
    Profile photo of Yann
    Yann
    Participant

    +1 for this. The mixpad needs upgraded to be able to do absolutely everything which it doesn’t currently do.

    The SQ-Sb just needs to be the back panel of an SQ5 in my opinion, nothing more nothing less. really hope it happens!

    #104348
    Profile photo of clarocque
    clarocque
    Participant

    +1 SQ-PAC

    #104354
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    Please think about exactly what you are asking for: The SQ processing protocol is very far advanced beyond the QUsb comparison you are alluding to. I own and use both a QUsb and an SQ5. I know all too well the benefits and short commings of both. If A&H could offer a full function FPGA processing I-Pad app they would already have it available in the SQ as well as their other upscale models. (D-Live & Advantis) There are clear and and understandable reasons why tactile controls are the primary function on all A&H upscale stage box controllers. I-Pads are an ancillary tool, not an ideal primary control protocol.! As I have stated on several occasions if an SQsb is absolutely needed, then put a SQ5 on the stage floor and do your thing with an I-Pad. The foot print is not that much bigger and all of the function you are requesting & more are currently available in an SQ5.
    Hugh

    #104355
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    Please think about exactly what you are asking for: The SQ processing protocol is very far advanced beyond the QUsb comparison you are alluding to. I own and use both a QUsb and an SQ5. I know all too well the benefits and short commings of both. If A&H could offer a full function FPGA processing I-Pad app they would already have it available in the SQ as well as their other upscale models. (D-Live & Advantis) There are clear and and understandable reasons why tactile controls are the primary function on all A&H upscale stage box controllers. I-Pads are an ancillary tool, not an ideal primary control protocol! As I have stated on several occasions if an SQsb is absolutely needed, then put a SQ5 on the stage floor and do your thing with an I-Pad. The foot print is not that much bigger and all of the function you are requesting & more are currently available in an SQ5.
    Hugh

    #104367
    Profile photo of Mfk0815
    Mfk0815
    Participant

    Do not compare the potential SQ-SB with the QU-SB. The QU-SB is more or less a toy compared to what the X32 Rack offers. That should be the device to act as a blue print for a SQ-SB design.
    For me A&H should not only pack the IO and processing of the SQ5 into a rackmountable housing without physical controls. A&H should furthermore extend the possibilities with some of the features of the X32.

    #104368
    Profile photo of ioTon
    ioTon
    Participant

    +1

    #104371
    Profile photo of Scott
    Scott
    Participant

    +1, But would like it to include an HTML5 based interface that can be used with any device, just by pointing a web browser at the mixer’s IP address. Another company does this with their rack mixer and it’s a great feature. No more app store/play store, no more OS compatibility problems.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.