The biggest Disadvantage of a HTML based remote control is that you cannot use hardware controller with such an “app”. The second is that the “app” relies not only on the mixer itself but also on the current version of the browser. Building a portable HTML user interface which works with a wide range of operating systems and browsers is far more complicated that build several native remote control apps.
We are now almost two years into long delays (6 to 9 months) in delivery of DX168s or SQ5s here in the USA. Any expectation of a new special purpose SQsb is farting in the wind given todays world trade problems. If the SQ advances are very important to your working needs then put an SQ5 on the stage floor and control it with your I-Pad. The SQ5 VS SQsb footprints would be very similar!
IMO if some of the 48K behringer features suit you better than the SQs then by all means buy it: or pick up an existing QUsb that is sonically similar and also is a 48K protocol. I am certain any suggestion to emulate any behringer product would not be well received in the A&H board room.
Hugh
Great concept to improve products by simply ignore good ideas from others. Thats how it should be. Everything is fine as long as the sonic quality of the premium preamps is fine. Congratulations, yiepee.
😉
+! for this also. I rarely need a control surface but still want the processing capabilities of the SQ5. I’ve gotten so used to doing this even with Dlive hardware at some of the venue’s I work at, if a SQ-SB came out I’d be buying it in a heartbeat.
.
