Thinking of trading in Qu-24 for SQ5

[volounteerParticipant]

@gravyface

You need to listen to it yourself. For me there is zero difference except the SQ is bigger with more features.

[gravyfaceParticipant]

You need to listen to it yourself. For me there is zero difference except the SQ is bigger with more features.

That’s not going to be feasible at all; nobody’s renting them, most stores around here don’t carry them in stock.

Have you actually tracked through both of them?

[volounteerParticipant]

@gravyface

looks like you got an impossible problem.

if your Qu is good enough then stop worrying.
if the Qu has a problem you can identify then try to find something that does not have that problem and that you can afford.
Will you find someone to let you test one out to see for yourself? Dont know cant say. How does Canada biz work for returns. Maybe the AH dealer could put you in contact with someone there that would let you do a test track to see.

I really doubt that AH spent the time and effort to design new analog preamps for the SQ when the Qu is plenty good.

And for digital 96kcp is better than 48. But then 384 is better than 192 is better than 96 — DEPENDING what you are doing.
From what you said you do not need more than 48.

Hugh seems to have given you the only real usage answer here.
You will have to decide for yourself whether it is worth it.
I would go on features rather than preamps or sample rates to decide. But that is just me.

[JgriftParticipant]

I have mixed extensively on both systems (live only). But I would say the SQ is much better that the QU. The new FPGA engine is miles better than the QU. And you have higher clarity and definition in the mix. As far as the pre amps…I understand they are not the same as QU. The flexibly alone of having a card option is worth it going to a SQ over a QU. Even if you don’t use that slot for a few years. The QU has to be reaching maturity soon. Not that it will make it bad once they end life but that the SQ will for sure be adding features for more years than QU.

[volounteerParticipant]

@jgrift

Is there any way to measure that clarity and definition?

The preamps may be better. Is there a way to measure that?
What makes you say they are not the same as the Qu?

Seems like @grayface should wait until he can find a way to AB test them himself.

[JgriftParticipant]

I’m not sure you need to measure a preamp to decide if sounds better. But perhaps I should rephrase it “I would say the SQ sounds better to my ear”. I was just sharing my experience. I do however believe that the SQ is a better mixing system. And with the cost not being drastically more it seems like a no brainer which one you should buy. Although if that 1.3k extra now breaks the bank than the QU is a fine board.

[volounteerParticipant]

@jgrift

If you say you like it better then I believe you.

If you say it *is* better then I will demand proof that is not subjective and is based on measurable data that can be confirmed by others.

Now as a mixing system, that depends more on features and ease of use.
I suspect SQ should win against the Qu if we compare those items.
And cost is always , at least for most of us, a big constraining factor.
So overall it will again be a very personal choice as to which one to buy.

The OPer indicated he liked the sound of 96Kcps sampling better than 48.
I like 96 better than 48 too. But I like 192 far better than 96, but for totally different reasons than @gravyface does.
If 384 were free then I would go to that rate instead of 192. Do not know anyone that has built a 786 but I suspect that by then you are running into problems with errors in A/D/A and jitter that would make such a rate moot.

And I have no idea what he means by DEEP processing. That has a specific meaning in psychology but I cannot grok the analog if we are talking about audio. The only thing Google turns up is double valve processing used by AH but Deep is not in all caps like the OPer wrote.

For me valves are a total nono and I would never buy anything with old style valves. If @gravyface thinks they are somehow better then he needs to make that decision. For me any vacuum tubes is more trouble for no added value and I would prefer to stick to transistors and ICs designed well.

Well better googling says that is just a plug in used with faking valves distortion. Even a bigger turnoff for me. I want the original clear sound not something that has been changed to ‘sound better’. I do not find such things better but that is just me. There are lots of garageband types who think louder is better and some sort of distortion is normal.

Would some other ‘deep’ plug in entice me to the SQ? That is possible.
Again @gravyface will have to make that decision based on his personal preferences.

[JgriftParticipant]

I did go from a Qu to SQ. And while I cannot provide evidence to the pre amps being better (not sure how you measure that one sounds better than the other). The console is much more capable. And in my experience sounds better. The DEEP processing is great. Love having the options for extra add on processing. Also like the extra routing/patching capability of the SQ which might be relevant to you in the studio space.

[Author]

Posts