Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
2021/04/02 at 7:18 am #100351
I’d like explain my view on the SQ-SB/PAC.
What is main thing for every musician? Does not matter it a symphonic orchestra or small amateur’s group 2…5 persons. Of course – quality of sound!
The best quality of sound is analog. But today we need many addons to analog sound to make modern sound: compressors, dynamic EQ, echo, delay, and other FX-devices. And they are from metal and are very heavy – but we (small groups) need a portability and light weight… That is reason why we need a digital mixer.
But a digital mixer on DSP chips with 24 bit / 48 kHz has not a good quality of sound (comparing to analog sound) because:
– By processing on 24/48 some coloration (overtones) of sound is lost;
– By DSP-chips processing a phase of signals is not coherent on input and output of mixer – it is loss of clarity, non-musical distortions, muddy sound;
A mixer on FPGA-chip 24/96 kHz has more precise and amenity by AD/DA conversions and processing of sound:
– 24/96 kHz has smaller latency;
– Phase coherent (all mixers with FPGA-chip inside are phase coherent devices = dLive, Avantis, SQ-serie);
– More overtones are living in sound.
About quantity of inputs/outputs
For small groups 16 physical inputs and 8 outputs will be enough in many situations. Architecture FPGA with 32 channels inside will allow to make parallel processing of channels in some reasons. Slink – allow to add more inputs/outputs if it will be needed by additional one or two stage boxes.
About “faderless controlling”.
Today every musician has a gadget – Android, Apple, Windows are platforms for control application for the faderless mixer. And the gadget technology leaps forward very quick. I think, it is no sense to install a gadget inside of the mixer – it will be non-modern in short time. Wi-Fi router and Touchscreen has to be non-installed in the mixer.
About cards.
Yes, of course. Dante, Waves…. It is a future. The less AD/DA conversions of a sound then better for the sound.
Footswitch – yes, of course. Not a lot of small groups has a sound’s engineer/operator and footswitch will be very useful in many reasons: rever-delay on/off, mute a group, change a scene for next one.
So, short to say – for me an optimal construction of digital mixer would be – “cut off” of all faders and buttons from SQ-5.2021/03/31 at 1:41 pm #100276Yes, the dlive cdm32 is splendiferous… except one thing – price is too high 🙂
2021/03/31 at 8:47 am #100272Yes, it could be DX168 but with combi XLR/TRS inputs and with place for one card (Dante or Waves… will be very useful).
2021/03/30 at 10:41 am #100257My proposal for structure of SQ-SB is very easy:
– take SQ-5 and cutoff all faders, buttons and display;
– from backside view of SQ-5 nothing changes except XLR inputs – they have to be Combi XLR/TRS
That is it. Software is the same. Cards are the same.
Form factor is stage box with 19” rack volumesDear All! Let’s discuss of the structure of SQ-SB rack mixer – it will helps to Allen&Heath to understand what an optimal structure has to be… but don’t forget about costs and end price.
2021/03/30 at 7:17 am #100255Yes, it would be great to have SQ-SB or SQ-PAC for small groups too.
2021/01/19 at 6:42 am #98211SQ-SB and SQ-PAC for small bands +1000
2020/12/21 at 6:40 am #97513+1000
2020/12/11 at 1:57 pm #97162Dear A&H,
Could you tell me when comes for sell SQ-SB or SQ-PAC?
Best regards
2020/11/23 at 8:40 am #96512Yes, it would be great! Only our activity can attract attention of A&H to this point! Please, be active!
2020/11/14 at 10:52 am #96340Hey Allen&Heath! Did you see New Midas Heritage-D Air
Maybe your answer will be SQ-SB or SQ-PAC ?!!
We are waiting…2020/11/09 at 6:54 am #96228Hey Folks,
Maybe somebody has information about plans of A&H for SQ-SB and SQ-PAC – please, mention it here. It is allow to make this topic more active.
Without our activity A&H thinks that it is not interesting for us…
QU-serie is practically closed for improvement – nothing will happend with it.
We have to ask about improvement of SQ-serie in direction “low cost”.2020/11/05 at 9:02 am #96115Hi Maw92,
Look on motu 1248…
About SQ-SB – I think, it will be more profitable for A&H only to remove from SQ-5 all faders… The rest of SQ-5 will be without changes. Maybe only TRS/XLR inputs will be changed (on my wish:-)2020/11/02 at 12:25 pm #96068Yes, Hugh, you are right – control application for QU-SB could be much better but a snake cable for FOH (CAT5 or CAT6) to PC or Mac with Touch screen not a bad solution in this case.
In any case I hope for SQ-SG our loving Allen&Heath has chance to make better control application.2020/11/02 at 11:08 am #96065I mean SQ core 32 – configuration from outside like on QU-SB (QU-PAC) but inside configuration like SQ-7.
2020/11/02 at 10:54 am #96064I think the best variant of SQ-SB or SQ-PAC will be with the same configuration as has SQ-7 but without faders.
But input sockets have to be as on QU-SB or Combi TRS/XLR in quantity 16/8 -
AuthorPosts