[ArnoParticipant]

Of course! The idea is to be able to skip over multiple extended breaks/transitions, but still have only one file/folder at the end of the day.

[ArnoParticipant]

Sorry.

[ArnoParticipant]

Feedback destroyer would be great to have. Occasionally, being able to flip the phase on the Mix outputs can also help combat feedback, but Qu doesn’t seem to currently offer that. I’m using phase-flip adapters instead.

[ArnoParticipant]

Can clock be sent via the Ethercon? If so it would be certainly possible to slave a second Qu, wouldn’t it?

Could you be so kind and point me to the discussion about the clocking issues? Thank you!

[ArnoParticipant]

Okay, how about the AB1608 serving not only as a stage box but also to split the signal and send it via the extra Ethercon? Is that possible or outrageous sounding?

[ArnoParticipant]

Okay.

[ArnoParticipant]

To be frank, I’m also thinking about mixing. For live such small numbers are perfectly fine, but when it comes to recordings and using this board for creative mixes even small amounts start to make me weary.
The 16 was marketed not only for live use, but for installation & studio as well. I am trying to determine if despite of what A&H claims this board can be useful in a small studio.
So far I’m starting to think that for a “full featured” board one has to step up to the Qu24 or 32. No, I’m not saying that the Qu 16 is a child’s toy. It’s a great ‘little’ board, but there are limitations that bum me out. I feel I should have stepped up and gotten something less… lmitating. Turns out I use subgroups more than I thought.
My only hope is A&H decides to provide is with a patch that would allow for stereo mixes to be internally route-able to the LR.

Thanks for reading my rant. I’m sorry if I sound too needy.

[ArnoParticipant]

I want to be as accurate as possible. Is that a bad thing?
The way I look at it there is always going to be certain margin of error. If I do everything I can to be as accurate as possible, the smaller the deviation when everything gets added together.

I understand small discrepancies don’t cause concern in you fellas. And that’s great. But I want to be able to get as close to perfection as possible without having to nudge and move around once everything is set.

[ArnoParticipant]

Well, in this case the delay compensation will never be right on. It’ll be almost on..

[ArnoParticipant]

I understand and agree with what you are saying. The reason I’m asking about total delay is in cases when a “grouped” signal is present in monitor wedges. As we know sometimes musicians can be very sensitive to delay in their own signal, and their baseline is their instrument.
Basically, my concern is not having performers being weirded out by the side effects of this work-around. That’s all. The rest ain’t a big deal.

If I want to group process something and bring it back in (parallel compressing f.e.) I guess the delay fiction at the preamps of each channel could come in handy. Suppose one could delay all non participating channels to avoid comb filtering.
Anyone in front of a Qu right now? Can you check if the Qu would let you dial in very precise delay values, like decimals and stuff?

[ArnoParticipant]

That helps guys, thanks for all your inputs!

[ArnoParticipant]

So then effectively it’s double that…?
After all the signal coming from the microphone goes throgh the board once, goes out and then come back in for second time into stereo in. Aren’t we looking at 2.4

[ArnoParticipant]

Hi, I have a question on the subject.

Let’s say I were to route a Mix back into a Stereo Input. What kind of latency are we talking about? There is a set of DA/AD conversion the audio signal must go through, there has to be some sort of delay in signal. Answer in milliseconds would be much appreciated (vs a “should be very small” answer).

Another one is – is it possible that an Internal routing of a Mix to the LR be added in a future firmware update? Or is this a limitation that cannot be overcome via a software upgrade?

[Author]

Posts