Yes
3 Likes
The Qu is much better bang for the buck compared to SQ. Still havenât used my SQ5 that much but Iâm pretty sure a Qu woulda been a better choice for me too. But I canât return it anymore and am not selling (for a loss, not worth) it so Iâll have to suck it up and stick with it. First world problems indeed
AH digital boards are pretty badass tho! I am especially fond of the crazy phase shifts one can introduce with the GEQs.
1 Like
I tried to read all this, but I stopped after a few hundreds of answersâŚ
maybe i should have read the manual instead 
i didn´t get the point why so many of you prefer the faderless version.
is it just because of the size/weight or is there any other reason ?
@AdamJay even thanked the guy who talked him out the q-16. why?
i´m sure thats in the manual but may i ask:
as there are no edit functions for the multitrack recordings, can i do at least:
record track by track
override pre-existing recordings (punch in punch out?)
start recording from different times.
if so, how do the audio files show up in a DAW ?
as snippets without time reference ? as a bounced full length track?
one last question:
i´ve used analog mixers forever. one simple thing i did/do all the time:
send a track via aux to a (hardware) delay or reverb efx. connect the fx signal back to a normal channelstrip. send that signal again via the same aux to create feedback. maybe i want to mute the send signal while adjusting the feedback-level of the fx loop, etc âŚ
how can i do that on a digital mixer like the q 16 ? i mean control parameters simultaniously that are on different layers ?
anyone understands that question ? - lol
i download the manual now, thanks.
Too big for my needs. Qu-Pac is more compact.
1 Like
i also read a bit about that topic in the allen&heath forum and
quite a few people say they´d have been surprised that they don´t miss the faders. on the other side they discuss how to midi control volumes ?
doesn´t make sense to me. only benefit to go without faders for me would be (beside size/weight) that there´s less in the machine that can get broken.
i´ve never owned a smartphone or tablet - maybe that´s what makes me my head scratching ?
i have to take my qu-pac out of the house at least every week, so moving a larger mixer around would be that much more troublesome.
i used the Quâ without an iPad for about a year, and there were no issues. Once I finally bought an iPad, however, the mixer really came to life in a new way. I got the faders that it doesnât have, and moving through the menus really became a breeze.
1 Like
You also get the more powerful internals on the QPac vs the Q16, you can expand to 32 tracks with the expander w/QPacâŚ
I chose the QuPac because of the physical size and expandability, plus it is easy to add faders via a midi USB host or by using ipad.
One important thing to bear in mind though if choosing A&H gear is that they only give a 12 month warranty, so if considering purchasing any of their gear buy from a dealer who offers a free 3 year warranty.
⌠but also the user interface is very clever and surprisingly easy to use, making the lack of faders not such a big issue as one might expect. This is also helped by the many ways in which one can configure this thing with softkeys and the other buttons. There is an obvious loss of direct interaction that only faders can give but the design is really smart. There is always something one would like to see in a successor but I would by this again, without hesitation.
I donât use the iPad app.
1 Like
^ Agree with your assessment - I found the UI of the QuPac very elegant and a pleasure to use also.
Same here. I prefer the screen on the unit over the iPad. Itâs good that options are available, though.
Personally, I love the motorized faders on my SQ5. But then again, I cannot transport the damn thing anywhere, its too big! These faderless mixing boxes are pretty much the only choice for compact transportation.
1 Like
Quick question is there any way to make the audio outputs 1 2 3 4 act as two stereo pairs for external effects or any way to pan them, thanks
no, i donât think so. 1, 2 ,3, 4 are only mono. 2-trk out and Alt out work well for this. I like Alt-out because itâs got the knob on the front to control the level. 5/6, 7/8, 9/10 are the other stereo outs.
3 Likes
I believe @PlumWrinkles is right about this. I know that with the inputs, you can link them and then hard pan them left/right, but I donât think thatâs the case with Outs 1, 2, 3, 4.
3 Likes
Cheers for that.will give the alt out ago
1 Like
Shame.cant ever see me using mono outs
if you ever end up with something like the Analog Drive, these sends are great for things like that.
Also, this might seem silly to mention, as i think itâs what theyâre actually for, but I run the mono outs into my stage monitor at gigs.
1 Like
Yeah 100% there for stage monitors. I just sold my x32r where everything could be swapped around.i have downsized alot so brought the qu pac, just trying to get used to it. Got it for a bargain ÂŁ599 so well chuffedđ
3 Likes
whoa! that is super cheap. nice buy
1 Like