The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Allen & Heath Qu-SB compared to Soundcraft Ui24r
Old 5th February 2017
  #1
Here for the gear
 

Allen & Heath Qu-SB compared to Soundcraft Ui24r

Hi folks, first post.

Okay, I also know the Soundcraft Ui24r isn't out yet, but bear with me. I'm 63 and mix my own five piece band and I want out of the analog world. I like my MixWiz, my DriveRack 360, my dBx 31 band eqs, etc. but I'm tired of my 180lb rolling rack. Accordingly, I'm looking for a lightweight digital mixer.

I like the idea of being able to see what's going on with the larger-in-comparison iPad screen (that is, larger than a Qu-16 screen).

The little I have read of the Qu-SB is favorable, but again, I don't hear much about it. There seems to be no backing, no promotional push on this unit from Allen & Heath and that concerns me. It is as if A & H isn't proud of the unit, so why should I want one? Every thing I read about the Qu-SB is good, but there is literally 10 times more chatter about the Ui-16 than the Allen & Heath product. Can somebody shed some light on that, please?

I assume Ui-24r will come out in March or April and that I will have to wait a few months for proper evaluation from the Sound Community.

FWIW, I have read the entire 81 page gearslutz Live Sound thread on the Soundcraft Ui-16. I've read about the connectivity problems, noisy preamps, etc. I know the Ui-24r promises to be a step up from the Ui-16 in terms of those issues.

Finally, just so know you will not think I haven't tried to do any homework, I've also read everything I can find on Google for both the Qu-SB and the Ui-16.

So, last question, can somebody give me a general idea how they think the not-even-shipped Ui-24r will compare in terms of features to the Qu-SB?

Thanks, gilded
Old 5th February 2017
  #2
Lives for gear
 

i don't own a QuSb or Ui mixer, but here's a few things ive noticed that may be worth considering..

the big downfall with QuSb for me is you have no backup device if your wifi fails.. they only make an iPad app for controlling it and unless you can sort out a way to hardwire an ipad in case you have wifi issues you are stuck.. As it would seem Wifi issues are not uncommon in public venues with lots of people so its likely to cause problems at some point..

They should make a PC/Mac app which lets you keep an old laptop for backup, however this isn't even in the works from what I understand its an intentional decision by A&H to only support iPad! The lack of backup is enough to rule out the QuSb as an option altogether for me.. A&H suggestion is to go with their QuPac mixer with built in screen as the backup..

The other factor with these digitial mixers is will they still be functional in 5-10 years from now ? That may not be an issue for some people who just sell older gear or don't care when they upgrade but I generally don't sell much gear and prefer to have stuff that can readapt to other uses when I upgrade..

the lack of PC/Mac for program for QuSb really hinders that prospect. My guess is there's much more chance to maintain use for an older digital mixer (after its discontinued) with a computer application than tablet apps.. knowing Apple, iPad upgrades will probably loose compatibility first.

The Ui24, looks good but id like to see some real world proof of its reliability. its coming off the back of Ui16 which has obviously had its issues so some 3rd party reviews that aren't related to Soundcraft marketing would be good to see..
Old 5th February 2017
  #3
Lives for gear
 

ebulb should actually have some hands on experience with the QU-sb before delving into the world of detrimental possibilities. I have both a QU16 and QU-sb: we run 5 open mics on stage for four seated performers and a stand up bass. FOH is either our KV2 ES stacks or venue custom installations and we have three KV2 EX10 wedges for on stage monitoring and supplemental house fills. I prefer good quality tube mics, one per performer, to double micing for sonic and many other reasons. We have IEMs available however almost never use them: A single wedge with carefully shaped EQ to support the sonic levels that are lost on stage from the available FOH bloom works very well for us. The luxury of carefully crafting the processing for each channel here in the studio and maintaining control of the musical content from the stage I could only dream about 20, 30, 40 years ago. I am taking the time and space to illustrate a very simple truth: The QU-sb is by far the least expensive, and singularly most important device I deploy. Spend the $ to buy the best router available to match your I-pad and you will be very good to go. I have never had a router failure with the I-Pad control since I started using it with the QU16 several years ago. My QU16 is now in it's case on the ready to use as a back up if ever needed. The QU32 core in the SB offers a great and inexpensive expansion option and the I-Pad screen is much more intuitive than any of the built in desk screens I have used. To this end the motorized faders and knob controlled processing are training wheels for folks negotiating the change over from analog to digital processing: however they, along with the small screen, will fail long before the internal circuitry of the sb does. Allen & Heath has been the leader of afordable live performance SR processing for many years. The QU line has been the biggest sales success in their history and the fact that the SB offers identical sonic quality with controls furnished by the acknowledged leader of wire less technology is a home run on it's own. They do not need to over sell a product that sells itself.
Hugh

Last edited by hughshouse; 5th February 2017 at 05:41 PM..
Old 5th February 2017
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hughshouse View Post
ebulb should actually have some hands on experience with the QU-sb before delving into the world of detrimental possibilities.
I appreciate you like your A&H gear and it might look like ive come to cut you down.. I haven't!! I like A&H products a lot and I'm not criticising the entire Qu series of mixers so don't distort my message!

my criticism is centred around WiFi and its ability to be hit and miss. the fact is A&H have made a poor choice by not providing redundancy on QuSb.. Difficult wifi enviroments exist whether you have encountered them or not and WiFi is less reliable than a cable. There is no way that having a PC/Mac program for the QuSb alongside the tablet would be a bad thing.
Old 5th February 2017
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ebulb View Post
I appreciate you like your A&H gear and it might look like ive come to cut you down.. I haven't!! I like A&H products a lot and I'm not criticising the entire Qu series of mixers so don't distort my message!

my criticism is centred around WiFi and its ability to be hit and miss. the fact is A&H have made a poor choice by not providing redundancy on QuSb.. Difficult wifi enviroments exist whether you have encountered them or not and WiFi is less reliable than a cable. There is no way that having a PC/Mac program for the QuSb alongside the tablet would be a bad thing.
The ability to establish a solid wi-fi connection lies squarely with the wi-fi gear you use, your understanding of how it works and the ability to set it up. This is exactly the same skill-set required for effective deployment of wireless mics, IEM's, com systems, etc.

I can appreciate the argument about redundancy for unit control and even a digital snake gives me the willies, but my experience using iPad control has been 100% positive since learning how to set up my own wireless network...ZERO problems. I use an Airport Express and an iPad2.

The answer of using the Qu-pac is apt. The size difference is not appreciable. Since I've done this as a business and count reliability and redundundancy as absolutes, I have spares for everything including mixer. The wi-fi has not been an issue and I'm as comfortable with it as any other kit.

This applies to external routers/WAP's, not to the built-in wireless in the digital toys out there masquerading as sound gear...
Old 5th February 2017
  #6
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gilded View Post
Hi folks, first post.

Okay, I also know the Soundcraft Ui24r isn't out yet, but bear with me. I'm 63 and mix my own five piece band and I want out of the analog world. I like my MixWiz, my DriveRack 360, my dBx 31 band eqs, etc. but I'm tired of my 180lb rolling rack. Accordingly, I'm looking for a lightweight digital mixer.

I like the idea of being able to see what's going on with the larger-in-comparison iPad screen (that is, larger than a Qu-16 screen).

The little I have read of the Qu-SB is favorable, but again, I don't hear much about it. There seems to be no backing, no promotional push on this unit from Allen & Heath and that concerns me. It is as if A & H isn't proud of the unit, so why should I want one? Every thing I read about the Qu-SB is good, but there is literally 10 times more chatter about the Ui-16 than the Allen & Heath product. Can somebody shed some light on that, please?

I assume Ui-24r will come out in March or April and that I will have to wait a few months for proper evaluation from the Sound Community.

FWIW, I have read the entire 81 page gearslutz Live Sound thread on the Soundcraft Ui-16. I've read about the connectivity problems, noisy preamps, etc. I know the Ui-24r promises to be a step up from the Ui-16 in terms of those issues.

Finally, just so know you will not think I haven't tried to do any homework, I've also read everything I can find on Google for both the Qu-SB and the Ui-16.

So, last question, can somebody give me a general idea how they think the not-even-shipped Ui-24r will compare in terms of features to the Qu-SB?

Thanks, gilded
It's too soon to tell about the 24r. It was just announced. It is a new product. It is not the repackaged product previously rebadged by Harman.
Old 5th February 2017
  #7
Lives for gear
 

I have compared many digital mixers over the last few years. In my endeavors I have found the following:
  1. All of the latest mid range digital mixers have great sound. A very good sounding mix can be made on any of them IMO and the small differences between them comes down to either taste, or it is so insubstantial that it makes little difference.
  2. Support infrastructure, price, and work-flow are the deciding factors when choosing among the top mid range mixers.

With that in mind, I hear you. I used to lug around an instrument rack with my MixWiz that was heavier than my amp rack . Loved my MixWiz rig, but it was like lugging around a lead brick from gig to gig.

To answer your question directly, I wouldn't want to be one of the first using the new Ui24. If you can wait for 6 months after its release to see how it is doing in the wild, it would be safer.

This is my overview of my opinion of the existing crop of compact digital mixers:

Ui24

Pro's
  • Sure looks good on paper.
  • Great GUI application
  • 20 XLR inputs
  • Integrated 802.11n 5Ghz radio (far superior to existing crop of 2.4Ghz radios in other products)

Con's
  • It isn't out for review in the wild
  • No off-line editor
  • No channel expansion through another stage box
  • No external IEM mix station capabilities (other than the phone app)
  • Limited routing capabilities
  • Limited functions on the channel processing
  • No matrix mixes

My summation of the Ui24 is that it is a good mixer for a band mixing from stage. It is particularly easy to operate which may be important coming from an analog mixer. At the 1K price point, it has some steep competition.

Qu-SB

Pro's
  • Its Allen and Heath .... which means most of the work flow will be familiar to you
  • Simple layout that is easy to learn
  • Expandable up to 38 inputs with an external stage box
  • IEM system available through Allen and Heath (ME1)

Con's
  • Only 16 XLR inputs
  • Decent app, but not as good as the Ui24
  • No integrated 5Ghz router (you have to hook up one of your own)
  • Still pretty limited routing, but perhaps better than the Ui

X32 Rack

Pro's
  • It is the most prolific digital mixer in history. Everyone knows how to use it
  • 23 total inputs
  • Expandable to 38 inputs with a stage box
  • Ability to use P16m remote IEM mix stations
  • Off-line editor (allows you to setup without your mixer present and save scenes/shows)
  • 6 matrix mixes (alternate mixes to be sent to other rooms, other sets of speakers, video recording, etc)
  • Includes a physical interface for operation if needed
  • Most comprehensive set of features available in this price range

Con's
  • No direct to disk multi-track recording (you need a separate computer to do multi-track)
  • No integrated wireless (you have to use your own)
  • Android and iOS app have different work flows
  • Only 16 XLR Inputs compared to the Ui's 20

To be fair, I own the X32 Rack and have only played around on the other 2 mixers (have friends that own them .... well, the Ui16 vs Ui24). At the end of 2013, I was sitting exactly where you are now. The tablet revolution in mixing was fresh (Mackie DL1608 was the front runner before the X32 Rack came out), and my biggest concern was giving up my faders.

I am glad to report that while I sometimes miss faders, I have grown so accustomed to the advantages of wireless mixing that I see no way that I would ever go back (and my back doesn't see any way either ).

If I were to be making the decision today, I might well wait and see how the Ui24 does.

I can tell you that I thought I would never use all the features of the X32 Rack, but I have used practically every aspect of it now. Sure, I could have gotten by without some of the more advanced features, but I am so glad I don't have to.

My existing monitor solution is an old Furman HDS wired IEM system. As those die, I am committed to moving over to the P16m local mix stations which gives each band member 16 inputs of their choosing to mix to their own taste (including main out and any bus). If I ever have need of more than 23 inputs, I can go rent a Behringer or Midas stage box from any number of sound companies in the area for the night to bring my channel count up to 38. When I have a big venue that provides a mix engineer for FOH (only happens a couple of times a year btw), they are all so familiar with the Behringer X32 work flow that I simply mail them my scene file and all is well.

I mix from stage with an android 8" Galaxy tab and the mixing station app. I have the tablet mounted on my mic stand and I can watch the mini-VU meters for all inputs and busses while adjusting my custom layer in real time while we play.

Regardless of which product you choose, I am sure you will find digital mixing a breath of fresh air
Old 5th February 2017
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

Nice comprehensive post, but I feel strongly about one point: built-in wireless capability.

From a reliability aspect, this feature is pretty much a sales gimmick. Nice that they've made it dual band, but a stand-alone, purpose built WAP/router is pretty much a necessity right now and in future will likely become absolutely necessary as wireless devices become even more prolific and available bandwidth dwindles.

I would rank it insignificant in choosing an audio console. Routing, recording/streaming interface, expandability/networking and remote/off-line features would be where I'd look. The Ui is capable of acting as a stage box which is a plus when building a larger inventory. I consider that a potential plus. That said, I'm very happy with the Qu series as I do live streaming for broadcast remote. The Qu really shines there.
Old 5th February 2017
  #9
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyllys View Post
Nice comprehensive post, but I feel strongly about one point: built-in wireless capability.

From a reliability aspect, this feature is pretty much a sales gimmick. Nice that they've made it dual band, but a stand-alone, purpose built WAP/router is pretty much a necessity right now and in future will likely become absolutely necessary as wireless devices become even more prolific and available bandwidth dwindles.

I would rank it insignificant in choosing an audio console. Routing, recording/streaming interface, expandability/networking and remote/off-line features would be where I'd look. The Ui is capable of acting as a stage box which is a plus when building a larger inventory. I consider that a potential plus. That said, I'm very happy with the Qu series as I do live streaming for broadcast remote. The Qu really shines there.
Thanks Wyllys,

Can you elaborate on one point? You said the Ui is capable of acting as a stage box. Can it expand its mix count by adding a stage box, or is it only a way of expanding the Si series mixer's channel count?

You could be right about the integrated wireless. If they are unable to put out high enough power with the built in wireless, it could potentially be much less useful than an external router.

The other advantage of an external router is that you can upgrade as new wireless technologies come out. Of course, you can use an external router with the new Ui mixer rather than using its internal wireless router, but as you say, this negates the positive of the integrated router.
Old 5th February 2017
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

I got the stagebox info from their website. This feature is a big plus in building scalable inventory. I wish A&H had given the Sb that functionality.
Old 6th February 2017
  #11
Lives for gear
ui12 user here-still experiencing connection freezes and hoping new firmware will solve. Not buying anything else until that happens.
Old 6th February 2017
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2manyrocks View Post
ui12 user here-still experiencing connection freezes and hoping new firmware will solve. Not buying anything else until that happens.
Are you trying to use the built-in Wi-Fi?
Old 6th February 2017
  #13
Lives for gear
Learned pretty early on not to rely on the internal router.

Folks at the ui users facebook page have posted that new firmware is in beta testing. It would be reasonable to ask if they are still working on the firmware for the ui24r.

I'm absolutely not going to be an early adopter of the ui24r. Not happening again.
Old 6th February 2017
  #14
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyllys View Post
I got the stagebox info from their website. This feature is a big plus in building scalable inventory. I wish A&H had given the Sb that functionality.
Thanks Wyllys,

The way I am reading it, the Ui24 can not expand its channel count by using another Ui24 as a stage box (like the X32 Rack can), it can only act as a stage box for more capable Soundcraft mixers with a higher count mix engine like the Si Expression, etc.

I know quite a few people that use an X32 full console with X32 Racks as their stage box which gives them redundancy in the mix engine and (as you say) a scaleable solution so they can do simple gigs with just the X32 Rack.
Old 6th February 2017
  #15
Lives for gear
For the OP's reading pleasure, there appears to be an active discussion of the ui on facebook. My impression there are more ui users posting there than have posted in the ui thread here, FWIW. https://www.*********************SoundcraftUi16Users/
Old 7th February 2017
  #16
Here for the gear
 

OP here. Thanks so much for the information, folks.

I think I'll wait until the Ui 24r has been out a few months and make a choice between these two units. In the mean-time, I'll keep reading up on whatever I can find.
I do have a friend who bought a Behringer stage box. I'll see if I can make some headway with that product. gilded
Old 15th February 2017
  #17
Here for the gear
 

I just wanted to add that its nice sitting in the audience and nobody has a clue that I'm actually running the show, they think I'm just a nerd with an IPAD

I own the QU-SB, I have also owned the

Presonus 16.0.2, FIREWIRE
Personus 16.4.2ai, FIREWIRE
AH QU-16 USB
ZED 10FX USB
ZED 12FX USB
SOUNDCRAFT MTK12 USB

Funny that Presonus keeps justifying FIREWIRE, then turns around with their newest BIG AND BAD mixer and uses USB.

Like many I do live shows and was worried about the IPAD only control. You can stop worrying, I connect the QU_SB to a new AIRPORT EXPRESS, use an IPAD PRO to control it, nothing but sweet music.

So after seeing the mixers I formally owned, you can see that price was not a contributing factor when I made the decision to go with the QU-SB.

I tested this thing hard for weeks at my studio. I ran scenario tests, like what if my iPad breaks?
Grabbed an IPAD from my wife, downloaded QU-PAD, connected to the network and I was back in business in less that 5 minutes.

Someone mentioned that AH hadn't pushed the SB very hard in a marketing campaign.
I agree they haven't, but lets evaluate that. The SB is more powerful that the QU-16, cheaper than the QU-PAC and has the same internals as the others. If anything, I feel AH made a mistake with the QU-PAC. Everything is going wireless, even when I ran the QU-16, I used the wireless control.

I bought the SB for its portability, OUT OF SIGHT form factor. AH sound quality, build quality and reliability . QU-DRIVE awesome feature. I feel that the Fader days are limited. If you need to look BIG and BAD I get that, but lets be honest.

Last edited by pgrillone; 15th February 2017 at 02:20 PM.. Reason: additional info
Old 15th February 2017
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

". The SB is more powerful that the QU-16, cheaper than the QU-PAC and has the same internals as the others. If anything, I feel AH made a mistake with the QU-PAC. Everything is going wireless, even when I ran the QU-16, I used the wireless control."

The Qu series is great. I use a Qu-16, one of the first to make it into the US, #3 I think. I'd like to go smaller, but I'd still choose the Qu-pac over the Sb for the surface controls. The size difference is minimal, the capabilities the same, but if for some reason you lost wireless capability, the Qu-pac let's you keep going...and keep your client.
Old 15th February 2017
  #19
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
The Qu series is great. I use a Qu-16, one of the first to make it into the US, #3 I think. I'd like to go smaller, but I'd still choose the Qu-pac over the Sb for the surface controls. The size difference is minimal, the capabilities the same, but if for some reason you lost wireless capability, the Qu-pac let's you keep going...and keep your client.
I agree that the QU-16 is am awesome mixer, The one I owned was the QU-16C, if it wasn't for a bad channel, I would have never even been looking for a replacement.
But when I started looking again, I saw the QU-PAC, kinda ugly to me but what the heck. In my shows, I pretty much do a setup and then ride faders and adjust fx and equalizer the rest of the show. As a professional Events company, I have 2 of everything. the Presonus 16.0.2 is still my backup. Knock on wood, I haven't had to use it in some time. But if I were only down to 1 mixer, it would still be the SB. BTW, you can hardwire the IPAD to the SB if need be.
Lightning adapter to usb, usb to ethernet adapter, direct connect to router. https://youtu.be/2ndUO_p_9oI
Old 15th February 2017
  #20
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgrillone View Post
I agree that the QU-16 is am awesome mixer, The one I owned was the QU-16C, if it wasn't for a bad channel, I would have never even been looking for a replacement.
But when I started looking again, I saw the QU-PAC, kinda ugly to me but what the heck. In my shows, I pretty much do a setup and then ride faders and adjust fx and equalizer the rest of the show. As a professional Events company, I have 2 of everything. the Presonus 16.0.2 is still my backup. Knock on wood, I haven't had to use it in some time. But if I were only down to 1 mixer, it would still be the SB. BTW, you can hardwire the IPAD to the SB if need be.
Lightning adapter to usb, usb to ethernet adapter, direct connect to router. https://youtu.be/2ndUO_p_9oI
Yup, two of everything...like Noah and the Ark. I have my back-ups pARKed in the trailer ready to go.
Old 15th February 2017
  #21
Lives for gear
 
dickiefunk's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyllys View Post
". The SB is more powerful that the QU-16, cheaper than the QU-PAC and has the same internals as the others. If anything, I feel AH made a mistake with the QU-PAC. Everything is going wireless, even when I ran the QU-16, I used the wireless control."

The Qu series is great. I use a Qu-16, one of the first to make it into the US, #3 I think. I'd like to go smaller, but I'd still choose the Qu-pac over the Sb for the surface controls. The size difference is minimal, the capabilities the same, but if for some reason you lost wireless capability, the Qu-pac let's you keep going...and keep your client.
I have the QU-PAC and if I were to buy again I would still choose the QU-PAC over the SB for the same reason Wyllys mentioned.
Old 11th April 2017
  #22
24i
Gear Nut
 

For around 1K I can't see it having exceptionally good pre's, but being as it has no work surface I guess they could cut cost's from that but how much? Its being billed as having "Renowned Studer" pre's. I wounder how they sound, and how do the other (12 & 16) Soundcraft box's sound?
Old 11th April 2017
  #23
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 24i View Post
For around 1K I can't see it having exceptionally good pre's, but being as it has no work surface I guess they could cut cost's from that but how much? Its being billed as having "Renowned Studer" pre's. I wounder how they sound, and how do the other (12 & 16) Soundcraft box's sound?
How much do you imagine a good pre costs per channel?
Old 11th April 2017
  #24
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by 24i View Post
For around 1K I can't see it having exceptionally good pre's, but being as it has no work surface I guess they could cut cost's from that but how much? Its being billed as having "Renowned Studer" pre's. I wounder how they sound, and how do the other (12 & 16) Soundcraft box's sound?
Good live mixer preamps are not expensive at all. They are simple circuits using minimal numbers of components. Unit cost is very low on mass produced product. Peanuts compared to other aspects. These digital mixers all make huge manufacturing savings by reducing the rest of the hardware needed too...

Where things have gone wrong (Soundcraft UI12/16) that is very much down to poor design and bad decisions. It could have been avoided easily. I suspect the rush to market with an outsourced design was the problem there. Prior to that, all the other Soundcraft desks (including their lower cost analog models) were all fine in the preamp department. The QU-SB has very nice preamps, and that is not an "expensive" board by any means... it can be done. It just requires good design and attention to engineering detail.
Old 11th April 2017
  #25
Gear Addict
 

Obviously there are a few players in the market, all with their own benefits/drawbacks: Soundcraft UI12/16/24r, Behringer XR12/16/18, X32 Rack, A&H QU-SB, QSC Touchmix 8, 16, 30, Mackie DL806, DL1608, DL32R etc. Most do a good job, just pick the one with the channel count and workflow that suits you best, and where any compromises are not deal breakers.

You ask about the UI24R - it's a bit pointless - Soundcraft have said it's great, but they would, and they said the same about the UI12/16. Until they're out and being used, you'll get no opinion that you should base a purchasing decision on. And I would expect sales to be slow to start with after the UI12/16 issues.
Old 11th April 2017
  #26
Lives for gear
My experience with my ui12 was at first I thought I had a bad mic cable because of the hiss when using line audio cm3 mics on 48v. Solved that with external preamp. The other unpredictable issue i have experienced is the inability to connect at times even after setting up an external router. The refrain of new firmware is coming ....has become entirely too tiresome. So I have decided to move on to the XR using the mixing station pro app.
Old 11th April 2017
  #27
24i
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 66d35 View Post
Good live mixer preamps are not expensive at all. They are simple circuits using minimal numbers of components. Unit cost is very low on mass produced product. Peanuts compared to other aspects. These digital mixers all make huge manufacturing savings by reducing the rest of the hardware needed too...

Where things have gone wrong (Soundcraft UI12/16) that is very much down to poor design and bad decisions. It could have been avoided easily. I suspect the rush to market with an outsourced design was the problem there. Prior to that, all the other Soundcraft desks (including their lower cost analog models) were all fine in the preamp department. The QU-SB has very nice preamps, and that is not an "expensive" board by any means... it can be done. It just requires good design and attention to engineering detail.
Outsourced to who? Studer?
Old 11th April 2017
  #28
24i
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneEng View Post
How much do you imagine a good pre costs per channel?
Well, a good mic-pre can run in excess of the total cost of this unit. Correct me if I'm wrong. The Soundcraft digital boards start at more than 2X the cost of this unit (Expression 1). Perhaps as "66d35" has stated a high(er) end pre is not the best idea for road life and a studio pre is not the best comparison here, but even 1/10th of the cost of a good mic-pre would be $100, yes?

I don't know for sure but does this unit have digital pre's? But of coarse there must be some sort of analog part to it to in-put an analog signal.
Old 12th April 2017
  #29
Lives for gear
 
mintaka007's Avatar
The sound craft ui12/16 were designed and built, including the software interface by smpro. Sound craft bought this unit and slapped sound craft on it.

The ui24 "supposedly" is a ground up design and build. The software and features look well thought out, and it sounds like Harman did a complete redisign of all the hardware.

I hope this is the case, and if all of this proves to be true I will definitely be buying one. I will, however, let others be the guinea pigs this first year to make sure it is what we have been told.
Old 12th April 2017
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 24i View Post
Well, a good mic-pre can run in excess of the total cost of this unit. Correct me if I'm wrong. The Soundcraft digital boards start at more than 2X the cost of this unit (Expression 1). Perhaps as "66d35" has stated a high(er) end pre is not the best idea for road life and a studio pre is not the best comparison here, but even 1/10th of the cost of a good mic-pre would be $100, yes?

I don't know for sure but does this unit have digital pre's? But of coarse there must be some sort of analog part to it to in-put an analog signal.
The preamps in even the most expensive mixers have components that sum up to less than a couple of dollars. There are off-the-shelf pre-amp chips that do most of the heavy lifting these days. Some older mixers used discrete circuits (My old MixWiz for instance) with a decent op amp chip.

The fact is that making a good, linear, low noise preamp is no longer hard or expensive at all.

It always mystifies me how preamps are glorified in mixers.

The stand-alone tube preamps used in some applications are used specifically because they are NOT linear. They color the sound in a generally pleasing way .... especially for vocals.

Today, most people want their preamps in their digital consoles to do nothing to the signal other than linearly amplify it. The internal mixer processing does the rest.

What would make a good debate is to discuss how well the processing in different digital consoles works. Preamps are not what makes or breaks a digital console these days. It is silly IMO to keep talking about them like they have some profound impact on live sound.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump