Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Andrew Broughton

Andrew Broughton

Senior
Feb 2, 2011
917
5
18
Back Lounge
www.checkcheckonetwo.com
I'm guessing that the QL and CL consoles have the same "guts" just with different mix counts, controls and so on. Kinda like how the DiGiCos were "supposed" to be, where files could be shared across the line. (doesn't work, btw).

But, on the QL and CL Editors, you can share the files between them without any trouble. I can even open a CL file in the CL editor, turn up Mix 17 (which doesn't exist on the QL), save it, open that file in the QL editor (no mix 17 shown), save it, and then open it back up in the CL editor and Mix 17 is still turned up.

So, what I'm wondering is what happens on the actual consoles? Can someone who has access to both save a QL file and then try to load it on the CL and see what happens? How about the reverse?
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Andrew, I don't have a QL console to test for you, but Yamaha today announced the coming Version 3 software early next year.

CL/QL version 3

In that press release was this little blurb, which I thought you might be interested:
With this upgrade QL series V2.0 will be skipped so that the CL and QL series consoles will be at the same V3.0 level. CL and QL series console files are interchangeable, so it is easy to choose and combine models to ideally accommodate live sound FOH and monitoring as well as broadcast relay and recording, from large scale applications to the most basic.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

I was just about to post that quote. Ya beat me to it. ;-)

It's great to hear that the files are the same. I've been hearing other manufacturers say that their files are compatible with all their consoles, but I've yet to see it work.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

If this is truly the case, Yamaha May have scored a coupe d'eta.

I'm curious to see how they handle the RIO patching between console. Do the QLs automatically assume that the RIO patch will be replicated on the on board inputs and outputs for the QLs?
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

It's all just Dante connections, what would be different between the 2 consoles?

[edit]Ah, I see what you're getting at. The patch on the QL actually names the inputs, doesn't use Dante patching.

Well, using the CL editor, I opened a QL file, and the first 8 channels are patched to Omni 1-8, the next 8-32 are not patched.
Ch 33 starts at Dante1 ending at Dante32 for channel 64.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

When converting CL->QL the QL assumes all Dante inputs and no analog (other than the 8 local on the CL). This has been annoying for me because to convert Ls9 -> QL you have to first convert to CL, which looses both the appropriate input patch, as well as input gain & +48V. I'd be happy to be wrong about this if someone can show me a work around, especially because I think a lot of people will be using QL as a drop in replacement for Ls9.

thomas d.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Andrew Broughton said:
I'm guessing that the QL and CL consoles have the same "guts" just with different mix counts, controls and so on. Kinda like how the DiGiCos were "supposed" to be, where files could be shared across the line. (doesn't work, btw)
Click to expand...

I'm curious about your comment regarding DiGiCo. Have you tried to use the SD Convert software and it didn't work for you? I've used it and it did what it's supposed to do.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

eytan gidron said:
I'm curious about your comment regarding DiGiCo. Have you tried to use the SD Convert software and it didn't work for you? I've used it and it did what it's supposed to do.
Click to expand...
First I've heard of that. They were saying in the past that you could load files from one console to another directly, which obviously doesn't work. DiGiCo would do well to get the word out on their conversion software.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Interesting you should ask. We provided racks n stacks for a show at the zoo here last week and the band was carrying a CL5. I brought a QL5 for the opening act and just prior to soundcheck the band's console started to act up in a rather nasty way. Loud pops and crackles from all the premium effects returns and the higher numbered positions from the standard effects rack. It had apparently happened before and there was already conversations with Yamaha about possible causes - hardware issues ( the band engineer suspected a problematic DSP chip ) versus a corrupted show file ( Yamaha was loath to admit a hardware problem ). After some discussion I sent the truck back to the shop for our CL5 but in the mean time we loaded his file via USB save into the QL5 and the band eng inspected the results with an eye toward sussing out the issues. The QL appeared to load everything from the CL file including the Dante patches as expected according the the BE. The show went off fine with the replacement CL5.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

That's very interesting, Riley. A real-world test.
Seems like in going from CL to QL there would be no patching issues; the issue comes if someone is going from QL to CL and is using the built-in XLR inputs. In that case some soft patching would need to be done.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Patching is the only issue I see with this process. However, if the QL is set up to use a RIO, then it seems like the show files would transfer without having to repatch.

There are worse problems to have when transferring show files.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Which is why I have Yamahas rather than Digico's. After looking real hard at replacing my older PM5D and M7 with a pair of SD8s it really seemed that the Digico products were designed by computer geeks who picked up some audio chops. While there is some occasional frustration waiting on Yamaha to get their computer chops together when say coming out with firmware updates the Yamahas interfaces do act like soundboards first and computers second.


Chris Johnson said:
Exactly! Having to do an input re patch is no big deal as long as you are carrying documentation (which you all are, right?). Thats a win for Yamaha...
Click to expand...
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Here we rent both the CL and QL line of mixer. The issues are in patching and when taking a file from a larger CL console to a smaller CL or QL Console (i.e. CL5 to a QL1 or CL3). Yes Mix 17 is still there and it will work fine, but if it was something that you had patched to an output of FX or whatever it won't be there and you will just need to repatch them. Can be a little frustrating if you don't remember what it was running, but it is nice to see that they work together.

Douglas Plander, Audio Engineer
Video Equipment Rentals, Orlando, FL
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Riley Casey;85704 ...it really seemed that the Digico products were designed by computer geeks who picked up some audio chops. While there is some occasional frustration waiting on Yamaha to get their computer chops together when say coming out with firmware updates the Yamahas interfaces do act like soundboards first and computers second.[/QUOTE said:
I see where you're coming this statement. I've been working on a SD9 for about 4 years now, but honestly when I first started using it I didn't like it. (I was coming from a M7)

However, if computer geeks really did design the console they also had a lot of experience on what audio engineers want.

As I started learning the desk, I because quicker and discovered many features that Yamaha just doesn't offer. Also, Yamaha's lineup have different workflows and different layouts. I personally find Yamaha's slightly frustrating when having to work with them on occasion.

It really seems to be a top choice brand for national touring acts and I can see why.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

Josh Voyles said:
Also, Yamaha's lineup have different workflows and different layouts. I personally find Yamaha's slightly frustrating when having to work with them on occasion.
Click to expand...

That being said, what Yamaha does have is consistency within their small groups. (CL line, QL Line)

When you buy a CL1, it's the exact same desk as a CL5 just smaller and less available channels.

That's one thing I dislike about Digicos.

On my SD9, I'd like to have more macros. The SD10 has 24, but I don't need the additional processing and channel count the SD10 has to offer. Additionally, I'd like to have encoders below the screen that light up with LED's to reflect the parameter color they are adjusting. But I can't carry around a desk the size of a SD5 or SD7.

I just wanted to throw this out there as not to come off too much like a Digico fanboy.

Sorry for derailing the thread.
 
Re: Can someone with a QL and CL do a little test?

eytan gidron said:
Josh, with the new iPad app you can add many more macros to your SD9. I am not sure but I think that you can have as many as 40 macros on the iPad screen.
Click to expand...


That's really good to hear. Digico just released that app and I really haven't had a chance to implement it yet. I'll probably have to rig up some sort of stand or something though.
 
Top Bottom