X32 vs QU 24
- Thread starter Kemper Watson
- Start date
Re: X32 vs QU 24
The QU-24 itself is priced about the same as the x32, the AR-2412 has 50% more channels, but is also priced over double what an S-16 digital snake head is.
The X32 needs a nice quick to switchover UPS backup here in the USA, but less so in other countries that use 220v mains. I'd still use a UPS for both though.
The lack of DCA faders on the QU-24 is a bummer, but it has 10 user buttons, although the x32 does have a very nice user section spread over 3 layers. The QU-24 can record 18 channels direct to disk though.
4 Mute groups vs 6 on the x32
Digital snake is 30 x 12 max vs 36 x 24 (or more) on x32. X32 does require a shielded (FTP minimum) cat-5 cable for it's snake to avoid issues with ESD - but does run on UTP cable. I believe the QU uses utp cable, but not sure how well it handles ESD.
The X32 just came out with a kickin' firmware update, that actually works with windows/OSX and ios devices (newer than first gen) that is worth checking out.
The p16-m personal monitor sounds fantastic, as good as the top of the line stuff right now - the Roland M-48, it doesn't have the same feature set, but is also about 1/4 the price. It blows the Aviom stuff out of the water, but then again, most everything else out now does that. It does have nice eq settings that are adjustable for each input unlike the A&H unit.
The QU-24 itself is priced about the same as the x32, the AR-2412 has 50% more channels, but is also priced over double what an S-16 digital snake head is.
The X32 needs a nice quick to switchover UPS backup here in the USA, but less so in other countries that use 220v mains. I'd still use a UPS for both though.
The lack of DCA faders on the QU-24 is a bummer, but it has 10 user buttons, although the x32 does have a very nice user section spread over 3 layers. The QU-24 can record 18 channels direct to disk though.
4 Mute groups vs 6 on the x32
Digital snake is 30 x 12 max vs 36 x 24 (or more) on x32. X32 does require a shielded (FTP minimum) cat-5 cable for it's snake to avoid issues with ESD - but does run on UTP cable. I believe the QU uses utp cable, but not sure how well it handles ESD.
The X32 just came out with a kickin' firmware update, that actually works with windows/OSX and ios devices (newer than first gen) that is worth checking out.
The p16-m personal monitor sounds fantastic, as good as the top of the line stuff right now - the Roland M-48, it doesn't have the same feature set, but is also about 1/4 the price. It blows the Aviom stuff out of the water, but then again, most everything else out now does that. It does have nice eq settings that are adjustable for each input unlike the A&H unit.
Last edited:
Re: X32 vs QU 24
Thanks. I really want to like the Allen n Heath, but the x32 may win out. It's hard to beat with all the features. I really dont like the dedicated stereo auxes on the A&H, why not be able to separate them?. And again, thanks for your time
Thanks. I really want to like the Allen n Heath, but the x32 may win out. It's hard to beat with all the features. I really dont like the dedicated stereo auxes on the A&H, why not be able to separate them?. And again, thanks for your time
Re: X32 vs QU 24
I use the QU16 every week and own an X32, I like the A&H better because of the FX and I dont worry if its going to power on today, but the features of the X32 are hard to beat.
I use the QU16 every week and own an X32, I like the A&H better because of the FX and I dont worry if its going to power on today, but the features of the X32 are hard to beat.
Re: X32 vs QU 24
Interesting Ben,
Which efx are you using on the X32 and the Qu-16 that you are comparing? I am partial to the plate verb on the X32. I have only fiddled with the Qu-16, but felt that with just a microphone and some time at GC that the efx of the Qu-16 were about on-par with what I get on the X32 (both are quite good).
Kemper,
The Qu-24 is a fine mixer. I would have a problem with not having the LCD scribble strips, and the channel VU meter LED's on the Qu-24 are simply useless (only 3 LED's per channel).
Declan has done a good job of outlining the difference in features.
Interesting Ben,
Which efx are you using on the X32 and the Qu-16 that you are comparing? I am partial to the plate verb on the X32. I have only fiddled with the Qu-16, but felt that with just a microphone and some time at GC that the efx of the Qu-16 were about on-par with what I get on the X32 (both are quite good).
Kemper,
The Qu-24 is a fine mixer. I would have a problem with not having the LCD scribble strips, and the channel VU meter LED's on the Qu-24 are simply useless (only 3 LED's per channel).
Declan has done a good job of outlining the difference in features.
Silas Pradetto
Graduate Student
Re: X32 vs QU 24
I wonder how much more reliable in-house manufacturing is versus contract manufacturing? I own an X32 that's been back for repair twice, and I'd still take it over anything else in the price range. Nothing can touch the features.
I wonder how much more reliable in-house manufacturing is versus contract manufacturing? I own an X32 that's been back for repair twice, and I'd still take it over anything else in the price range. Nothing can touch the features.
Re: X32 vs QU 24
Because one's not Behringer..... Sorry I couldn't resist.
I'm a new Qu-16 owner. I also own a StudioLive and a DL1608 and the Qu is hands down the best feeling board of the 3. The initial quality is VERY good. The mixer just feels solid. While I can't vouch for the long term reliability, the A&H brand has been respected forever. Behringer, is hoping for and seems to be getting, some new found respect with the X32 line.
My decision was easier in that I'd not use Behringer if it were given to me. That's just me. If you're torn, I suggest looking at the features you need and if the A&H has them, don't be concerned about the "other stuff" the Behringer might have. I realize that's a tough proposition as they pack a lot of features into the board. The A&H is easy to learn, and with the price drops and places selling lower than map, in the states you can snag a Qu-24 for under $2,250. That's a few hundred less than the Qu-16 was just a few months ago!
Because one's not Behringer..... Sorry I couldn't resist.
I'm a new Qu-16 owner. I also own a StudioLive and a DL1608 and the Qu is hands down the best feeling board of the 3. The initial quality is VERY good. The mixer just feels solid. While I can't vouch for the long term reliability, the A&H brand has been respected forever. Behringer, is hoping for and seems to be getting, some new found respect with the X32 line.
My decision was easier in that I'd not use Behringer if it were given to me. That's just me. If you're torn, I suggest looking at the features you need and if the A&H has them, don't be concerned about the "other stuff" the Behringer might have. I realize that's a tough proposition as they pack a lot of features into the board. The A&H is easy to learn, and with the price drops and places selling lower than map, in the states you can snag a Qu-24 for under $2,250. That's a few hundred less than the Qu-16 was just a few months ago!
Re: X32 vs QU 24
I recently used the qu-16 and I own a couple of x32's, didn't like the qu at all. I thought the compressors were terrible. EQ was ok but felt like a cheap desk compared to the x32
Sent from my iPhone
I recently used the qu-16 and I own a couple of x32's, didn't like the qu at all. I thought the compressors were terrible. EQ was ok but felt like a cheap desk compared to the x32
Sent from my iPhone
Re: X32 vs QU 24
What specifically is terrible about the compressors? I find them quite good.... way better than those on my StudioLive 16.4.2 which would distort terribly at even moderately aggressive settings.
As for the cheap feeling.... I guess time will tell. If forced to choose which will need fewer repairs within 5 yrs with weekly use, based on reputation alone, my guess is even most Behringer owners would put their money on A&H.
What specifically is terrible about the compressors? I find them quite good.... way better than those on my StudioLive 16.4.2 which would distort terribly at even moderately aggressive settings.
As for the cheap feeling.... I guess time will tell. If forced to choose which will need fewer repairs within 5 yrs with weekly use, based on reputation alone, my guess is even most Behringer owners would put their money on A&H.
Re: X32 vs QU 24
Just picked up the Qu 24 last week. Already have the X32. After over a yr regular use, small niggles with the X32, sticky buttons and all, so wanted another board to give the 32 some downtime.
Really would have rather just gone with another X32, but lack of local support, and the 3rd distributor change in this country in almost as many years made us look elsewhere.
Feature wise its a non comparison. The Qu24 is rather elementary for a similar price, basics like lack of EQ sidechain on dynamics etc make it a tad irritating. Similarly i could not find a way to assign channel mutes to the soft keys.
AH's hard patched 3 x stereo mixes make it more of a 7 aux + 4 FX board, if you are doing monitors mono. Unless you use a combination of Pan + Level to get 10 mixes working.
FX are great, and it gets the job done well. GEQ's hard patched on all outputs.
18ch of Multitrack direct to a USB drive seems like a good idea. Will try it out.
Build seems a tad better than the X32. To me.
Just picked up the Qu 24 last week. Already have the X32. After over a yr regular use, small niggles with the X32, sticky buttons and all, so wanted another board to give the 32 some downtime.
Really would have rather just gone with another X32, but lack of local support, and the 3rd distributor change in this country in almost as many years made us look elsewhere.
Feature wise its a non comparison. The Qu24 is rather elementary for a similar price, basics like lack of EQ sidechain on dynamics etc make it a tad irritating. Similarly i could not find a way to assign channel mutes to the soft keys.
AH's hard patched 3 x stereo mixes make it more of a 7 aux + 4 FX board, if you are doing monitors mono. Unless you use a combination of Pan + Level to get 10 mixes working.
FX are great, and it gets the job done well. GEQ's hard patched on all outputs.
18ch of Multitrack direct to a USB drive seems like a good idea. Will try it out.
Build seems a tad better than the X32. To me.
Re: X32 vs QU 24
My experience of using a qu was at a gig where I had to mix a simple drums keys and vocals set up, found the compressor didn't work very well at all, ended up with a 6:1 ratio on the vox and it still went all over the place. It's not like I had much to do with the mix, but just couldn't get the vocals to behave, the guy had a very dynamic style, but was a total nightmare. I was surprised at how badly they coped. I'm fairly experienced as an engineer so I'm pretty sure it wasn't me. To top this I had the venue asking me to keep a lid on the volume and it was just all over the place...lol
My experience of using a qu was at a gig where I had to mix a simple drums keys and vocals set up, found the compressor didn't work very well at all, ended up with a 6:1 ratio on the vox and it still went all over the place. It's not like I had much to do with the mix, but just couldn't get the vocals to behave, the guy had a very dynamic style, but was a total nightmare. I was surprised at how badly they coped. I'm fairly experienced as an engineer so I'm pretty sure it wasn't me. To top this I had the venue asking me to keep a lid on the volume and it was just all over the place...lol
Re: X32 vs QU 24
Next time you're in that situation, you might try using a mild compressor on the vocal channel strips and then routing the vocals to a group with another compressor set to more of a hard limiter mode. I do this regularly so that the vox get little to mild compression during a performance but have a fast, hard knee compressor running at ~6:1 on the vocal group to keep things tame when they get loud.
Next time you're in that situation, you might try using a mild compressor on the vocal channel strips and then routing the vocals to a group with another compressor set to more of a hard limiter mode. I do this regularly so that the vox get little to mild compression during a performance but have a fast, hard knee compressor running at ~6:1 on the vocal group to keep things tame when they get loud.
Re: X32 vs QU 24
I'm getting just the opposite remarks from a couple of well respected people on here and from two people that I personally know that have them
I'm getting just the opposite remarks from a couple of well respected people on here and from two people that I personally know that have them
Re: X32 vs QU 24
I have to say the X32 comps are always able to give me very good results...now with the mix control along side chaining it should be really all purpose. I used the LA2A emulation this weekend and the Pultec and they worked well I thought.
I have to say the X32 comps are always able to give me very good results...now with the mix control along side chaining it should be really all purpose. I used the LA2A emulation this weekend and the Pultec and they worked well I thought.
Re: X32 vs QU 24
Has anyone had to deal with weather related issues yet on either console?.. Getting damp? Extreme heat?
Has anyone had to deal with weather related issues yet on either console?.. Getting damp? Extreme heat?
Silas Pradetto
Graduate Student
Re: X32 vs QU 24
My x32 has sat in direct sunlight for hours with no issues.
Sent from my SCH-I545
My x32 has sat in direct sunlight for hours with no issues.
Sent from my SCH-I545
Re: X32 vs QU 24
My x32 is outside every weekend in the swamp that is Central Florida. No problems so far
My x32 is outside every weekend in the swamp that is Central Florida. No problems so far