Behringer WING vs Allen & Heath SQ | Which should you buy?

Vocal EQ Cheat Sheet (FREE)

SQ Mastery Course

WING Mastery Course

BEST PRICE → WING

BEST PRICE → SQ

Check out DC Pro

Behringer WING or Allen & Heath SQ? Both are great mixers in the same price range with similar functionality. It comes down to some nitpicky differences to decide which we share with you in this video.

Chapters:
0:00 Which do I prefer?
0:42 Difference 1: The Touch Screens
0:57 Difference 2: Buttons & Knobs
1:38 Difference 3: Sizes
1:54 Vocal EQ Cheat Sheet
2:17 Difference 4: Stage Boxes & In-Ears
2:47 48kHz vs 96kHz... Does it matter?

[matthewfrohbieter]

Finally an SQ course. Most videos on YouTube are pros speaking to pros. Glad there will be training for us novice types. Thank you.

[RobertoLedesmadelaltillomusica]

The Wing has many advantages over the SQ 5 (more DSP processing for example), but the SQ sounds noticeably better (FPGA processing) and you don't need a controlled environment or optimal listening positioning to hear it. Thanks for your video.

[bgcreations]

Just a thought: The Behringer Wing has a ton of features. You can route anything to anywhere, and it’s very solid. You get a lot of features typically found on high-end mixers for less. However, it lacks in one area: the user interface. It’s not very volunteer-friendly. Remember, most churches do not have a paid sound engineer or a tech team on their side. So, if your sound team is new and consists entirely of volunteers, consider getting the Allen & Heath SQ.

[VinylTees]

honestly what sold us on the Wing over the SQ was that we were moving from a system with an analog snake and A&H stage boxes are astronomically more expensive than Behringer's as you showed onscreen, and we skipped the P16s in favor of Midas DP48s which have more channels and two mixes per box which makes it significantly cheaper per IEM mix.

[NoTechHacker]

I sold my SQ-5 that I used in my home studio and bought a Wing, mostly because I wanted to learn how to use it. It’s super flexible. Once you get used to it, the routing capabilities are great.

[metzger]

Thanks for the overview. However, the comparison of 48 kHz vs. 96 kHz was a somewhat unusual way to highlight the differences. In live conditions, it doesn’t really matter whether a mixer operates at 96 kHz or 48 kHz when it comes to sound quality. What does matter, though, is latency. When I switched to a digital mixer for the big band, the singers and drummer hated it due to latency issues. Switching to 96 kHz resolved the problem for them.
If you use a digital wireless microphone and a digital wireless IEM system, the latency becomes even more noticeable. You’ll end up with at least 5 ms of latency, and singing or playing drums with 5 ms of latency is not enjoyable. On smaller stages, this issue is exacerbated because you can also hear the sound directly.
For example, the Allen & Heath SQ has a latency of 0.7 ms, while the Behringer Wing has 1.47 ms.

[erickgabrielalfaroroldan]

Honestly, I do prefer the 96kHz of the SQ because I do a lot of routing so it saves latency and I make it go through external effects (mostly Waves SuperRack over SoundGrid) so there is where the quality is more noticeable. When using unprocessed audio or master files, the quality is not going to be noticeable even with a $1M setup, but is noticeable when applying effects

[FOHGeek]

If you already have some Behringer or Midas equipment like S or DL series stageboxes, then it migh be a nice idea to stick to the same ecosystem and choose Wing. Otherwise A&H SQ is a better idea. More local I/O ports, more faders, more expansion card choices, less picky about Ethernet wiring, more intuitive dBu-based metering...

[ErnestDotPro]

I have worked with both Wing and SQ7. Been running the Wing for several years at multiple churches without a hitch. The flexibility and customization is amazing. Producers and professional audio engineers have come in to mix on the Wing and after a service or two, every single one loves it.

SQ is more intuitive. Easy to walk up and get a good mix. Wing is more flexible and powerful to make a good mix great. Thought it does require a bit of effort to learn.

Also, I've had an SQ fail to boot on a Sunday morning and the Wing has never had an issue.

[fabian]

Someone who was used both has noted that SQ sounds better? like sweeter than the Behringer? Well, that's what I heard when compared to X32 also, preamps sound quieter on X32 hope that Wing solved all this with the "Midas Pro preamp"

[krlosvitev]

A sound comparison could help, more plugins doesn't mean better sound, but wing has a cool selection, maybe that could be a big diferential

[michaelyoung]

I run a behringer wing and a A&E avantis. I’d pick the A&E for ease of use and quick learning. The wing needs a lot more time to get used to. But I like that I can do more with it without add ons. Both are great boards. For me the A&E does have better overall sound quality but the Wing allows a lot more flexible processing options and I doubt most people will hear a difference between the two unless your a-b testing them side by side.
My Conclusion is you can’t go wrong with either option. Both are fantastic boards but if keeping cost low is a priority definitely buy the wing you will not be disappointed!

[petterrong]

Would've loved for a more in-depth comparison, this is very surface level and sounds more like it's directed at non-sound-tech staff at a church, responsible for purchasing only. In terms of input DSP channels, Wing wins big time, 96 vs 48 input DSP. De-esser on every channel vs separately sold license for single de-esser per FX rack (of which you only have 8, including the ones you have to use for FX). 2 seperate fader banks vs 1 fader bank (on all sizes). 3x AES50 ports with 48/48 channels vs 1x SLink which without additional hardware and hubs only allow for maxiumum 40/20. And even another port with StageConnect with up to 32 channels of flexible line-level audio. 16 FX racks vs 8. Different types of EQs vs just stock PEQ. Wing is definitely a better value.

Also a correction about the price difference for the 48kHz boxes: You can't add 2x AR2412 to get 48 inputs, as dSnake protocol (which SLink uses when connected with 48kHz boxes) only supports 40 channels, e.g. AR2412 + AB168 for 40/20 system. If you want more, you need an additional SLink I/O card, which is about 300$ and another CAT cable

[worshipldrcaleb]

We jumped the X32 to the WING in 2021 and have been very happy with it

[kevinwang]

My vocal EQ staring point is very similar to your cheat sheet, which I find really interesting!

I start with a HPF at 112, and more often than not I push it all the way up to 140 for speeches. For vocals I might go higher.
I either do a low shelf at 350 or a wide cut at 200-250. I find 180 to be the frequency I usually dislike in male voices. Gonna have to try low shelf at 900!
I start with a cut at 630. I've only had 1 vocalist where I had to push it all the way up to 750 and widen the Q a bit.
I often do a boost at 1.8-2.5 for increased clarity. With a low shelf at 900 I might not have to do this boost, instead I can push up the fader; which essentially does the same thing. Gonna have to experiment and see which one feels better.
And for speeches I save the last band for de-essing, but for vocals I usually do a boost at 20k with a super wide Q of 0.7 (inspired by the Maag EQ's air band). I also sometimes do this on acoustic guitar and snare.

And as for the sample rate, the lower latency with higher sampling rate might be necessary if you use things like Waves soundgrid or Yamaha VST rack. I believe they both have a soundgrid card? According to Michael Curtis the VST rack round trip is under 3ms (with low latency plugins of course) on a DM7. SQ might be different, but with 48kHz the latency might become noticeable and distracting if you're routing monitors post insert. Not a huge deal, but still something to consider.

[IntheDAW]

Surprised not many people talk about the processing the wing has. Amazing sounsing delays reverbs. Auto tune and every channel has premium gate comp eq sections woth the RND 545 emulation on every single channel to remove feedback and noise befofe it happens.
Only yamaha has rhat built in.

[dionaire]

If you're mixing for digital streaming rather than just venue. I think the sq is better.

[sunrisegsd]

Just moved to the Wing for FOH from an X32.
Amazing upgrade.

[matthewmatiki]

Would love a new dedicated video comparing the new Wing Compact and the SQ5 especially with the new P24 Mixer/Hub; it changes the landscapes of Wing mixers.

[gracenotes]

It's worth keeping in mind that it's not just the mixer you're investing in, but the whole eco-system. In terms of cost, the 'whole system' viewpoint strongly favors the Wing, but in terms of quality I would say it favors the SQ, especially when it comes to ME1 vs P16 personal mixers.