My conclusion with discussing with many PreSonus Studio users is they migrate to PreSonus Studio because of the ease of board layout and the simple use of the board, along with price. The layout of UC Surface is simple. The recording aspect is well planned. This makes it appealing to the musicians that mix themselves.
On the other hand, many of us that have years of experience find the UC Surface basic and elementary. The surface control has no concept of order that a channel strip on a pro board has. We all have hours operating pro boards and are accustom to having full control on manipulating routing, sends, effects, delays, ect. To get the sound we desire as well as output options.
My suggestion would have UC Surface as the basic control and then have a pro version. Keep the basic program simple but work on a new program that would satisfy the pro soundman. Including full control on routing, delays on every channel, possible dual channeling, able to route mains to mix outputs with delay for multiple speakers and many more of the wonderful comments that I have read so far. All using the hardware of the mixer and not software of a computer.
Studio one is a great program but not to be used for live sound. If a program like UC Surface Pro was developed along with capture, I think it would an outstanding package and may become the leader to professional sound in the $1200 - $4000 usd range.
I have been using Yamaha digital boards for over 12 years and migrated to PreSonus boards because of their growth in the past few years. Even though Yamaha has many more bells and whistles than PreSonus has right now, PreSonus has better wireless control.
I have used studio live boards for 3 years and finally purchased a Rm32AI. I’m impressed with each update and was happy with the last one which included delays on mix outputs and group control. Please continue the good work.
My hat goes off to all the engineers and programers that have worked on this project. Well done! Keep up the good work.