Is there anything inside the Quad Cortex that they didn't steal from someone else?

I’m not surprised you can’t mount a logical defense. Pretty weak minded on your part to resort to personal insults.
Where are the personal insults? I see some generalized assumptions (that given your at-best non-sequitur response, seem fairly supported by fact). But he's not the one calling a specific individual weak minded...
 
Where are the personal insults? I see some generalized assumptions (that given your at-best non-sequitur response, seem fairly supported by fact). But he's not the one calling a specific individual weak minded...
Do you want to take your answer here or in the pm where you asked?
 
So taking one in particular to task like its some kind of cardinal sin to take the best of what they've seen to date and combine it into a product they feel has the best of current tech as some kind of problem strikes me as unnecessarily antagonistic from that perspective.
In a vacuum, I'd agree. But there are two major nuances that many keep missing:
  1. Multieffects aren't like the smartphone industry. There are literally hundreds of ways to implement functionality, DSP allocation, workflow, UI, and GUI in multieffects; we know because we've designed them during our lengthy iteration process, most of which were much farther from where Helix landed than one particular product happens to be. In fact, the only possible way they could've made dozens of their design decisions were if the Product Owner repeatedly dictated: "I dunno, just copy how Line 6 did it." And what's odd is that all the things they copied were rarely the ideal solution, as we've come up with numerous better ways to do them since 2015. So it's far more lazy (and a bit slimy) opportunism than it is commoditization of multieffects design. Of course, being lazy (and a bit slimy) isn't a crime. However...
  2. ...Feigning credit for things one's copied is straight weaksauce. Other companies have blatantly xeroxed big chunks of our work before too, but they weren't brazen enough to boast about how superior "their" work is.
I don't expect non-designers to recognize every lifted element: "<Scoffs> Oh my god, rounded squares in a grid, just like iOS." Except it's never once been about rounded squares and grids.
 
Mod Drew- the tone of the thread is cool like this, let’s not get it back up to where it was a couple hours ago.

Charlie Day Ok GIF
 
That kid does look obnoxious. In Boston he would be known as a ‘ya dood’ :rofl
He was a British comedy character called 'Devvo' that we all used to watch in the mid 2000's.

Turns out, he was a fucking primary school teacher!!! :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

He got fired when everyone found out:


Straight up fired for satire!! Fuckin' modern Britain...
 
For the users, it most definitely is, at least to some extent.
It's kinda... I dunno... problem identification scales right... so when I owned the unit, the fact that I couldn't have huge patches with tons of reverbs and delays, EVEN THOUGH that is what was promised in the marketing.... really disappointed me.

Then they fixed it. So I was no longer disappointed.

But then I started doing other things, like putting other pedals into the loops... and dealing with extra noise, and signal loss....

Then I used it in the studio for a rehearsal in 4-cm with my amp... wtf... there's a ground loop I can't get rid of... even when I use an isolator transformer to lift the ground....

Then I tried to use it for midi control of a valve amp, the same way I can a helix by changing the channels when switching scenes.... and it was just pitiful....

Then they released the looper update, and it had nothing in there of interest for me.... and I just tuned out.

You can see that any one of these by itself, probably could've dealt with... but the package as a whole..... it just left soooooo much to be desired.... and my worry is that they'll either never fix any of it, or by the time they do, there will be better stuff on the market and they will have missed the boat.
 
You can see that any one of these by itself, probably could've dealt with... but the package as a whole..... it just left soooooo much to be desired....

No idea why you quoted me, but anyway: That was pretty much why I never got hooked. For different reasons than most people, but still.
 
For the users, it most definitely is, at least to some extent.
Not sure what this means.

I can count many dozens of things that were specifically lifted from Helix that have nothing to do with rounded squares and grids, yet any time someone mentions shameless copying, contrarians fall back onto... rounded squares and grids. It's like when B€#®!n&€® unveiled their MonoPoly (not Mono/Poly! See, it's different, there's no slash!) and any critique was met with "Ohhhh, they both have keys and knobs. Big deal."

It's not about the keys and knobs. It's not about the rounded squares and grids. It's the many dozens of other things that collectively could never have organically manifested themselves without the active, blatant direction of "just copy how Korg Line 6 did it."

Basically, it's Diet B€#®!n&€®.
 
btw, hmm didn't realize...
qhkRvPh.png

Well, it's really all pretty much the same. Number of blocks in serial/parallel order. And what else should/could you do? Just makes sense this way.
And when you look at the various Boss GTs, it's almost the same as well (just that they don't allow for as much parallel paths).
BOSS TONE STUDIO for GT-1000.jpg


Seriously, apart from possibly using some arabic or asian nomenclature (signal flow from right to left), that's just the best way to represent a signal flow on a screen. Squares (now colored) feeding each other. There's hardly any better way to do this from a logical POV. Adding icons is just the next logical step. And making it look like icons on a smartphone is making people feel all familiar with the design, too.
 
Back
Top