NDSP Quad Cortex

[GTR37]

Neural has made some crazy moves and whackaloon claims since the QC but holy hell this one takes the cake. They’re aren’t even to where Bias is as in this subject back in 2016. Nevermind anywhere near the same universe compared to the helix on plug-in vs hardware mirroring. Absolutely crazy. I know we keep giving them chances and they’ve come a long way but holy hell man. This is a whopper

Honestly as Jarick said , I had just learned to block out the static

I just separate the marketing department from the product , I really don't Care about TINA or what it does for what they say it does

Show me , hell if it means that the QC gets 4 or 5 big updates a year , then yay TINA

I just watch the videos from the players tones I like and judge the product on the tones it produce not on the NDSP schpeels

Like I said in a prior comment , Doug and Fracnciso are not coming to my House for the holidays I don't have to love them to dig the product

 

[hblu22]

Neural has made some crazy moves and whackaloon claims since the QC but holy hell this one takes the cake. They’re aren’t even to where Bias is as in this subject back in 2016. Nevermind anywhere near the same universe compared to the helix on plug-in vs hardware mirroring. Absolutely crazy. I know we keep giving them chances and they’ve come a long way but holy hell man. This is a whopper

I will give my own opinion as a non-neural employee and not really a defender - though it may come out that way: the difference between line 6 helix and native and the QC/neural plugs is that the helix came out first and then they eventually ported that to a plugin format. Most people first became interested in neural when they tried the plugins and when they bought the QC (at least in my case) they wanted those same plugins on a portable hardware modeler. So definitely not the first time that a company has put out a plugin and hardware version. But it is the first time a group of highly desirable plugins ended up ported to a hardware modeler for easier live use (some folks don’t like to gig with a computer). While these two different views are not miles apart I do think there is a difference. Now if someone could get the full genome in a box - that would be awesome….

 

[Elf]

Quad Cortex Development Update #51 & Plugin Development Update

neuraldsp.com

On Wednesday July 31st, we released CorOS 3.0.0 with Plugin Compatibility and Cortex Control 1.1.0. The response to this update has been overwhelmingly positive and we cannot thank you enough for your patience and your kind words. This release shattered any records held by previous updates with respect to the number of users who updated on release day!

We also announced that we are giving away a free plugin to all Quad Cortex owners who update to CorOS 3.0.0 until Wednesday August 28th.

Finally, we introduced TINA, our data collection robot, and published a follow-up article and research paper explaining how we’ve merged mechanical robotics with machine learning in more detail.

In the coming weeks, we will release CorOS 3.0.1, patching any issues that are found in CorOS 3.0.0, while simultaneously finishing up the remaining tasks for CorOS 3.1.0.

The future of CorOS updates
CorOS 3.0.0 was our most significant update to date, overhauling much of the system’s architecture. With this update now complete, we’re shifting gears to deliver more frequent releases, including new devices like amplifiers and effects for all users. We understand some users have concerns that Plugin Compatibility might put new devices behind a paywall, but we want to make it absolutely clear: that’s not the case.

We’re proud to introduce Plugin Compatibility to the Quad Cortex, marking the first time a modeling company has effectively integrated the worlds of native software and embedded hardware. Tens of thousands of our Quad Cortex users who are also plugin users have been eager to access their favorite plugin sounds on their hardware. For those who aren’t plugin users, rest assured, we’re adding plenty of new devices directly to the Quad Cortex.

Our philosophy is clear: when we create an exceptional device, we aim to bring that technology to the Quad Cortex whenever possible.

We want to emphasize that plugins are not a paywall or DLC for the Quad Cortex. Instead, they offer a way for our hardware and software to coexist harmoniously. If you’re not interested in plugins, you won’t miss out on essential features. However, if you do use plugins, Plugin Compatibility gives you the power to replicate those sounds and signal chains on your Quad Cortex.

Finally, a reminder: future plugin updates will be ported in parallel with upcoming CorOS updates. Soldano SLO-100 X and Fortin Nameless Suite X are coming in CorOS 3.1.0, and the next major update will include Parallax X and Archetype: Nolly X.

Future X updates
We are pleased to announce that the next X updates will be Archetype: Cory Wong X and Archetype: Petrucci X. We look forward to sharing them with you

tHe fiRSt!!!!

 

[Lysander]

But it is the first time a group of highly desirable plugins ended up ported to a hardware modeler for easier live use

Pretty sure Positive Grid did this with the Bias Head like 7 years ago. It's just a dumb statement for NDSP to make.

 

[holoholo]

 

[Whizzinby]

Overall it was the most “ehh” i’ve felt about the QC in general, I think overall it’s all solid enough and does what you’d want. Nothing really seemed bad but it just makes me realise how much more superior working with plugins is for what I like.

They need to take the next step and let people mix n match the plugs in plugin format now.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

They need to take the next step and let people mix n match the plugs in plugin format now.

Sure they will but not until the dust has settled a bit on QC development, and probably not until most or all plugins are supported in CorOS.

For me it’s not a big deal or THAT appealing:

- Plugins are already about mixing and matching, that’s why I prefer them. DAW’s can do it already.
- it’s rare that I need to combine more than 2 NDSP plugins, if that.
- Most of the time the advantage for me is combining NDSP plugins with stuff that isn’t NDSP at all. Lexicon reverb plugins, Arturia delays, 3rd party cab IR’s. The amps are NDSP’s strongest area, everything else (IMO) can be bettered going to other brands. At best they might sound similar, but then you’d be losing the dedicated GUI’s for each effect.
- CorOS is so similar to Helix, and Helix native already exists. Can just use Helix instead, or combine an amp from NDSP with an instance of Helix for a feel of what it would be like
- A big part of what NDSP are good at is the visuals, otherwise we’re getting Helix Native again.

I am looking forward to NDSP releasing a native QC plugin whenever that happens, and i’m not saying mixing and matching would suck. But I don’t think that in itself REALLY brings much to the table, unless you’re also a HW user and want to make presets offline or have consistency without being tethered to a HW unit.

The main draw would be the extra amp models - as it stands there’s basically nothing in the way of cabs or FX in CorOS that I’d get excited about. They do the job but I know I’ll end up using 3rd party shit anyway. The whole “container” thing is a bit overrated unless it really brings a lot to the table - Genome/Amplitube/Guitar Rig/Tonocracy have basically proven it to me as I don’t find any of them worth using beyond one or 2 blocks.

 

[deadpool_25]

A few days in and there's a lot to like. The amp tones and feel are outstanding. The ease of use is excellent (and I still haven't even used the editor). The form factor is very good although the footswitch spacing could be tight in a live environment. I also really like that I can use a virtual capo (transpose) and a pitch detune in the same preset. FM9's one-pitch-block limitation means I also need a Drop pedal on the board. That's not tht much of a problem but it does make an already large footprint a little bigger.

There are some things I don't love (in comparison to the FM9).

1. The 8x4 routing & I/O falls well short of Fractal's grid system (14x6 on the FM9). I've become very fond of putting my dual detune, delay, and reverb all in parallel where none of them are running into the others. This is significantly more difficult (in some ways impossible) on the QC. Another example is when I'm running a synth through it in parallel with a guitar. The I/O path for the synth eats up an entire path even if it's just a straight in/out situation with no effects; that's only two squares on the Fractal grid, and you can put those two squares pretty much anywhere on the grid so they don't get in the way of anything else you want to do.

2. The effects are relatively weak. They're not bad--actually I'd say they're pretty good--but Fractal's are stellar imo. This is mostly about the quality and variety of reverbs and delays.

But I'm really liking the QC overall. I'm gonna put together a little pedalboard for it.

 

[dean701]

Sure they will but not until the dust has settled a bit on QC development, and probably not until most or all plugins are supported in CorOS.

For me it’s not a big deal or THAT appealing:

- Plugins are already about mixing and matching, that’s why I prefer them. DAW’s can do it already.
- it’s rare that I need to combine more than 2 NDSP plugins, if that.
- Most of the time the advantage for me is combining NDSP plugins with stuff that isn’t NDSP at all. Lexicon reverb plugins, Arturia delays, 3rd party cab IR’s. The amps are NDSP’s strongest area, everything else (IMO) can be bettered going to other brands. At best they might sound similar, but then you’d be losing the dedicated GUI’s for each effect.
- CorOS is so similar to Helix, and Helix native already exists. Can just use Helix instead, or combine an amp from NDSP with an instance of Helix for a feel of what it would be like
- A big part of what NDSP are good at is the visuals, otherwise we’re getting Helix Native again.

I am looking forward to NDSP releasing a native QC plugin whenever that happens, and i’m not saying mixing and matching would suck. But I don’t think that in itself REALLY brings much to the table, unless you’re also a HW user and want to make presets offline or have consistency without being tethered to a HW unit.

The main draw would be the extra amp models - as it stands there’s basically nothing in the way of cabs or FX in CorOS that I’d get excited about. They do the job but I know I’ll end up using 3rd party shit anyway. The whole “container” thing is a bit overrated unless it really brings a lot to the table - Genome/Amplitube/Guitar Rig/Tonocracy have basically proven it to me as I don’t find any of them worth using beyond one or 2 blocks.

Yep. Once in the DAW, all rules change. The modelers shine when a pick and go device is needed but if you're just recording an amp and applying a cab and effects in a daw scenario I use other software. Case in point, for live I'll settle for a decent pitch block. Mixing I'm going straight to my Eventide Immersive or Soundtoys.

 

[mbenigni]

Another example is when I'm running a synth through it in parallel with a guitar. The I/O path for the synth eats up an entire path even if it's just a straight in/out situation with no effects; that's only two squares on the Fractal grid, and you can put those two squares pretty much anywhere on the grid so they don't get in the way of anything else you want to do.

Experiment with the Return block late in any given lane and I think you’ll find that you can streamline presets like this considerably. (The only time I still struggle is when I want to leverage I/O not exposed by the send/ return/ loop blocks - e.g. USB audio. This is also an issue on Helix, and on FAS if I’m not mistaken.)

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

Experiment with the Return block late in any given lane and I think you’ll find that you can streamline presets like this considerably. (The only time I still struggle is when I want to leverage I/O not exposed by the send/ return/ loop blocks - e.g. USB audio. This is also an issue on Helix, and on FAS if I’m not mistaken.)

Or the blend. Put it anywhere where you want it to insert in your chain, plug the synth into input to. If you hook the control to an expression, you get to morph from synth to git sound as a bonus :)

 

[laxu]

There are some things I don't love (in comparison to the FM9).

1. The 8x4 routing & I/O falls well short of Fractal's grid system (14x6 on the FM9). I've become very fond of putting my dual detune, delay, and reverb all in parallel where none of them are running into the others. This is significantly more difficult (in some ways impossible) on the QC. Another example is when I'm running a synth through it in parallel with a guitar. The I/O path for the synth eats up an entire path even if it's just a straight in/out situation with no effects; that's only two squares on the Fractal grid, and you can put those two squares pretty much anywhere on the grid so they don't get in the way of anything else you want to do.

2. The effects are relatively weak. They're not bad--actually I'd say they're pretty good--but Fractal's are stellar imo. This is mostly about the quality and variety of reverbs and delays.

But I'm really liking the QC overall. I'm gonna put together a little pedalboard for it.

I can agree with all that. The effects were the main reason why I decided to sell the QC 3 years ago. I'd really like them to elevate those.

Fractal does not get enough kudos for their effects.

I didn't mind the limitations for routing, I usually don't tend to have more than delay+reverb in parallel. Even the FM3 is just about enough horsepower for the kind of signal chains I want to run, especially now with the gapless switching.

 

[GTR37]

I can agree with all that. The effects were the main reason why I decided to sell the QC 3 years ago. I'd really like them to elevate those.

Fractal does not get enough kudos for their effects.

I didn't mind the limitations for routing, I usually don't tend to have more than delay+reverb in parallel. Even the FM3 is just about enough horsepower for the kind of signal chains I want to run, especially now with the gapless switching.

Gapless switching especially for the FM3 guys was huge and I would use the term game changer there perhaps
You can now run 4 different amps , 4 different drive
4 different mod effects etc etc
In one preset , I don’t think one of the other products available allows 4 amp models gap free in the same preset

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

*cough* Headrush

 

[GTR37]

A few days in and there's a lot to like. The amp tones and feel are outstanding. The ease of use is excellent (and I still haven't even used the editor). The form factor is very good although the footswitch spacing could be tight in a live environment. I also really like that I can use a virtual capo (transpose) and a pitch detune in the same preset. FM9's one-pitch-block limitation means I also need a Drop pedal on the board. That's not tht much of a problem but it does make an already large footprint a little bigger.

There are some things I don't love (in comparison to the FM9).

1. The 8x4 routing & I/O falls well short of Fractal's grid system (14x6 on the FM9). I've become very fond of putting my dual detune, delay, and reverb all in parallel where none of them are running into the others. This is significantly more difficult (in some ways impossible) on the QC. Another example is when I'm running a synth through it in parallel with a guitar. The I/O path for the synth eats up an entire path even if it's just a straight in/out situation with no effects; that's only two squares on the Fractal grid, and you can put those two squares pretty much anywhere on the grid so they don't get in the way of anything else you want to do.

2. The effects are relatively weak. They're not bad--actually I'd say they're pretty good--but Fractal's are stellar imo. This is mostly about the quality and variety of reverbs and delays.

But I'm really liking the QC overall. I'm gonna put together a little pedalboard for it.

I agree with this , the amp tones or many of them are really good The NDSP voicings especially the Marshall variants just have this very raw thing and clarity and punch in the mids
It’s almost like a Freidman compared to a Marshall to me
People that don’t like the Freidman complain that it’s to smooth or too polite and dark and that it removes that crushed glass Kerang that is sort of the Marshall staple it comes across as maybe a bit harsher in isolated tracks but kills in a mix

Too me NDSP really nails that sound and aggression in the mids and upper mids
And they also have the low end attack where it’s tight but still has kind of a bounce when the pick hits the string and when you dig in for leads it just sings

In the short time I had it
I preferred it much over Kemper , Helix
Fractal was close , some models were better in the FM some in QC , but if your a big fx guy Fractal no question

 

[GTR37]

*cough* Headrush

I honestly have not used one enough to say but can you run 4 different amps
4 drive , 4 delays , 4 mods
Before running out of CPU?

 

[Stone]

I cant speak for QC amp tones since ive no experience with them, but i can say that whatever amp Toanz i want i can get with my Fractal and with my love of deep parameter tweaking (when Required) sky's the limit as to what can be done, i can say without a doubt there is nothing out there that would make me even have a passing thought of replacing it
But thats me YMMV

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

Well...I was just talking about amount of amp models....

The one I have only has 11 blocks ...so no....and running more than 2 or 3 delays is asking alot of it....


But ...I can run a stereo path with 4 separate amps....3 different mods....a couple drives...and stereo delay and reverb.....and change the settings with scenes....and get quite a lot from one preset(rig) with scenes. And while not exactly applicable...you get gapless preset switching too....and spillover (tails).

Once again. I was just originally talking about running 4 amps gapless inside a preset....but they are surprisingly capable.... especially the 1st Gen devices....the newer ones get more blocks...but the code must be ugly, because its CPU taps out quicker....and allegedly runs the same files and sounds exactly the same ...but buckles under heavy load..... meanwhile my mx5 never maxed out CPU.....unless I try to run 4 delays or too many advanced reverbs.

Also, with the mx5....it only cost like 350 new.....that's a lot for a little.

I'm sorry to derail your thread...have a good day guys!

 

[Whizzinby]

For me it’s not a big deal or THAT appealing:

I am looking forward to NDSP releasing a native QC plugin whenever that happens

But I don’t think that in itself REALLY brings much to the table

unless you’re also a HW user and want to make presets offline or have consistency without being tethered to a HW unit.

The main draw would be the extra amp models

The whole “container” thing is a bit overrated

 

[MirrorProfiles]

HA. Well the reason I'd like QC native is purely to have more of their amp models that arent in their plugins yet. Not arsed about the FX or building NDSP exclusive patches (or using captures/other peoples presets). The only reason I'd prefer that over lots of suites is they'd release it all in one go rather than trickling it out.

I'd be just as happy picking up the amps I want in suites and having nice GUI's