NDSP Quad Cortex

Jarick said:
I was listening to some videos with QC vs Kemper captures and you can just hear the Kemper ones sound a lot duller. I really liked a lot of clean to mid gain Kemper stuff but higher gain just didn't have the same bite and tightness as say Fractal amp models.



Yeah totally. I think it's shades of difference.

There's some times where QC sounds a little smoother in a good way, and then I have to do less work to get rid of the extended high frequencies. Then there are other times where Fractal sounds more detailed and clean in a good way, and QC sounds a little stuffy.
Click to expand...
I think the QC really excels on the hard rock tones and metal stuff
For the cleaner and EOB more dynamic stuff I would still likely give the edge to FAS
Although the fact they are redoing the Fender Deluxes next update may indicate that they are aware this is one area to address

Along with the spring verb
 
GTR37 said:
I think the QC really excels on the hard rock tones and metal stuff
For the cleaner and EOB more dynamic stuff I would still likely give the edge to FAS
Although the fact they are redoing the Fender Deluxes next update may indicate that they are aware this is one area to address

Along with the spring verb
Click to expand...

Just a pure guess but if they refined their profiling tech and can get more accurate, then they would most likely nail the tone without having to do any iterative modeling updates. So it would basically be end game.

One question I have that nobody will answer is how they account for the speaker impedance curves. That seems to be the big question. Fractal led the way here with adjustable curves by amp, and that makes a big difference. Fender kind of followed suit. The others don't really mention it at all, so could either be a generic impedance curve or something from an expected matching cabinet.

It's not super important so long as it's done well, but I think that may be a big reason for differences in feel across modelers and amp models. I like to almost always run a 2x12 or 4x12 cab with Celestions with any amp, so that may change the low end in a Deluxe or AC amp.
 
Oops, it appears I've done it again.

Octo Cortex.jpg

Octo Cortex time!
 
mikah912 said:
I'm sure you've explained it previously, but, uh...why two of the same?
Click to expand...
Because the one on the left is pretty much permanently assimilated by the studio set up. With just the one, there were over a dozen cables and dongles hanging off the back of it, and deciding to use it anywhere else (e.g. band practice at a friend's or whatever) was an ordeal. I wanted a studio interface and something for live/ mobile applications, that could use the very same presets, etc. and not present a big learning curve.
 
Los-D said:
This is triggering

:rofl

In my case the “Fractal thing or the Neural thing again?”
Click to expand...
I dipped my toes with the FM3, and for me there was no comparison. The QC just makes sense to me. But I get why some people go the FAS route instead. The amp models are incredible, params are deep, and the unit is a bit quieter overall.

The main takeaway for me is: pick one and only one. Serving too many masters turns into a waste of time.
 
mbenigni said:
Because the one on the left is pretty much permanently assimilated by the studio set up. With just the one, there were over a dozen cables and dongles hanging off the back of it, and deciding to use it anywhere else (e.g. band practice at a friend's or whatever) was an ordeal. I wanted a studio interface and something for live/ mobile applications, that could use the very same presets, etc. and not present a big learning curve.
Click to expand...

I've heard wackier reasons. But love to see it working so well for you.

I'm going to slightly disagree with the "one and only one" rule because Helix Native (with a small, cheapo Steinberg interface) does everything your "studio" Quad Cortex does and frees my FM9 to do all of the external studio recording/live gigging it can stand. But yes, it's easier to minimize UIs....
 
mikah912 said:
I'm going to slightly disagree with the "one and only one" rule because Helix Native (with a small, cheapo Steinberg interface) does everything your "studio" Quad Cortex does and frees my FM9 to do all of the external studio recording/live gigging it can stand. But yes, it's easier to minimize UIs....
Click to expand...
Yeah, if you keep the studio stuff 100% in the box, the whole proposition changes. I did consider simply buying an audio interface instead of another Quad Cortex... but where's the fun in that? ;) (Seriously, though, I decided to go with the 2nd QC because I don't have plugins that are as comprehensive, or that I like as much, as the QC content.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jarick
Modeler Shootout Clips - Axe 3, Helix, Kemper, NDSP Plugins
Replies
17
Views
725
OneEng
O
laxu
Neural DSP Nano Cortex
28 29 30
Replies
591
Views
23K
norminal
norminal
fiftyshadesofslay
Anybody else getting sick of modellers?
28 29 30
Replies
594
Views
18K
OrganicZed
OrganicZed
texhex
AXE III fw 27 vs. Kemper vs. Tonex
Replies
3
Views
330
Jarick
Jarick
B
Valeton GP-200 question (new software version 1.6.3)
Replies
1
Views
402
ballhawk
ballhawk
Back
Top