Quad Cortex Mini

[Lysander]

They would've had this in the pipeline even back when QC originally launched is my guess. They're following a roadmap and a vision, which we don't get to see. So their decision making seems weird, but I'm going to assume they know what they are doing.

I really wonder if both the QCM and Nano Cortex were been worked on at the same time and eventually got to a "fuck it, let's ship both" situation.

It's not uncommon. The Helix LT began its life as a backup plan in case the Helix Floor ended up being too expensive to sell.

 

[dws2384]

The fact is that this sort of hardware is not that expensive to make. The Hotone Ampero 2 Stomp hardware is IMO fairly comparable in quality at nearly 1000 euros less, with significantly less processing power and smaller touchscreen, but still functionally kind of doing the same things as half a QC.

To play devils advocate, thats kinda the difference between designing and assembling something in China vs Finland. Everyone in EU or USA says they want manufacturing and businesses in their country but then complain about the price vs what you can get from China. Cant have it both ways.

On a separate note. I saw that 4 of these can fit in a rack drawer. So I suppose this would also be the ideal 'Rack Cortex' That people wanted too

 

[Orvillain]

I'll bet we can come up with like 5 other definitions of "doing things right." I'm not disagreeing with your definition. I'm simply pointing out that the term is variable, and therefore a perfect nexus for an interminable Internet argument.

I'm trying to point towards a more objective version. You'd typically have a post-mortem or retrospective after each release, and you'd judge and analyse what you did right, what you did wrong, what you could've done better, and then you'd evaluate what absolutely needs carrying over to the next release.

The point being - the user actually has very little insight into what doing things right really means. All they ever really have is their own opinion, without any stats or evidence to strengthen their position, and often times they're just shooting from the hip about their own personal wants and needs. Which isn't really global. So you're absolutely right to point out that the term is variable, but I just want to add an addendum that the variability is also variable lol.

Most of their plugins still don't run on the QC, and i reckon a bunch of amp models listed in the pre-order blurb never materialized. They were supposed to have TINA™ churning those non-stop.

I'm sure if it was ever promised that TINA would result in a ton more amps being delivered ? Or maybe TINA was used to capture a shit ton of amps internally, that they then used to make their model training more accurate?? Who knows what TINA is actually for. Everyone is just guessing more or less.

 

[Orvillain]

I really wonder if both the QCM and Nano Cortex were been worked on at the same time and eventually got to a "fuck it, let's ship both" situation.

It's not uncommon. The Helix LT began its life as a backup plan in case the Helix Floor ended up being too expensive to sell.

Could be. I can only speak from e-kit experience, but there it was like ... okay, we know that most people aren't going to buy the expensive model.... and we know that the entry level model isn't going to appeal to most drummers. So we need three tiers, etc etc etc.


Anyway .... I still contend the QC is actually a pretty great device. I personally just wish it wasn't as noisy as it is, when interfacing with other gear. I know I should probably just get over it, but in 4-cable-method versus the OG Helix Floor and Axe FX III, it was so obviously not as good from a signal integrity perspective. I think that's possibly an outcome of them starting out as a software company, and more or less underspeccing their hardware for whatever reason. BOM is no joke.

 

[mbenigni]

View attachment 58200

You bastard. Now I want one again.

(Camera angles are a bitch.)

 

[mbenigni]

I buy stuff with built-in expression pedals.

Then what are we even talking about here?

 

[ChordInversion]

I'm trying to point towards a more objective version.

Admirable effort, I'd say. But I don't think one exists.

You'd typically have a post-mortem or retrospective after each release, and you'd judge and analyse what you did right, what you did wrong, what you could've done better, and then you'd evaluate what absolutely needs carrying over to the next release.

The point being - the user actually has very little insight into what doing things right really means. All they ever really have is their own opinion, without any stats or evidence to strengthen their position, and often times they're just shooting from the hip about their own personal wants and needs. Which isn't really global. So you're absolutely right to point out that the term is variable, but I just want to add an addendum that the variability is also variable lol.

Sure. Its clear that for many, doing things right is not merely an internally-defined or sales-measured quality. It's about keeping commitments, for instance. We can (and will, I imagine) disagree on that to some degree or another. But once the word "right" comes into play, the inevitable response is "right according to whom?"

I'm sure if it was ever promised that TINA would result in a ton more amps being delivered ? Or maybe TINA was used to capture a shit ton of amps internally, that they then used to make their model training more accurate?? Who knows what TINA is actually for. Everyone is just guessing more or less.

Sure, but they did promote it. It stretches credulity more than a little bit to assert that Neural is utterly shocked that customers thought it wouldn't result in the delivery of lots more amps.

But again, I don't think much dram is required, and I don't really know enough to know what Neural did and did not promise and did and did not deliver. I just know that "doing things right" is a subjective term based on varying perspectives of desirable ends, priorities, and what constitutes "right" versus "profitable" or even just "good for business."

 

[mbenigni]

Gotta say, it's a cool looking box—Neural's Industrial Design team is great. The price makes perfect sense to be honest. Things are gonna get more expensive across the industry, I'm afraid. Thanks, [thing we can't discuss]!

This is classy, man.

 

[Orvillain]

Gotta say, it's a cool looking box—Neural's Industrial Design team is great. The price makes perfect sense to be honest. Things are gonna get more expensive across the industry, I'm afraid. Thanks, [thing we can't discuss]!

It's more attractive than the regular QC I think!

One of these and a Morningstar controller could be a slam dunk. But I just seriously doubt that they're going to ever do anything significant for the midi people. QC still doesn't have separate midi commands for stompbox and snapshot modes (iirc??)

 

[Lysander]

I'm sure if it was ever promised that TINA would result in a ton more amps being delivered ?

Yes: https://www.guitarworld.com/features/neural-dsp-tina-interview . They were talking about "hundreds of amplifier models in a couple years" back then.

“...with that, we were able to cut down the time. Fender mentioned that for the Tone Master Pro, it takes one of the researchers about three months to model a channel. That's about the same time that our more conventional DSP engineers needed to make an amplifier. With TINA, we've got that down to hours or, worst case scenario, days. It’s exponentially faster."

IIRC the QC got exactly one new amp model in all of 2025 (a '92 Dumble ODS).

 

[deadpool_25]

I don't want to be dragged into forum mudslinging,

Friendly debate isn’t mudslinging.

but, either way you want to measure it: no, it's not "40% of the size". I'll leave it at that.

I believe he said “roughly” and just because you took only that part of my post to reply to, I did the math again even though I know math in public is a bad idea.

Area: QCM is 47.6% of the QC’s size. Roughly half I’d say.

Volume: QCM is 44.8% of the QC’s size.

So you’re right it’s not 40% of the size. But…well…

But hey, this really doesn’t matter. This discussion has run its course I think.

 

[Orvillain]

Yes: https://www.guitarworld.com/features/neural-dsp-tina-interview . They were talking about "hundreds of amplifier models in a couple years" back then.

“...with that, we were able to cut down the time. Fender mentioned that for the Tone Master Pro, it takes one of the researchers about three months to model a channel. That's about the same time that our more conventional DSP engineers needed to make an amplifier. With TINA, we've got that down to hours or, worst case scenario, days. It’s exponentially faster."

IIRC the QC got exactly one new amp model in all of 2025 (a '92 Dumble ODS).

Yeah but they never said they'd give them to you.

I know it seems like I'm being flippant and contrarian, and maybe I am. But it is entirely possible that the main usage of TINA over the last year was to get them to v2.0 captures.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Then what are we even talking about here?

The context was all there if you follow the quotes bud.

 

[deadpool_25]

Let’s talk about the 10 vs 4 encoders for a sec. Now, like everyone else here I don’t have a QCM in hand. I do have a QC though. And on the QC I admit I sometimes reach for the wrong encoder to tweak something. This is because the applicable encoder isn’t always directly below the parameter I want to tweak. So I’ll twist an encoder and be like “oops, not that one.” I’ll quickly grab the correct one after that. It’s absolutely not been a big deal; I always laugh at myself when it happens.

Without having the QCM in hand, I can’t know for sure but I think I’ll like tapping the parameter with my left hand and turning the encoder (bottom right, correct?) with my right hand. It seems like it might be super fast to edit multiple parameters if I keep my left hand over the screen and right hand on the encoder. Tap, twist, tap, twist. Lol.

Again, I can’t be sure until I get the damn thing but I’d guess it will more efficient rather than less.

 

[Dez]

Let’s talk about the 10 vs 4 encoders for a sec. Now, like everyone else here I don’t have a QCM in hand. I do have a QC though. And on the QC I admit I sometimes reach for the wrong encoder to tweak something. This is because the applicable encoder isn’t always directly below the parameter I want to tweak. So I’ll twist an encoder and be like “oops, not that one.” I’ll quickly grab the correct one after that. It’s absolutely not been a big deal; I always laugh at myself when it happens.

Without having the QCM in hand, I can’t know for sure but I think I’ll like tapping the parameter with my left hand and turning the encoder (bottom right, correct?) with my right hand. It seems like it might be super fast to edit multiple parameters if I keep my left hand over the screen and right hand on the encoder. Tap, twist, tap, twist. Lol.

Again, I can’t be sure until I get the damn thing but I’d guess it will more efficient rather than less.

Yeah honestly it will be nice to not hunt for the encoder you want to tweak. Left hand selects the block on the screen, right hand turns the encoder - boom.

 

[DrewJD82]

Are you really? It looks slick - people like shiny gadgets, the GUI is nice and modern and the marketing sells it well. That's pretty much it.

TBH, with where NDSP are today, the tones are also great.

But I strongly dislike the company, so I won't be buying one.

“Let down” might be a better phrase. Alongside giant fake tits, $0.99 Big Gulps, I should never underestimate the appeal to the lowest common denominator and “shiny shit” definitely fits in that box. The “I didn’t know I needed this but take my money” comments are doing a wonderful job at confirming my bias in this direction.

Spoiler: NSFW

 

[Orvillain]

What hellishness have you just unleashed @DrewJD82

 

[Whizzinby]

 

[MIJLOVER]

I don't really know enough to know what Neural did and did not promise

Disclamer: negative Nancy here:

I remember .. they promised everything. Every time someone asked "But will it be able to do this?" they never said "Uh, I'm not sure" or "no", but always confirmed it would do absolutely everything, even toast your bread and walk your dog.

That's why I never bothered getting on the preorder and never bought anything they released. It sounded way too naive (perhaps a calculated marketing move), and I couldn't see them living up to the hype, especially within the estimated timeframe, regardless of their 70 engineers working 12-hour shifts or whatever. I prefer companies that keep it more real.


But fortunately for their customers, they never abbandoned the unit and it's great now, and I see no reason why it woudn't remain relevant for quite some time.

But the mini makes absolutely no sense to me, looks akward, but I'm sure they've done their homework/marketing research and it'll sell well. We also shouldn't underestimate what saving $400 means in terms of moving units.

 

[Whizzinby]

Let’s talk about the 10 vs 4 encoders for a sec. Now, like everyone else here I don’t have a QCM in hand. I do have a QC though. And on the QC I admit I sometimes reach for the wrong encoder to tweak something. This is because the applicable encoder isn’t always directly below the parameter I want to tweak. So I’ll twist an encoder and be like “oops, not that one.” I’ll quickly grab the correct one after that. It’s absolutely not been a big deal; I always laugh at myself when it happens.

Without having the QCM in hand, I can’t know for sure but I think I’ll like tapping the parameter with my left hand and turning the encoder (bottom right, correct?) with my right hand. It seems like it might be super fast to edit multiple parameters if I keep my left hand over the screen and right hand on the encoder. Tap, twist, tap, twist. Lol.

Again, I can’t be sure until I get the damn thing but I’d guess it will more efficient rather than less.

Yeah I think they found a cool way around the lack of encoders with the tap or scroll encoder in one hand, edit with the other. You keep one hand on the encoder that is dialing a param up or down, and then the other hand can either tap the param your editing, or you can keep that off-hand on the encoder that scrolls if you don’t want to tap. Pretty slick.