Quad Cortex Mini

What is "full TINA functionality", exactly?

Screenshot 2026-01-28 11.13.10 AM.png
 
Does that mean Data was really an expensive sex toy? Speaking of, why would you need that if you have a holodeck? Heck, if you have a holodeck, why would you bother traveling across the galaxy when you could enjoy 24/7 holoporn instead?
People have been saying that it feels off with safety protocols engaged but on the other hand holographic STDs are not to be trifled with.
 
The mini draws less than half the current as the full size? That seems odd if the processor board and screen are the same and the IO board and switches are what's updated. Hmmmm.
 
The mini draws less than half the current as the full size? That seems odd if the processor board and screen are the same and the IO board and switches are what's updated. Hmmmm.
I only know very basic electronics lol - I have no idea why it draws that much less power and I agree with you it’s odd.
 
Lots of minor differences that could add up: LEDs, extra phantom power, etc. And then (speculating) whatever parts have been improved for efficiency under the hood in the past 5 years. I don’t think the original ever drew as much current as stated, anyway - that was like a max draw plus CYA fudge factor, and bundle the cheapest PSU that met or exceeded.

Is the QCM supply basically the same part with an improved connector? That wouldn’t surprise me, even though it can deliver more current than is needed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dez
Lots of minor differences that could add up: LEDs, extra phantom power, etc. And then (speculating) whatever parts have been improved for efficiency under the hood in the past 5 years. I don’t think the original ever drew as much current as stated, anyway - that was like a max draw plus CYA fudge factor, and bundle the cheapest PSU that met or exceeded.

Is the QCM supply basically the same part with an improved connector? That wouldn’t surprise me, even though it can deliver more current than is needed.
It’s not the same part, it’s just got Neural printed on it - the other one I had for my QC had a bunch of Chinese on it lol

It seems fine:

IMG_0481.png
 
Lots of minor differences that could add up: LEDs, extra phantom power, etc.

I doubt thats more than 100 ma, or less than 10% of the difference. Relatively speaking, the reduced draw amount (if accurate) is massive.

It sounds like the QC draws enough power to run both a QC mini and an HX Stomp at the same time with some leftover. If the performance is the same, I think there must be a measurement error, the mini is using much more efficient components, or there was some serious design issue with the OG. Its very interesting...ok, probably boring as shit to most of you :grin
 
I think this thing is knocking it out of the park for a lot of the guitar playing market - bedroom players like me (which is most guitarists by far) - I don’t think I have a single gripe about it at all.
I think the mini knocks it out of the park for a lot of the guitar playing market - bedroom guitarists like me. I don’t think I have a single gripe with it so far.

This weekend I’ll be playing it with my actual amps, and given Deadpool’s tests I’m sure I’ll be happy with that as well. 90% of the time I’m running QC using a gate (Zuul) and OD (Grind or Boss SD-1) device into my amp, then into my Suhr, back to QC for IR/EQ/chorus/reverb-delay. There was always a little hum that I’d hear even without playing anything. I’d need to use another gate after the amp to get rid of it, but it was never bad enough for me to do that - just kept playing 😈 maybe the mini will be better with that?
 
Back
Top