The NDSP Nano Cortex…

[paisleywookiee]

Yeah, but maybe it's different when both competing products in this case would have the benefit of Neural's marketing and existing userbase / ecosystem. There are a lot of great amp plugins out there, but a lot of people are just going to default to using the Neural ones or, now, the UA ones, even when there are arguably better (and cheaper) options in some cases. That's part of why a Neural capture plugin would probably do well even with Tonex and NAM being things.

I’m just thinking in the context of my use case, where I’d be capturing amps to use with the NC, but then I’d like it on my laptop too, for later “reamping”, like what I do with the Helix Native stuff.

 

[synthpenguin]

I’m just thinking in the context of my use case, where I’d be capturing amps to use with the NC, but then I’d like it on my laptop too, for later “reamping”, like what I do with the Helix Native stuff.

Yeah, that would be great!

They could even keep the capturing process to the actual hardware if they're concerned about the inconsistencies from capture to capture the more open platforms experience (though tbh I have no idea if that's already an issue for Neural captures anyway).

 

[paisleywookiee]

Yeah, that would be great!

They could even keep the capturing process to the actual hardware if they're concerned about the inconsistencies from capture to capture the more open platforms experience (though tbh I have no idea if that's already an issue for Neural captures anyway).

Honestly, I think that’d be crucial for that very reason.

 

[Sascha Franck]

You can definitely do a pre-compressor, post EQ, post delay, and post reverb in the same patch, though the three post FX would be fixed in that order.

That'd be fine with me. The patches I'm using for quick (or light luggage) gigs are built pretty much in that way.

-Previously, you couldn't activate or deactivate FX at all without using patch changes, but it seems that now, with the new update, you'd be able to toggle them all together (or in whatever combo) WITH an external MIDI controller. You can not do this on the unit itself.

Uh, that sucks.

-The footswitches by default are each set to toggle between their two assigned patches, e.g. pushing footswitch 1 goes between patches A and B, and pushing footswitch 2 goes between patches C and D. The only other option is turning footswitch 2 into a bypass for the whole unit. So, you can switch between two patches with one footswitch, but you can't assign FX slots or anything like that to the second footswitch.

That's pretty bad news, too.
Given the amount of programming that apparently went into the unit (especially post-release), such modes should be pretty trivial to add.
I mean, I really only need 4 patches (clean, clean lead, dirt, dirt lead) in most situations, but I defenitely prefer to have them as 2 basic patches with a lead variation for each, so in case I needed to do some quick adjustments during soundcheck, I'd only have to adjust 2 patches. I usually also get more "homogenic" results out of that method.

Anyhow, thanks for your detailed answer. Looks as if the unit isn't for me, at least not yet.

 

[synthpenguin]

Here's the MIDI CC list btw:

https://neuraldsp.com/manual/nano-cortex#Incoming-MIDI-CC-List

As stated in the patch notes, it's just bypassing blocks, expression pedal control, and tap tempo and tuner. So you can't directly change parameters over MIDI unless you assign them to the expression pedal, which limits things, but still a great update imo

 

[synthpenguin]

That'd be fine with me. The patches I'm using for quick (or light luggage) gigs are built pretty much in that way.



Uh, that sucks.



That's pretty bad news, too.
Given the amount of programming that apparently went into the unit (especially post-release), such modes should be pretty trivial to add.
I mean, I really only need 4 patches (clean, clean lead, dirt, dirt lead) in most situations, but I defenitely prefer to have them as 2 basic patches with a lead variation for each, so in case I needed to do some quick adjustments during soundcheck, I'd only have to adjust 2 patches. I usually also get more "homogenic" results out of that method.

Anyhow, thanks for your detailed answer. Looks as if the unit isn't for me, at least not yet.

Yeah, they are some pretty odd limitations. I'm glad they're adding stuff, and at a decent pace now, so I think more flexible switching etc is a real possibility... but I definitely wouldn't buy it if it's a must. It's half of what is making me hesitate too, even with this new update.

And you're welcome!

fwiw I would look into the Tonex for your use case if you haven't. It has its own cons, and I personally don't really like Tonex as a platform (mainly for UX / fun factor reasons), but it's a lot more flexible when it comes to this sort of thing (and its support for external footswitches is much better).

 

[Sascha Franck]

fwiw I would look into the Tonex for your use case if you haven't.

Well, I don't think it'd do well for my needs as a standalone unit. I thought about using two Tonex Ones as the two "amp channels" on my bigger board (with a GT-1000 serving as the "brain" - too bad the internal amps just suck for my taste) but the NC would possibly do as well (right now I'm using an Amp Academy for cleans and an Amplifirebox as a dirt pedal platform).
Anyhow, I also have an HX Stomp, serving my smaller gig needs just fine, so all of this is a first world issue anyway.
But I got attracted by the NC as it'd also allow me to easily do some captures, something the Tonex doesn't (as it needs a computer and quite some more adjustments).

 

[synthpenguin]

Well, I don't think it'd do well for my needs as a standalone unit. I thought about using two Tonex Ones as the two "amp channels" on my bigger board (with a GT-1000 serving as the "brain" - too bad the internal amps just suck for my taste) but the NC would possibly do as well (right now I'm using an Amp Academy for cleans and an Amplifirebox as a dirt pedal platform).
Anyhow, I also have an HX Stomp, serving my smaller gig needs just fine, so all of this is a first world issue anyway.
But I got attracted by the NC as it'd also allow me to easily do some captures, something the Tonex doesn't (as it needs a computer and quite some more adjustments).

Makes sense!

And yeah, I had actually briefly thought about an NC + HX Stomp pairing for related reasons. It could be a pretty flexible rig (especially since now the HX Stomp can send MIDI CCs to the NC instead of just program changes) and still pretty compact, though I ultimately ruled it out for myself.

 

[[Nathan]]

I’m just thinking in the context of my use case, where I’d be capturing amps to use with the NC, but then I’d like it on my laptop too, for later “reamping”, like what I do with the Helix Native stuff.

After everything I’ve seen in the landscape of Kemper, tonex and nam capturing I think the smartest move is to only allow capturing on the companies device/hardware. People seem to ignore basic gain/level measuring and it adds another element of randomness to the process which isn’t there on kemper or qc.

I’d be perfectly happy owning a nano cortex or kemper if I can use those captures in vst across a mix session but they don’t have that. If NDSP had a plugin to play back captures but only allowed captures to be done via QC/NC then it also sells a bunch more units, imo this is the best way to go for minimal confusion and maximum capture usage.

I’m really hoping this is the route stadium goes. Obviously they’re bringing captures to the hardware, but if they also allow playback in vst

 

[paisleywookiee]

After everything I’ve seen in the landscape of Kemper, tonex and nam capturing I think the smartest move is to only allow capturing on the companies device/hardware. People seem to ignore basic gain/level measuring and it adds another element of randomness to the process which isn’t there on kemper or qc.

I’d be perfectly happy owning a nano cortex or kemper if I can use those captures in vst across a mix session but they don’t have that. If NDSP had a plugin to play back captures but only allowed captures to be done via QC/NC then it also sells a bunch more units, imo this is the best way to go for minimal confusion and maximum capture usage.

I’m really hoping this is the route stadium goes. Obviously they’re bringing captures to the hardware, but if they also allow playback in vst

Yeah that’s exactly what I mean. Require the QC/NC for capture, playback only in VST.

 

[Sedaxel]

They do plenty of great work. They just have a truly bizarre disinterest in their own flagship product.

Well.. I´m not so sure about that. I guess it´s much easier to modify the code of a much simpler unit (NC) than the one of a beast like the QC with all its complexity (you know... you add something and screw another something in the way, so yo have to search for the issue, fix it, etc...). But I´m sure they are working on it too. I´m afraid they screwed with all the stupid PCOM promise. They are VERY guilty of that. And honestly... I still think that PCOM would be a marginal feature that very few users would die for. As We always say, We all here in forums are just a microscopic part of the total market of multieffects in the world. Personally, if I had the QC and the PCOM was released, I wouldn´t use it at all. I would use the fantastic models and capturing features.

Anyway, yeah, with the NC they are listening to users and they are working fast. For me, it´s more than fair.