I had an AX8. It’s a very good unit.
I prefer the QC. Size, easy to use, UI, sound, power…
I’m still waiting for what I consider “basic” improvements, but it does the job. And I have fun with it.
1 Like
Glad to hear that your new QC is bringing a smile to your face. I agree with you about the effects. The selection is limited, as compared to most of the competition, but I’ve found most of the fx to be excellent (the Leslie model is a BIG disappointment, though). I’ll take quality over quantity, any day.
I see the Quad Cortex as a bit of a work in progress but it does what it does so well, I don’t mind waiting (and waiting) for the other features. I just hope that Neural doesn’t take so long developing it that the next generation of modelers swoops in and makes the the QC antiquated. Time will tell.
In the mean time, enjoy!
TBF, I’m lucky enough to have an Eventide H9 Max ‘on the side’. I can stick that in the effects loop and use it to back fill any missing effects.
There was a certain appeal in having everything in one box on the Fractal but, really, everything is built from the amp tone up (at least to my mind) and, on average, I do prefer those on the QC.
Has to be the definition of a first world problem 
. ‘I can’t find an astronomically expensive guitar amp modeller that sits exactly in the Goldilocks zone of my wants’.
As you say, key is to enjoy it and I am. Having a bit of gear that allows really good, immersive playing via headphones is a total gift.
1 Like
To update, I just sold my FM9 last week and I haven’t missed it one bit! QC for me all day every day.
I think I want a backup QC now…
7 Likes
Exactly how I feel about the QC.
About 1 month in now and I’m getting happier and happier with my QC choice. The mopdels are great and, frankly, I’m not missing the wider range of effects.
Highlights:
-
Most amp models sound good without much tweaking. Caveat being that I prefer to use IRs to the cab block in the QC.
-
Captures. I really didn’t factor these in when I bought the QC. I wanted it to stand up as a modeller first and foremost (after dissapearing down the rabbit hole of ‘profile hunting’ with my Kemper). However, I find the factory captures to be really useable and am blown away but the free captures from amalgamaudio on the cortex cloud. With a handful of go-to captures for favourite amps (Tone King, Morgan, Orange) I’m happy to just play.
Chuffed.
5 Likes
Awesome! I’ve had both QC and FM9 for about 2.5 years now. My fm9 sold about a month ago and usually I have a bit of regret selling a piece of gear but I have to say I haven’t missed it. The QC paired with a midi controller is as flexible as I need it to be. And the tones more inspiring and easy to dial. Love it.
2 Likes
I use a full AxeFx3 (with FC-12) live still and I can’t see moving from that due to the versality, but when I don’t need the effects or I’m doing someting smaller, I’m starting to like the quad more and more. I practice with it almost exclusively now.
I’m considering doing the pedalboard sort of set up (quad, expression pedal and power) and see if I can get the sounds I need from it for smaller shows, or when I hit an open mic to try new stuff. I have a great couple af amp sounds that are very useable for me, but the some of the effects aren’t there yet for me (YRMV). I rely on the rotary and some other sounds that I just can’t tune in well on the Quad yet.
I also worry on the smaller gigs about drinks and stuff getting thrown at the stage (water bottles, beer, small women, you know, whatever). I feel like I would need to protect the Quad more than if I just had my bulletproof FC-12 and some Mission pedals in the line of fire.
In terms of just plain amp tones, the Quad is simpilier to dial in, for sure. I dislike the routing on the Quad for more advanced effects (like having multiple reverbs in parellel with a delay and I still want the raw output to come through, etc.). The Quad is a MUCH more “all around” device though. It makes an amazing interface, for instance, and it’s just plain simpler to work with. Great for travel!
TLDR:
- Still sticking to the AxeFX3 rig, but it’s more complex and capable
- Loving the QC more and more though, and it’s simple and almost as capable (with a few tricks the Fractal doesn’t do well, like being a nice interface)
To add, if I were to choose NOW and start over without a catalog of souds to reproduce, I would just go Quad Cortex. It’s less in the way, simple to use, etc. The less I tweak parameters the more I get done, and that tweaking never ends on the Fractal gear for me.
4 Likes
I have switched to the QC, maybe about 2 years ago, from an fm3 and later, fm9 setup.
The main reasons for the switch are not tone-related as one can get great tones from both units with some effort. I live in Toronto and gig mostly in the city, via public transportation, so the main goal for me was to carry as less stuff as possible to a gig, the smaller and lighter, the better. Instead of carrying guitars and wheeling a carry-on sized luggage w/wheels to gig with no free hands, it’s now guitars and a tiny backpack all on my back. QC wins in that category.
Another one for me was the pitch block, with all the power the Fractal stuff has, it for some reason cannot handle 2 pitch blocks or more in a preset. Just not doable, but for the stuff I do, I need 2 or more usually one as a virtual capo, one for whammy/pitch shifting etc. The QC again, handles this with no issues.
The rest of the benefits are luxuries that I get to enjoy (the touch screen to edit on the fly, the extra buttons for more scenes etc).
3 Likes
I had an Axe FX 2 for 6+ years (or more) sold it because I was moving to a new country. I wanted to try the QC because I wanted something different which was not Boss or Line6. I currently own a tube amp with pedals (digital and analogue). Axe FX 2 was a great unit that served me a lot over the years with my previous band, especially for the delay textures and parameters and the high gain amps. With that in mind, I would say that the QC is an excellent unit too. Superior to the Axe Fx 2 in many ways, ease of use, UI, getting a good sound quickly. Never tried it in a live setting yet and do not know yet about the build quality (owning for less than a year now). What I feel is lacking (compared to my Fractal experience) is the quality and quantity of firmware updates. Yes, PCOM is great and genius to have but sometimes I tend to expect more pedals, more amps and more significant features in updates (just nitpiking, but yeah…)
2 Likes
I’m with you on that, i still think (and hope) that effects will increase in quality and number and will compete with strymon, meris, gamechanger etc but the “aggressives updates” (wich was the final selling point that made me pull the trigger on it) are not there yet. By the way they removed it* from the QC FAQ, i understand why because , obviously, it’s not what happened and can create frustrations (i have), but i don’t see it with a very good eye…
*the “very aggressive plan for updates” that became: “Our pledge is that the collection of sounds will continue to grow, permanently.”
1 Like
Sometimes I wonder if they made a dedicated Virtual Capo block if that would be less CPU-intensive than the whole pitch block. I like that the QC has a Transpose block AND a Pitch shifter block; we play Soundgarden’s Black Hole Sun which is tuned up 75c, so I need a Transpose block to raise it by a semitone and then a pitch block to drop it 25c, since the pitch block can only go +/- 50c.
In any case, I’m very happy with the pitch functions on the QC!
I did a bunch of research into the virtual capo for Fractal. Their algorithm is actually more glitchy than Transpose for QC. Watched multiple videos of people demonstrating Virtual Capo and critiquing it + saw post on their forum of people wanting an update where it isn’t glitchy. While somewhat glitchy, Transpose is actually more accurate than what Fractal has for this sort of effect
2 Likes
Does it not work to just use the pitch shifter to go up 75c?
If you’re using it anyway, then it can’t be much more glitchy that way surely?
Exactly. It’s usable in a full-band context, but both Line 6 stuff and the QC blocks are much better, even though QC’s claims to NOT be polyphonic. shrug
The pitch block doesn’t go up 75c. It only goes +/- 50c, otherwise yes, that would be ideal. Still; their pitch blocks are good enough that I can use two in a row and still get a good result versus the glitchy mess you get with Fractal.
1 Like
It’s probably been 5 years ago at least since I made the switch from the Fractal ecosystem to Neural. On the Fractal side of things, I was using the AX8, which even though dated, sounds absolutely phenomenal. Prior to that I was using Helix, but I was never satisfied with the tones and behavior I was getting. I wanted to love that unit, but in the end I sold it for the AX8. Helix was ok as far as tone and realism. But the AX8 was totally next level in that department. My issue(s) with the unit were never about that. Instead it was about usability and the UI. I would still be in the Fractal fold, if they hadn’t initially downgraded the battle chassi for the AX8 (8 foot switches +3) to the FM3 (3 footswitches). But the nail in the coffin was the UI. I fully expected the heir to the AX8 throne to have an updated UI, which would bring the unit into the 21st century. But for some reason, they opted to stay with that clunky assed grid system. The changes they did make to the UI, were far from significant. So it was still behind the times imo. Even my 400 dollar Mooer unit has a better UI than the FM3. And from what I’m told, the FM9 isn’t any better. I was already acquainted with Neural Plugins, so naturally, when Neural announced the release of a hardware version in which to house them, I started looking at the QC. I finally decided to give it a try and I have to say it delivered the goods. Although I do have some minor bitches about it, (set list workflow, external power supply, and consistency of durability). Other than that, I love the unit. It has a small foot print, intuitive UI, and the most important thing…It sounds incredible. To my ears it sounds just as good as anything in the Fractal universe. So yeah…long story short, it came down to dissatisfaction with the UI and the form factor of the FM3. Otherwise, I’d still be a Fractal guy. I really feel like the decision to design the FM3 in this manner was a huge misstep on the part of Fractal. I’m sure that it cost them at least a few customers. I wasn’t the only one. There were very many complaints about this change in the design, which I believe, ultimately led to Fractal retooling the unit (FM9) to be comparable to the button layout of the AX8. They just didn’t go far enough with the updated unit. Fractal really needs to completely retool that UI. It’s still a clunky, counterintuitive, hard-headed fink imo lol.
4 Likes
For me, QC is a complement to my Axe FXIII, and I lean towards one or the other depending on what I play. QC is IMHO better at producing modern metal / djent tones, especially paired with Fishman and/or BKP pickups. Axe FX is better at, honestly probably everything else. But recently I’ve been into djent stuff so I’ve been playing with my QC and my Fractal has been collecting dust.
One big drawback from Fractal for me is that it just has too much depth and the factory presets mostly suck. Even third-party (or even artists’) paid presets suck because they might have been created months or years ago (not to mention they might have paired their Axe FX with high end cabs/amps), and due to software updates, they may sound totally different now.
The NDSP business model IMHO directly addresses this gap. It’s aimed towards bedroom guitarist and/or guitarists with minimal gear who just wanted to get a mix-ready tone ASAP. Like, I have no doubt that Fractal probably can produce almost all of the NDSP tones, but in order to harness the maximum potential of Fractal you’d need to spend a lot of time to gain deep understanding of tone shaping.
Another advantage for NDSP is that many of the presets are made using Fishman and/or BKP pickups, which are common in mid to high end guitars these days. And idk why the Fractal presets sound especially bad with those pickups (moreso than like.. duncans, dimarzios, etc.). I’m sure the “fix” is probably pretty simple, but I’m a total dumbass in tone shaping so I somehow couldn’t make my fishman-equipped guitar sound good with Axe FX. But with NDSP, wow, the gap in presets is really wide, I have so many tones to choose from and they sound really good.
All in all, if I could start over I’d rather invest in QC and NDSP ecosystem. If and only if I feel that something is missing, would I considering purchasing Axe FX