I own two NDSP plugins and they are excellent. I wanted to have the same sounds on the QC so I captured them.
Of course it would be nice to “have the plugin on the QC”, but I have no idea how it looks like.
Like you said @HonestOpinion , it could mean to run the vst in a wrapper somehow.
But then what about the GUI? I guess they will not port this to the QC, or will they?
Whatever Neural comes up with, somebody will surely be disappointed…
In my case, I can live with the captures, so no pressure on the plugin compatibility.
Neural should not have announced it so loudly and everybody would be happy.
haha it was when you thanked me for feedback got me asking why then i saw the name and the lil shield but anyway hopefully everything works out soon and neural keeps up
The most sensible way of implementing the ‘plug-ins’ inside the QC would be to show them as any other block, and those blocks would only be available for the users that purchased the plugins…
Technically, NDSP can’t simply ‘run the VST’ inside the QC , they have to ‘port’ the algorithmes to the hardware-specific QC DSP chips…
That’s why it takes them much more time than expected at first…
<EducatedGuess>
I suspect that initially someone said 'Ho, we simply have to recompile our C++ code to another target - ie: the DSP inside the QC - but alas, things are not that simple, it is not always possible, it really depends on the DSP hardware support for C++ code, and the way the C++ compiler is smart enough to heavily optimize the code …
And the performances were probably not good enough for the QC DSP …
So, they probably have to either : change the algorithme (this is hard, as the new algorithme must be less resource heavy, but keep the same result (sound)) … or they have to do some ‘hand optimization’ (write some DSP Specific assembly code ) which is even harder and more time-consuming …
</EducatedGuess>
I really wonder if its worth the price, as it add some significant delay to other functionnalities (both QOL features and Content) of the QC , and it will ‘paywall’ some features that would be part of the ‘agressive update policy’ that was announced at launch…
Time will tell… NAMM is near, and I really hope that they will show some significant features (a preview of the Editor was announced in a previous blog post…) but the promised ‘agressive update policy’ remain to be proven …
I love my QC , but I begin to wonder if I made the good choice … The NAMM show will probably be an important event for the QC Future …
As it got obstructed by the bottleneck of resources during the pandemic, they couldn’t deliver on their promises. Most couldn’t.
Yet Fractal updated the Axe FX III at least 10 times more than NDSP did with the Quad Cortex, and FYI “software” updates do not need hardware, just software updates. So the “no parts argument” can’t be blamed on Covid-19 for this. In other words, the editor should have been out months ago… Programmers need a kick in the arsh! Now I like where this thread is going too… You (NDSP) have not thrown out “ONE” single picture of the Editor’s progress that I can find since the “fake” one SW PR dept put out 2+ years ago. Get busy NDSP…
NDSP also released multiple new plugins and updates to plugins within that time frame which take SW DEV resources to produce. NDSP makes more than just the QC. Also the number of people that assume SW DEV is simple and fast are an amazement. Especially with a smaller DEV team that’s focused on multiple product threads. DEV takes a ton of coding and testing hours to produce something worth releasing. Slamming out something less than complete just so they can say they have a release would cause more harm than good in the end.
I’m constantly flummoxed at those railing against a product they bought that doesn’t serve their needs. Sell it and get what does. Why keep it and continually yell at clouds about how it’s not working for you? At some point, doesn’t the “blame” shift from them to you?
Maybe I’m just in a different head space about it. I got what I paid for. I didn’t pay for promises or should haves. NDSP is still updating and expanding the capabilities of the product at no additional expense to me which is a HUGE plus! New major versions of SW almost always come with a co$t (looks at every DAW that isn’t free to begin with) so I come at it from the viewpoint of NDSP continually making my original QC investment better for free. That’s just my take.
While this thread has been going I’ve come to realize that I too bought the QC partly on expectations of the plugins to come. This has changed over just a few comments to “what can we do to help each other as costumers/NDSP to make it better”? Thank you all ( and I mean all) for changing this illusion of “expecting things to come”. Funny thing is I couldn’t have received this view from you in case I wasn’t deeply content and deeply grateful in awe with what the QC already can do.
No longer “waiting” for updates. Loving it.
By the way, it’s spring here, wish it’s the same by you.
this thread has morphed a bit, but based on its overall gist;
the ONLY reason the QC caught my eye initially was that it was advertised as being able to run the NDSP plugins in a portable format. When it was announced that it wouldn’t be able to do that at launch, I decided to wait to buy until it could. Then later when they said the introductory price wouldn’t last I went ahead and bought it anyway and figured I could make due till the PUs got ported.
What I found over time is that I can get by just fine w/out the PUs on the unit. I can do plenty without them, and most can be simulated (with a few exceptions). I’d still like them, but it’s not been a showstopper for me. I’m really glad I bought the QC anyway because it’s been the most inspiring and motivation piece of gear I’ve bought in a LONG time, as-is.
At this point, I don’t expect NDSP’s development pace to change, based on the track record so far. It is what it is. The areas it can improve upon are well-documented, publicized and acknowledged by NDSP.
Users can either choose to bail on the product, or try to implement their own workarounds where they can. I’m choosing the latter but don’t begrudge or belittle those who want to jump ship. For some users it seems this unit might not EVER reach their expectations of the perfect modeler.
Well said Xush. I have only had my unit about 2 months. It already does so much more than I could ever user or need… BUT it is not the usability of the unit that bothers me. It is my ongoing lack of trust that the Neural company is a company that I want to engage with over a long period of time. IF I decide that I don’t want the frustration THEN I can sell my unit. For example I have learned that the word “soon” does not mean what I think it means when they say it.
P.S. When I say long period of time… I mean like 3 to 5 years. I am pretty sure I will have moved on to something else by then. I am somewhat of a tech glutton!
I’m brand new to the QC and have barely put much time into it just yet but I’m excited to see where it can take me. I’m coming from the Helix and most recently and currently, the Fractal FM9/AxeFx 3. Each of these units are actually great in their own right and each has features that the others don’t have so it’s a matter of finding which one works best for your needs as a musician whether that be a performing musician, studio guy or a bedroom enthusiast. What works great for one of these scenarios may not work as well for the others.
Personally, I would like to see a well defined workflow for live use with all the features that are needed to perform at my best such as improved setlists, complete control of footswitch assignments, colors and labeling, more MIDI implementation etc. Of course having an editor would be great but if you’re familiar with the Fractal universe then you’ll really appreciate simply using the QC’s touchscreen and how easy it is. Of course what also makes it easier is that there aren’t 6 billion parameters like on the Fractals to have to interface with. It’s both a blessing and a curse. Even better would be a man IOS/Android app to make edits to the QC wirelessly during a show.
I also don’t personally care about the implementation of the NDSP plugins within the QC. I’m not sure what the real benefit to this is although there may be one I’m not aware of. I own several of their plugins and other than the nicely designed GUIs that these plugins have, I don’t see why they would need to be ported to the QC. Would they even be able to replicate these GUIs onboard the QC? Perhaps in some separate GUI wrapper but if they can’t, then what’s the need? I figure if you have the same amp, cab and effects models on the QC, then you should be able to simply replicate the tones generated by the plugins but that’s just me. Maybe just the ability to have the same models and effects and be able to load the same signal chain and amp/effect settings form the plugins into the QC would be sufficient? As others have mentioned, you could also capture the tones from the plugins which to me already seems more than sufficient. I’d much rather see NDSP spend more time on not implementing this feature and continue to add more amp and effect models as well as implement more advanced features on those models and the unit as a whole. Unfortunately, since this feature has already been promised, it almost has to be done to save face and not alienate a large part of the user base who really want this implemented avoiding a mass exodus.
In the end, I don’t believe that NDSP is necessarily in trouble but unfortunately, all that is required to cause chaos is the perception of being in trouble which some of the recent YT videos create. Sure, the QC may not work well enough for many people who require specific features to use the unit in the way that they require and are used to so you’re going to see people jump ship because they don’t have the time and patience to wait. Fractal was founded in 2006 which is 17 years to get where they are today with continuous updates and improvements. I think the QC will get there but it obviously takes time. I’ll hang onto my QC even if I continue playing my Fractal live until the features I crave in the QC are implemented or determined to never be implemented at which time I’ll either accept that and keep it or move on. By then, the other modeler manufactures will probably have released their latest generation of products and the arguments about which is better will start all over again.
I bet you could get pretty close to any plugin sound (save for some exceptions like the synth stuff in Archetype Rabea) by utilizing blocks already available in the QC with some careful tweaking.
I think what people are looking for though is the ability to easily transfer their tone to QC, i.e. the ability to import an existing plugin preset they dialed in on the computer and get exactly the same sound on the unit so that they can take it to the gig, etc. In order to do that it’s not sufficient to have models of similar amps.
You need models of amps and effects that will sound the same when all the knobs and switches are set to the same values.
Some sort of desktop integration to transfer your presets to the QC (probably a Desktop Editor dependency, although they could take the cloud route in the interim).
Seamless transfer of IRs, plus addressing the functionality gap between the Amp/IR blocks on QC and the latest plugins.
Frankly, a lot of their excuses fall flat on me. I understand that plugins predating QC (like Archetype Plini) may be difficult to port due to the algorithms used, but all newer plugins should be built with cross-platform compatibility in mind at this point, yet there are no signs of them taking steps towards an incremental rollout.
Even in the plugin domain things take way longer than they should, e.g. it’s been their stated intention to backport some QoL features from newer plugins to the old ones. This should have been a matter of days if their codebase is organized in a reasonable way, but somehow it is taking years, with some plugins not receiving any updates since 2019/2020. Meanwhile, new products are getting launched with regularity.
All of that, combined with the lack of engagement with the community (at best we’re getting a few sentences once a month or so), creates an impression of a terribly disorganized company. I understand that they’ve got burned by overpromising stuff in the past when Doug was active on forums, but I’d prefer them to be more engaged even if they get things wrong every now and then, instead of completely withdrawing from the public space.
They may not be immediately in trouble like some suggest, but they are burning through goodwill and that will be very hard to restore.
I do not agree! I believe that if I buy a Ferrari I must also have the Ferrari engine inside, the assistance of Ferrari, the power of Ferrari! also because you NDSP promised me this and sold this more than 2 years ago!!! and then I find myself having the external body of the Ferrari but of all the rest of the Opel (with all due respect to the latter) I remain of my opinion and that is that if the next firmware is not up to expectations I think that they will have a big damage of image. and I also say that if I buy a pedal board like this the last thing I think is that I will have to sell it because it has problems such as latency, poor effects, loop gain problem etc etc….and I agree @spikey with Neural must get moving and fast too or else Reverb will be flooded with used QCs!
I agree, and with no Marketplace for the content creators that are doing high level presets and captures they have been disincentivized. I also agree that it is the perception that the company gives that they are disconnected and if criticized they get seem to get defensive. As a short term user it looks to me as they are doing the balancing act of trying to keep their revenue stream going (the plug ins) and trying to deliver on explicit promises that are kind of beyond their means. These two ideas together leave me not feeling great about my unit. It will be interesting to see if they show up at NAMM with a functioning desktop editor that could be quickly dispersed to the QC owners. I believe it would be a great opportunity if they do, and if they don’t it will reinforce what many of us are feeling about it.
I believe they said the editor shown at NAMM will be beta at best, so there won’t be a “quickly dispersed” editor after NAMM unless something truly extraordinary happens. I’d guess another 2-4 months conservatively after NAMM if all goes smoothly with the testing. SW DEV is not fast. You don’t want it to be. That’s how you get buggy, unreliable code.
Good reasoning there. Do you have any insight into why the MarketPlace is not up yet? Are there technical issues that require tons of time on that as well? Also, if some of these things are so time consuming couldn’t a company like Neural let another company work on their project that does that specific thing? Like the MarketPlace… aren’t there companies that do that kind of work?
illusion of “expecting things to come”. Funny thing is I couldn’t have received this view from you in case I wasn’t deeply content and deeply grateful in awe with what the QC already can do.
