Amen. I understand that company is between a rock and a hard place cause they “promised” the plugin thing (i can’t care less, i bought a gigging machine not a plugin thing) but there are far more important things to fix/improve/provide for the actual unit
4 Likes
Nice. Now I just have to wait until the plugins I actually own get their X version.
2 Likes
The QC just keeps getting better! Thanks, NDSP team.
3 Likes
Put another way: Neural DSP are releasing a way to have their plugins on the Quad Cortex. However, all the plugins are incompatible with the Quad Cortex. They are therefore redoing all the plugins to be compatible. The ones with the ‘X’ are the ones that are currently compatible with the Quad Cortex.
2 Likes
Great update! Keep up the good momentum, Neural DSP!
2 Likes
Really wish we were getting dual switch functionality or even just the ability to assign what you’d like to any given switch. That being said it’s still an exciting update with pcom finally becoming available.
7 Likes
They are!? Wow! I didn’t realize. Thanks for the enlightenment 
I absolutely would love the ability to be able to use-assign functions to footswitches (looooong press the Preset switches to change Presets please, then there’s no way you can change preset accidentally while changing mode. Yes, this does bother me hugely and yes I will keep banging on about it until Neural come up with a fix, and no, I don’t understand why this doesn’t seem to bother more people 
)
13 Likes
I agree. I come from the fractal ecosystem and their use of switches is great and I believe the qc would benefit from that a ton. It’s happened to me a few times where I’ve changed presets when wanting to goto a different mode, to the extent I got a midi baby to be able to swap via an external foot switch. It requires power, a midi cable. Stuff I can get rid of if we just had that feature. I’m not losing hope being it’s one of the most asked for request.
6 Likes
Great, I’m glad you agree - that’s another real frustration about the ridiculous implementation of the footswitches at the moment, people end up buying a separate midi-controller, just to be able to safely do the things you really should be able to do in the unit itself… I really am not fussed at all about plug-ins, I’d just like them to get the basics of the UI sorted so we have a useable platform for live use…
When you say it’s one of the most asked for requests, you mean user-assignable footswitch options, rather than the way you change mode specifically?
8 Likes
Hold and secondary functions of the switches. Last I checked it had over 200 votes for.
8 Likes
Yeah, I definably want more footswitch function. It’s all I really want or need at this point. I do think that once they get the PCOM behind them, they will likely start working on the midi side of things. It is the one thing that could really take the QC to the next level imo.
I’m still excited about the update though. It appears that the ground work is set for switch control as they have added more function to the midi messages out. And the other goodies that PCOM will bring. I can tell a difference between the SLO model in the QC compared to the plugin version. I like the plugin version better. It has a little more “it” to it to me 
. Can’t wait to try it out!
4 Likes
This needs to be said…
Neural have said that PCOM would come in Q2 2024.
That does NOT mean that it will be available at 12:01 AM on April 1st.
It could be May, it could be June. Have some patience.
5 Likes
Actually it could be June 30th.
I am on my third QC. I got rid of the first two and just stayed with my Axe-FxIII. When the new firmware and editor came out I thought I’d buy another QC. I’ve been getting some really great sounds this time and liking it much better but it still is way behind Fractal. The one thing thats going to keep me from using the QC live is the latency with my wireless and in ear monitors. Its ashame because I’m getting more usable tones than my Axe-FxIII and it bums me out because I was really wanting to go small and light with a touchscreen for on the fly editing. I’ll keep this third one and use it in the studio or wait until its better.
1 Like
Maybe a stupid question, but how is the QC related to the latency of your in-ears?
2 Likes
It’s the combination of the overall latency in the three products. Wireless in ears add some and the guitar wireless adds some and the QC has more than the fractal. The three combined pieces of gear with their own latency is enough to bother me. Especially playing fast lead like I do, it’s enough to throw me off some. Im using three rows with three amps and delay plus reverb on the QC, maybe thats why?
1 Like
I’m surprised. There are videos of latency tests for the QC on YouTube, especially after the latest updates where they improved it overall. Also, captures are a bit faster than amp models. And QC is really fast. It is surprising that it is not faster than the Fractal.
Still, I do play fast leads too, and I am not even able to feel the latency, but I guess that a question of taste.
2 Likes
I’ve heard some people are more sensitive to it and maybe thats me, or its all in my head. I’m not giving up on it.
1 Like
The QC has good latency performance in certain situations. But when you start adding more amps or captures and pass the signal between the processors, it keeps adding up quickly. Testing it with 1 amp or capture block on one row doesn’t tell the whole truth.
3 Likes