I understand everyone’s points but every other company is somehow able to release functional updates in a timely manner. I think Neural needs to hire more staff tbh (inb4 moderated because dissenting opinion)
You’re welcome to share your opinion, if it’s fair and constructive we leave threads open for discussion.
To provide what insight I can, it really just depends on the update and how involved or how big the update is. From 1.1.0 to 1.2.0 it was about 2 months, but from 1.2.0 to 1.3.0 it took a little over 4 months since that had the looper and several other features. 2.0.0 we’re tackling two large functions, so there’s extra work and care involved to make it right.
Regarding your note that we need to hire more staff, we’ve been aggressively hiring so we can continue to improve our turn around times. Hope you find this context useful!
7 Likes
with all the respect, what makes you think they need to hire more people?
delayed updates are more common than you can think, and to be honest, you should be very happy with the idea that NEURAL take it very seriously .
the easy way for them was to release bugged update, but they didn’t .
what if one of this bugs shows up in the middle of your gig?
im sure your reaction will not be so polite or understanding .
i think we all need to appreciate the fact that NEURAL wont compromise the quality of the updates, and avoid situations like i mentioned above, and not falling for the community pressure to release it as fast as possible.
2 Likes
Whether you’re one of those frustrated by the pace of things, or you’re defending NDSP, the positive I see is people having a few emotions related to the device. That sort of connection is a good sign. It means the QC has in some way struck a chord (ha ha) with musicians.
Moderation here trying to keep discussion going - within reason - is also a good sign, and is another difference between this product and a competitor. For me, it’s a big turn off when anyone who doesn’t toe the party line is immediately shot down by cultists or moderators. I’m done with that sort of community.
2 Likes
There are a lot of moving parts in software development. Especially in something as niche as this. Devices have different architectures/tech stacks, companies have different number of employees, devices are different in terms of features, companies have different level of quality control etc. All of these will impact development time.
While QC may be lacking some features that its competitors have, QC also has several features that they don’t have. Also plugin support, that no other system has, is being developed AFAIK and it also takes resources.
You are probably right that Neural needs to hire more people and for me it seems they are trying (looking at their careers page). Demand for high quality software engineers is high though and supply is low globally so it’s not that easy.
And for QC dev team I just wanna say thank you and take your time if you need to. #1 thing is that the 2.0 won’t break anything and has as little bugs as possible. Everything else comes after it.
2 Likes
Another software PM going to chip in (mainly from an enterprise security background). From my experience the release cadence from Neural has been pretty decent (my last place did 6 monthly releases, for example, and our product was significantly more mature and thus less likely to break than the QC).
I’m not sure what people seem to be so pissed about - would you rather your QC bricked itself or bugged out during a show? Software development is hard, especially with a hardware platform like this.
I’m far from a Neural shill, while the QC is a decent device I only use it when I can’t use my tube amps, but some of the complaints on here seem pretty off to me. We’re getting regular updates from the dev team and a pretty fast release cadence, which is about as much as you can expect imo.
Anyway, keep up the good work QC devs, don’t crunch yourselves to death over December. As @illuminati1911 said, “#1 thing is that the 2.0 won’t break anything and has as little bugs as possible. Everything else comes after it.”
Peace.
5 Likes
OK - this is getting curious.
Why is the QC demographic so full of software devs, PMs, or some other variant of engineer?
I find this really quite interesting. Imagine if there were a published API! Things could get pretty wild in here.
5 Likes
21st century blues lawyers… 
In all seriousness tho, nerds who play guitar are going to jump onboard a platform like the QC early on just to play with the hardware and check out the UX. I don’t generally like modellers (altho the QC has gone some way to changing my mind), but I was straight onboard for one of these just to check it out.
3 Likes
I think you’re right. Between the large display, unibody enclosure and those very clever rotary switches, it is a lot more tech-gadgety than your traditional rack unit.
Still didn’t expect quite so many of us to come out of the woodwork though…
1 Like
Thanks for the reply, I want to apologize because I had a couple beers last night and my comment came off more rude than I meant it to.
5 Likes
Dev here 
- Because it’s the first hardware device to implement modern ML, and the community (discord) is also really good. I’d love an API but I don’t think it’ll happen. I’ve been bored with fractal for years now and the QC affords so much more than the kemper in terms of tech.
5 Likes
Have noticed the same trend and it is not surprising. The QC is essentially a computer with specialized hardware for music production and performance. We are looking at AI, machine learning, inter-device connectivity, network communication, preset design (which qualifies as high level programming) etc… No wonder IT and engineer sorts are attracted to and comfortable with the technology.
We are seeing a convergence of silicon and carbon-based lifeforms in everyday life and that manifests in the arts as well. I’m in a couple of bands but also record and run sound. Since everything is digital these days, it is much a computer-based endeavor as it is musical. An IT background is super helpful. Not to speak of how many people work in IT these days. Even if they don’t, their job may leverage technology in some respect that makes them at least somewhat computer savvy.
And you are right, sooner or later someone is going to put out a device that allows open-source code if it’s not out there already. The challenges with that sort of thing, as always, becomes curating the code line to keep out the junk, source code version management with a large international pool of developers, as well as security, but the cost of entry with open source tends to be lower and the possibilities opened up by crowd sourcing development are endless.
You also can’t underestimate the future capabilities of AI and what are probably steadily growing data stores detailing the behavior of knobs/switches on analog devices either. Not hard to envision future modelers that are able to listen to, and capture, any recorded source and instantly isolate an instrument and reproduce that precise tone on the modeler including time-based effects such as modulation that truly leverage convolution processing allowing much more complex captures that will also include modeling of all the knobs and switches of the analog source.
Now if we can only figure out a way to navigate the reality that AI’s have already started composing their own music, something they can do quickly and relentlessly, and somehow keep the music created by humans relevant. 
1 Like
SEiT 
I’ve always been into technology and new things, but I’ve been much more wary with guitar tech in the past. Pods and other modelers just never did it for me when I used or heard them previously, but I got sucked in by the sound and convenience of the QC.
It’s looking like my band might do some fly-dates next year, plus even in a van we have been close to/over weight limits in the past, so this seemed like a logical choice, and the best of what is out there.
Any news about the mac/windows software?
1 Like
Are you referring to QC drivers or desktop editing software? If so, there hasn’t been any mention of anything driver or desktop software related.
Otherwise, all available news regarding updates is provided only via the development updates:
I wonder if the Neural team can / has considered expanding the current beta program size? That way, folks who want to opt-in by X date to try 2.0 can. And, the team can enjoy a nice holiday break, while also expanding the number of folks with the 2.0 release, without risking a big update that goes out to all which might ruin everyones holiday break? Just a thought…I’m sure they’ve considered it. Also, as much as I want to play with it it’s very reasonable to just hold it until next year when the company is best suited to respond. Not a lotta days left to turn around fixes and frankly not really worth it to burn out your team!
1 Like
I am looking forward with great anticipation to the next major update of Quad Cortex, version 2.
And it seems to me that the completeness and stability of this update will determine the future of the Quad Cortex. If the update is full of glitches, it will mean that the Quad Cortex is a gadget and not a musical instrument, and I fear that.
So I hope the next 2.0 update will be as stable and complete as possible.
Then the reputation of the Quad Cortex as a new generation of gear that can be used as serious equipment will be established.
I think the QC has already established that reputation. The QC is currently in 2.0 BETA testing and will be publicly released when when any bugs are fully addressed.
2 Likes
I don’t think so. If 2.0.0 is full of glitches, then there will be lots of updates. Nothing more.
Today I saw a video of Andertons, where the Captain mentionend that the QC is their best selling product in 2022 - across all product categories. I don’t think that all those buyers will rush to Reverb if the release is glitchy.
1 Like
I disagree. If 2.0.0 is glitchy there will be a lot of unhappy customers who will probably reinstall 1.4.1 and start posting on here like mad.