Thanks IllegalGardner,
one of my problems is compounded by using 3 guitars in a gig (or 4 if I use electric acoustic as well). Switching between single coil and some heavy ThroBak Humbuckers can make my life harder if I’m then screwing around with volume problems on different presets.
This issue is one of the reasons that the Kemper has been so great for me; if the quad has a preset volume control it would help.
1 Like
if it turns out that the Output controls are Global instead of per Preset you could probably have an easy workaround just by using a Gain and/or EQ block(s) enabled at the front of the chain for presets created for your various guitars.
1 Like
There are a few ways to approach this. I have experimented (with fractal) in creating separate presets for single coil and hss guitars - and also with using control switches to adjust output to compensate for the vol difference bt hums and singles and i’ve found there’s really no wrong way to go about it, and what’s best totally depends on what your set looks like.
For example you’re playing covers where you’re going between wildly diff tones and several guitars, it probably makes sense to use different presets for each song or genre and level set per instrument so your volume stays consistant, and try to keep all the presets in a single bank for simplicity. If you’re playing bar blues, one preset with well thought out scenes should work fine - and on cortex will be even easier when they create the hybrid mode so you can set up a row of stomps and a row of scenes.
What’s nice about the control switches in fractal is i can make some sticky. So even as i change between say clean and rhythm tones, either within the same preset or different presets - my control switches toggling lead boost, or the vol and eq change for singles, are always the same footswitch. Being able to designate any footswitch for any purpose, as well as being able make a switch global, are damn near the top of my wishlist for cortex. I hope once they implement a looper they’ll revisit this and provide more flexibility - so we can map the looper block menu to any footswitch we like.
1 Like
Many thanks to all for the input. Once my Quad has been received (or when), I’d greatly appreciate reading how users have managed to find ‘work a-rounds’ for these issues.
InstantGardener - you’ve hit the nail on the head re my problems with the Ax8 - finding a way to maintain a constant volume to my backstage FrFr. I’ve got it down pretty well with the stage, but still use a pedal board for effects - my hope is the Quad will eventually provide the best of all options in a light, powerful, and most importantly for me - numb nut proof easy UI.
2 Likes
Leveling your presets and scenes has nothing to do with the desire to have a dedicated, easy to access volume control for your wedge, so you don’t have to turn over your wedge to adjust your stage volume. That easy to access volume control should NOT change the FOH volume. Also, the most likely scenario is that the sound tech guy will hand you a female XLR cable to plug in, meaning you have the 1/4 out for your wedge (which is not a problem). But no drawing in the manual (as I recall) reflected that reality which is a little disconcerting to me.
1 Like
Yeah man, I hear ya. I think my suggestions for the rotary encoders during gig mode would fix that use case nicely. That coupled with some other suggestions in increasing efficiency with footswitches should turn out nicely- but even as a worst case / day-1 scenario, just swipe down on the screen and make those per-output level adjustments as needed.
1 Like
Let’s hope Neural read this Thread and have a brilliant, and speedy solution. Difficult to believe they haven’t read the forum posts on the FM3 release, or the manuals for the FM3 and Kemper to determine some of the ‘must haves’ and issues that were discovered post release.
The threads on volume control are pretty extensive on those sites; many from me in my throws of desperation and angst.
I’m still a believer for the Quad and in the capabilities of NeuralDSP - I’m just frustrated in the delay.
2 Likes
Yeah the waiting sucks, but with the right hardware in place - the software will come around in time and sew it all together. I ordered day-1 and was supposed to ship in september 
so I hear ya, its tough to be patient. Can’t help but feel like we’re finally right around the corner from release now though.
They def pay attention to these forums. They just have their hands full getting v1.0 ready to release it into the wild, so I don’t expect them to spend much effort talking about future items until they get that out of the way.
How community requests get integrated to their development plans will be interesting to see.
2 Likes
IllegalGardner - fully agree. I think at one time the SKA on my order was 21, dated the 10th of Jan, 2020, so like you I ordered on the announcement. Been a long time waiting, and nowadays I’m checking emails multiple times a day - waiting for final payment invoice.
Neural’s attention to detail in all their exisiting products gives me a level of comfort that the Quad will (ultimately) be no different, but it’s very important that they don’t stall the software updates in order to just reach hardware sales critical mass. User negative views (in my case) was the reason I didn’t pick up my FM3 option.
1 Like
Not sure i understand your concern about stalling software updates - maybe you can elaborate?
I think it looks straightforward - they’ve got the biggest team now since the company’s inception, with a separate squad on the cortex than the plugins. I think both teams continue straight ahead for foreseeable near future, with the plugins largely funding the cortex team as they refine it. Depending on how things go financially, they’ll break off some pieces to work towards the next hardware offering - probably a mini version but that’s down the road and beside the point. They’ve got to crank out a considerable amount of units to see ROI on something that’s taken considerable resources to develop, and the only way that happens is by removing the but’s that are bound to show up from early comparisons and reviews, by continually leveling up their software.
It seems possible / likely they will handle 3rd party capture transactions, start offering artist cortex add-on packs, and throw in deals on plugin ports - not to create ‘paywalls’, but to add some optional premium (but totally unnecessary) features to create add’l revenue steams that aid dev costs - ultimately adding the models and features needed to stand toe to toe with all the other cool kids.
I waited a year for the fm3 and it turned out i was more in love with the idea of it than what it actually was, and sold it - bugs aside. I think the most recent cortex delays are them learning from others mistakes and making damn sure its right before they cut it loose. That kind of restraint has gotta be painful financially and emotionally but if they get it right, it’ll pay off in spades.
3 Likes
Thanks Illegal Gardner, great post.
You have actually answered my concern that they may concentrate on rolling out the units and take their foot of the software issues. With two separate teams running my concerns regarding this issue would appear invalid.
Re future hardware, I’d love to see a floor pedal board. on the lines of the FC6 Then I’d keep the quad close to my (annoying) tweaking hands.
Anyone thought of a way to connect the FC6 to the Quad?
Fc6 is proprietary. Maybe one day neural makes their own controller pedal, but a separate midi pedal is totally doable day-one. There are tons of options out there, fcb1010 seems a pretty all-encompassing one.
Also keep in mind one day they may add that functionality to smartphone / tablet so you can keep cortex on the floor. I wouldnt hold my breath though, theyve got lots of heavy lifting to do first, but that would be fantastic
1 Like
Noted. I’ve had past issues with FCB1010’s manufacturer and tend to stay away from their products nowadays. I think Fractal missed the mark by making their floor controllers proprietary, as I for one would buy one if I could use it with the Quad. I’m doing some homework on the best alternative and have been given some models from posts in the Neural forum.
Maybe Al Grenadine, the FracPad creator will step in and design the ‘QuadPad’ -
1 Like
What the proprietary controllers bring to the table is much better integration than you get with a generic controller. That gap can close a bit with devices that have firmware tailored to a device but my experience with 3rd party controllers with the AxeFx (FCB, LiquidFoot, among others) was that they were not as clean to use.
I was utterly thrilled when I got my MFC-101 because the user experience was so much better.
1 Like
Totally agreed alec, and should neural ever make one, they can revisit things like scribble strips they may not have had the opportunity and / or cost fluff to get it in the base model.
Quad pad would work too, though i’d prefer a manufacturer one of course so it’s all baked in one app. Theres a ton of other midi controllers, and while yes you will not get feedback at the controller for what you’re stomping on - it’s a day one solution that’ll keep the cortex off the floor and yet still have all the functionality needed on the floor. I think i still have an old art one from back in the day i may experiment with…
1 Like
I’ll look forward to hearing how the experiment goes before I leap in and buy one, so please post your results.
1 Like
Sure thing. Though, midi is midi- if you see a controller thats got the features / switches you need - go for it, it’ll work.
1 Like
if I get a MIDI foot controller I’ll likely get the FCB1010… just because I had one before and I’m familiar with their setup… they’re built well… good price point… it has a couple expression pedals… and enough foot switches to dedicate a few to my X32 Rack Snippet changes.
Just raising a possible feature suggestion that may help with this. If NDSP worked into a future firmware update the ability assign a midi CC# to control the level of the specific outputs on the I/O page, it would mean users could introduce any number of midi controllers to control specific output volume independently of the master volume knob on the QC unit. I for one would be happy to get a small midi volume knob that would live on my board that could simply plug in to the usb port of the QC, and i would use it to adjust volume of the output i send to my onstage rig. I am unsure if under the day 1 firmware those levels can be assigned to a midi CC#