Can The Quad Cortex Really CAPTURE A Pedal?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 окт 2024
- One of the coolest features is the Quad Cortex Pedal Capture using the Neural Capture function of the Quad Cortex. I have never tried capturing a pedal before, so in today's video I captured 4 different pedals to see how well the Quad Cortex can copy the sound of these pedals.
🎸 20% OFF The Tone Course With Code "MIC101" At Checkout 🎸
rhettshullguit...
🎸 Complete Nashville Number System video course 🎸
rhettshullguit...
---Pedals In This Video---
Neural DSP Quad Cortex (affiliate link)
imp.i114863.ne...
JHS Morning Glory (affiliate link)
imp.i114863.ne...
Timmy MXR Version (affiliate link)
imp.i114863.ne...
Vertex Ultraphonix (affiliate link)
imp.i114863.ne...
------------
MY VIDEO COURSES:
The Complete Nashville Number System video course
rhettshullguit...
Check Out My Guitar Tone Course Here!
rhettshullguit...
------------MY PRESETS & PROFILES:
Line 6 HX Stomp Presets
www.rhettshull...
Line 6 Helix & Helix LT Presets
www.rhettshull...
Kemper Profiles
www.rhettshull...
Impulse Responses (Helix, Kemper, Iridium & AxeFx)
www.rhettshull...
------------
MY SECOND CHANNEL:
Rhett Shull Studio
/ @rhettshulltwo
MY DISCORD SERVER:
/ discord
DEACON KNIGHT (my band):
/ @deaconknight1939
------------
THE BACKSTAGE JOURNAL PODCAST:
(apple) podcasts.apple...
(spotify) open.spotify.c...
------------
SHIPPING ADDRESS:
5805 State Bridge Road
Suite G90
Johns Creek Ga
30097
------------
My Video Rig (affiliate links)
CAMERA:
-Sony A7III
amzn.to/2NDqJW2
LENSES:
-Sony 24-105mm f4
amzn.to/3svZuLZ
-Sigma 35mm f1.4
amzn.to/37M01S6
-Sigma 50mm f1.4
amzn.to/3dM4FDm
LIGHTS:
-Neewer LED Panel Bi Color
amzn.to/3kzkb73
SOUND:
-Sennheiser MKH 416 Shotgun Mic
imp.i114863.ne...
-Universal Audio Apollo X4
imp.i114863.ne...
-Zoom H6 Handy Recorder
imp.i114863.ne...
Pretty sure Neural has said the Quad Core isn't able to capture fuzz pedals right now.
You all prolly dont give a damn but does any of you know of a trick to get back into an Instagram account??
I was stupid forgot the login password. I appreciate any help you can offer me
@Emerson Fox instablaster ;)
Someone, maybe it was Rabea said that the instructions was to set the pedal with a light breakup when you’re doing the capture. Of course it might vary depending on pedal. Great vid though, keep it up
The tone bender has a much lower input impedance them the other pedals, you should try it to adjust the input impedance on the QC. Not sure about tone benders, but if they are like fuzz faces the impedance should be set at around 10K. That most definitely would help.
I thought the same thing. Putting primitive fuzz in a loop switcher with a buffer circuit has a similar problem.
Truly interesting. Something that can closely mimic a pedal sounds like a lot of possibilities to happen!
Yeah, a lot more “buying” pedals off Reverb and returning them because they were “damaged in shipping” lol.
I'm a fervent modeler user, when you have to move to rehearsal or on the road, nothing beats it (Yes, I hate heavy lifting...).
This capture feature looks awesome, as long as it does not destroys pedal makers...
it definitely sounds like the capture lacks a bit of the low mids but its very minimal and still amazing, I want one !
Your tone Bender just brought a tear to my eye...that thing really is amazing sounding w/those P-90’s.
You're right about the way it captured the Tone Bender. The dynamics of it were really different. On the bright side though, now you have an effect that you didn't have before which could inspire something else. I think that's one of the most exciting things about this unit. Not what you can copy but what new things you can create even if it's kinda by accident. Maybe next time, try deliberately screwing it up and see what comes out.
That Tone Bender's tone is absolutely outrageous. Wow. The captured version of it isn't even close, but I'm not surprised - it doesn't seem to capture the glitches so well.
Not fault of Quad cortex though, they clearly stated that tone capture feature works for overdrive, boost and distortion pedals, that they are doing their best to be able to capture fuzz as good as overdrives soon
@@shakespeariancopy3053 oh absolutely. It does a stunning job of capturing so much.
I bet the Cortex is filtering out the glitches as errors.
Pedal sounded great, QC not even close. Based on this video I would not spend the money on a QC, I'd buy the pedal
@@HiredGoonage Um, the QC isn't competing with the pedal -- it does a little more.
If theres a Tone Bender in the thumbnail, I'M IN!
Same!
Same
!emaS
Me too
Yup.
Wow the tonebender really woke the gary clark jr. in you, didn’t it? Love that sound. I’m currently waiting on my Quad Cortex. I’m kinda hoping that a community of captured will evolve over time, just like the kemper community. cheers.
Being a test engineer I would've preferred the pedals to be in the loop during the comparison. Not that this is apples to oranges test but it's a little red delicious to granny smith. Just saying variables could've been minimized a bit more. In my experience my fuzz face loves being before helix but hates being in the loop. Maybe the tone bender would sound the same in the loop as the capture? Who knows, I'm being picky. Great video.
Really? I’ve been putting an aggressive overdrive in the loop for better feel and sound. It would make it easier to just plug it in the front. I can’t see what I’m doing with the rack. I have to feel my way around the way I have it set up. If this feels better than the helix and Kemper I’m going to eventually get it. At the end of the day I love a great tube amp and real
pedals and I play for hrs. With modelers I tweak for most of the time. Except the Yamaha 100hd double modeler. They bought line6 it’s simple. It feels and sounds great. Plug in and play.
@@kcussrebutuemos4815 I have other overdrives that sound great in the loop but fuzz's are very fickle creatures.
Didn’t help that he changed guitars either
Thanks Rhett! I've never owned a modeler, but have decided that the quad cortex will be my jumping off point. The user interface was the tipping point, so hopefully it's not a huge leap. Anything I can learn while I wait is super helpful.
Geesus... that Tone Bender pedal sounds ungodly amazing! Forget the Quad Core capture review... man what a sound!
Yeah, the pick attack on the tone bender is completely different. On the pedal it almost has like a swell before hitting the note, and in the neural capture it breaks instantly
Guys at Quad Cortex stated that fuzz capture was not ready yet
He should have tried a compressor in the front, fast attack medium release, might do the trick.
In any Quad Cortex capture demo video I've listened to so far, the capture always had more presence.
I believe the quad cortex did exactly what it was supposed to. It would be ludicrous to believe that it could replace all your favorite reverbs, delays, choruses etc. You can’t even put distortions into the equation since it’s just too much information. Every frequency is going to react differently and all a modelling software can do is recognize paterns. As guitarists we get wrapped up in what tone is just right when, really, nobody else is going to notice the finer nuances of your spring reverb or your klon. Don’t get lost in the sauce
Pretty much where I'm at after 30 years of playing. I'm amazed by and love this kind of gear, but one instance of each fx is enough when you play for people 😁
It becomes a problem when players blind buy over the internet based of Rhetts tacid endorsement. What i believe I witnessed, is that Rhetts fingers played differently when he was plugged into the real box. So yeah, if you were to pluck an E, even if the notes sound identical through both devices, if you can't feel it, then thats that.
@@jameshoover492 I think good players instinctively modify their playing to adapt to whatever they're playing through in a way they're not even consciously aware of.
With the Kemper I used to own, I found that I liked the profile I made better than the real thing in some ways.
There seemed to be less clutter and floor noise, and much better clarity in the profile.
It's almost like it organizes and cleans up all the frequencies in the sound.
Neural: Capture doesn’t support fuzzes at this point.
Rhett: Captures fuzz and spends more time talking about how it didn’t work so well than talking about pedals that are supported. 😆
Exactly. No capture something that might let us see what the thing can actually do ( my choice would be a Conspiracy Theory which I'd be impressed if Neural captured accurately). For click's sake we get a fail/gripe about about something the company says it can't do.
Yeah thought that was a bit of a waste of time trying to capture a fuzz
@@ian2lorimer There's value in probing the limits of a system.
i'm surprised how good the QC is right now and i'm sure it'll be better in the future with new software updates and stuff, but i'm even more surprised at the moment with how well it takes pedals, there were some delicious tones coming from that amp capture + those overdrives and the tone bender.
My sense with this is like much of the other modelling stuff: what we might hear in person or in a “shootout,” no one in a recorded or even live setting will be able to tell the difference. That said, most of us are playing for ourselves so...that’s who to please! Edit: saw typo, tried to fight it
Fuzzes are pretty hard to model. They are one of the last real problems but some companies do a lot better than others. The axe fxs are really good.
But yeah, judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree. They literally state that fuzzes dont work yet with the profiling. So why do it and then complain that it isnt close? They know, its not implemented.
Thats like complaining that a car doesnt go very fast before you have put the wheels on it.
that's basically it, no one needs amp+cab+mics+expensive pedalboards or wtv for a live setup, no one will notice the difference, and the logistics are a lot better
@@ricardogdnb No, but it is fun! And fun's the main thing, right?
@@Amish_Trivedi it depends. for some it's about making money and less overhead costs with gear means more profit at the end of the gig
@@ricardogdnb Completely fair!
Haven't watched the full video yet but the Morning Glory and Timmy are the exact pedals I plan on capturing when my QC arrives! They make an awesome combo for Worship Guitar tones :) Now to continue watching and see how well they turn out lol
That tone bender is gnarly. I love the compression and bloom!
Thank you for the Nashville Numbering System tuition. I am so lazy but I am ona roll and it has sunk in. I sort of understood anyway but there was a lot of information that has kicked me into approaching guitar like I did when I first picked it up. Top Tuition.
Why didn’t you mess with the gain setting once instead of only using the volume knob?
Yeah thats what I was thinking.....I was shouting at the telly...."the gain isn't matching the pedal" there's a gain knob on the QC. And why try and capture a fuzz when Nueral have said it doesn't do fuzz.
Love Rhett but this video just didn't sit right.
You know, I will say that they were close ish. In detail on a RUclips video I hear definite differences. In a live mix nobody will tell a difference. They sound good on their own right I’d conclude with. Great video!
Excellent lineup of pedals! I’ve been wondering about some of these pedals myself. Can’t wait to get a Quad Cortex!
I am old school, and when I love the nuances of a pedal like your fuzz, no modeler today will be able to replace it, and if I was recording a song I'd want to hear those nuances. However if you are a gigging musician, WOW what a power house 🏠 this unit is!
99% of your viewers are living their plan b (or c) every day. Great video as always.
I think I am somewhere in the middle of the alphabet myself..
i am so excited for this feature for when mine shows up. only thing i'm not sure of at least in the video since you didn't show it is that maybe you were running your levels too hot? Watching some of the other videos like Rabea over on Anderton's, they set levels and consistently the pedals captured with slightly less gain and treble. But even running hot, with some minor tweaking you generally get them there. Just seems like goosing them a little less you can get even closer. Really looking forward to capturing my Lightspeed and my Petty John Predrive. Also gotta say, the tone bender caputre wasn't bad. For something they are flat out saying they can't really capture great at the moment, it already does a decent job so it's going to be interesting where they get down the line in regards to things like fuzzes. And it sounds like they want to eventually be able to capture other types of pedals like modulation and time based stuff in the future. For a straight out the gate, They are looking like they are coming out with a pretty good jumping off point as a product.
Hi Rhett,
Do you feel like the Quad Cortex is miles ahead of the competition, or do you think they have just tailored their product to a specific niche? In other words, are they just the new kids on the block, offering great tones but not really miles ahead, or is it a real game changer? I'd love to hear your opinion. Cheers
Gotta love a MK1 Tone Bender! It's truly amazing how far digital technology has come. So tasty playing there.
Rhett does another pro job of what the device can/can't do. He's got a nice even temperament for the video format that is quite refreshing! Also, Right On using HIWATT!!
Thanks for the demo Rhett! The Cortex seems to have a lot of potential, but your face speaks volumes compared to when i see you playing the real amps and pedals. Thanks a bunch for the honesty! I am sure the quad cortex will improve over time, but for now i don't see anything being able to replace the real amps/pedals yet. And then there's the feel thing that we watchers don't feel, but that is surely different on the real amps i assume.
The reason that you were getting too much low end with your usual settings on the Timmy is a product of the Les Paul. I had the same experience. I switched to an SG and it solved the problem. Les Pauls, especially chambered models, have a lot of low end when recording.
That Tone Bender is a Beast of a Fuzz, can't get any better than that.
In fact that's a piece of art that produces a sound that makes you wanna play 24\7.
Any chance of an updated demo of the built-in tones/effects with the latest firmware revision?
(especially since some issues you pointed out have been fixed)
I liked the quad's morning glory capture more than the the actual one lol. The timmy was really really close. The tonebender capture sounded great, but it didn't have the bloom of the pedal. I liked the extra brightness though.
I am on a budget for sure so I always find it interesting on gear that allows you to "carry" more sounds in less space. Thanks Rhett for the vid
the amp in the box pedal sounded the best because it doesn't rely on the interplay between the first stage of the amp and the pedal like the others do. Not to mention that this was pedal -> modeled hiwatt. Except for the Mk1 fuzz, the others were convincing enough that you could only bring your quad cortex to a gig and no one would know the difference (except you! as other people have mentioned)
Neural have already said that it doesn’t do fuzzes well... yet. I think all the other pedals were great. Think about it from the point of view of someone who doesn’t own all this gear and cannot compare it side to side.... you’d never know which is the real pedal. I think this is a great tool for the home studio guy. The only thing I’m concerned about is your comments on the last vid about the delays and verbs being ordinary; that sucks. Hopefully they’ll improve over time. Still, I’m looking forward to getting mine even for the amp, pedal tones and captures.
Fun fact: the Timmy is called that because of Monty Python.
Tis merely a scratch
There are some who call me... Tim?
Haha, the black knight?
Fake News😊
The Timmy Williams interview! Brilliant!
So is the Quad Cortex basically capturing IRs from the devices directly? Does it read the "circuitry" of the target pedal and then duplicate that in its own hardware? Are you supposed to start with setting the pedal up exactly the way you like it, or should it be set to everything set min/mid/max level and then capturing it? It would be interesting to see if you could capture each dial/knob specifically as well as the "master" circuit and then meld them together into a single image.
Hi @Rhett i have the quad cortex and I am following you, but I cant see you share Any presets or captures, can you please upload them. :)
Seems to be lots of buzz for each quad cortex that there wasn’t on the pedals
I thought that too.
Pete Thorn talked about how an isolation transformer was needed for some captures. The process of capturing sound has been simplified for neophytes like us, but it's not a magic device yet 😁
I think the captures sound better in most examples. Less muss more crisp but no ice pick in the ear effect!
12:29 That face ! 😁 pure joy .
I feel you Bro ✌🏼
Great video dude, just out of interest....can the QC capture synth pedals, like the Boss SY-200?
So..., Rhett, I can conclude that with your latest IG Stories and that Moog shirt, that there is going to be a Synth video soon.
WOOHOOOOOOO!! YESSSSS! SYNTHSSSS!
Oh Lordy lord pleaseeee!
Great stuff, Rhett, thank you for this one!
hello rhett, is it the same tone bender that you bought at Macaris, is it an original or a reissue ? i'm looking to buy it but i want to be sure that the reissu is as good as the original :)
The quad cortex doesn't allow you to make horrible fuzz captures. That's just fantastic.
Don't say that too loud, I think the guy paid half the price of the cortex for that sound 😂
@@HeadbangoO bro I still can't believe a one effect, brand new guitar pedal can cost that ammount.
I haven't played with a Neural DSP myself, but I'd be intrigued to try in on things that it's not supposed to do a good job at modeling, just to see if something new and weird and interesting pops out.
Did you auto-set the levels? It feels like the level was off by a lot more than other videos where capture was demonstrated.
Kinda seems like hes got no idea what hes doing.. not a great video. Would love to see some videos with somebody that puts a little thought process into what they are doing
@@jamesc178 agree....the gain knob is there to compensate. No use saying the gain doesn't match the pedal and then never ajusting the gain knob on the QC. I'd be pissed if I was Neural. Not offence to Rhett but this video seemed like he didn't really follow the best way to get the best capture out of the pedal. All a bit half arsed.
That tonebender is too Cool. For when it came out, it is just astonishing.
Awesome vid as always Rhett! How well do you think the QC would accurately capture rack compressors and preamps? Having a collection of rack gear in a captured form for live performance sounds exciting.
I'm at ten minutes in, (Timmy capture adjustments) and so far Analog is winning.
No contest. I'm at 11 min, and to my ears the Quad Core isn't even on my radar.
While the captures don't sound exactly like the pedals, they certainly get the flavour so you're in the ballpark to create some cool tones.
The Timmy is the greatest pedal of all time. So, so good. And the fact that MXR and Paul made that deal just makes it even better. Makes it possible for folks who can't get one like Rhetts.
Rhett, can you explain the Quad Cortex capture controls? Are they essentially adding a 3-band eq and gain/clipping block as a way to adjust the captured snapshot? Can you move the EQ before or after the capture? How does adjusting these controls compare to adjusting similar drive/tone controls on the actual pedals? Are they similar?
Super helpful, could the Quad Cortex capture my 1966 Ampeg FlipTop, 1971 Acosutic 360/361 and 1968 Drip Edge Bassman? (and emulate the cabinets?
Can not copy fuzz pedal. My favorite pedal is bug muff rams head. Will they continue to develop neural capture for QC. If yes QC is best option for me. Anyway probably i will download other users captures only want to capture rams head but neural capture not good for fuzz pedals. Thanks for video.
Definitely amazing. That being said, the Quad Cortex definitely has that typical harsh digital distortion fizz. Nothing a little eq couldn't help though
Do you think if the gain was constantly too high do you think you had it set wrong while capturing?
Excellent Rhett.. I do love tones....
Am I missing something here. The gain doesn't match the pedal and he ajusts the volume on the QC. Can you not ajust the gain knob on the QC? Is that not why it has a gain ajustment on the QC.
Excuse the stupid question if I'm just not getting it.
Rhett, is there a metering option you can employ to evaluate levels? Once you have a sound you like on the analog pedal when going thru your amp, remove the amp or all other FX and see where it’s level is metering without anything else in the chain. Then you can compare with the captured sound to ensure the two are metering at the same overall level. Then, reset the chain with the amps and such and you should have a more apples to apples comparison. Hope that makes sense.
How good the Cortex is? definitely better than my Digitech RP150 I still use.
Is this Napster for pedals? If I’m Josh Scott etc. aren’t I annoyed/upset that people are copying and sharing my pedal tones for free? Is that the wrong way to think about it?
The problem with high end technology of our time is that full resolution doesn't do a real justice capturing vintage equipment warm. The modern direct stuff/capture/profile is always has too much presence and lack of low mids compare that what we used to back then. The high resolution frequency today is not fit to vintage frequencies which was less probably around high cut in the 6K. Sometimes less is more.
The recently added "MK3 Silicon Fuzz" is a really great sounding fuzz! Leagues ahead of any other fuzz tone on the QC imo.
My dream ?
A Quad Cortex, two Headrush monitors, and one month time for capturing the very best boost, overdrive and distortion pedals.
I think the problem with many of these " modelers " that have the matching feature, is that they only look at a small percentage of what is actually going on. I feel most spend too much time trying to get the frequency response the same as opposed to the gain structure. What you end up with is a scenario where it's what goes out is an approximation of what goes in. We knew that anyway, but where it spends its time learning what it's copying is where it falls short.
I think it works really well, and is great if you want a snapshot of a pedal at specific settings. However, a proper model should allow you to adjust virtual knobs as if you had the real pedal in front of you, and this probably works better for my workflow.
sorry if this is a complete noob question, but what about capturing a room? Like, say you encounter some room, idk, a castle, that has an enormous sound and maybe you could take a speaker and a microphone (colors the sound obviously) and have the Quad Cortex think it's a reverb pedal and then you have the sound of that room (sort of) on the go. Or I'm really stupid and this kinda thing has existed for a long time.
I think your thinking of a type of reverb in itself !
If you use your QC as an amp, and you run your Tonebender in front of it, does it sound good, or does it sound like when you do that with a Kemper? Asking for a friend. ;-)
Great video, Rhett. I would love to see you run the captured pedals back into the real amp. I plan to sometimes use my QC in front of my tube amp (no cab or amp from the QC) and it would be great to see if the QCs captured amp and captured pedals compare to the captured pedals in front of the real amp (and indeed the real pedals into the real amp).
Are you sensitive to latency? Does this thing feel like a laggy plugin or an actual tube amp that responds immediately?
At this point, you realistically don't have to worry about latency anymore. I have the line 6 Firehawk (which is basically a shitty version of the helix which is way cheaper) and even then I feel no latency on it at all. Engineers are now trying to get the feel indistinguishable from a tube amp now since latency is a nonissue.
I've wondered about this too. Things with an ADC-digital-processing-DAC signal path cannot have instant response, but they've gotten quite short. Pete Thorn in a recent live video mentioned one of these fancy tools (probably this same Quad Cortex thing everyone's talking about) as having 2 milliseconds latency. That's like the time sound travels two feet, it's like moving your amp two feet further away. I don't know of anyone who can hear that. Of course if you chain these things together the delay adds up, but they're allegedly good enough you'd never want/need to use more than one at a time.
great video Rhett, Neural has mentioned at the present it struggles with Fuzz, something to do w impedance
just for fun , try maybe changing that input impedance for that one preset with the fuzz capture and see if that feel and squishy compression comes back somewhat
Can’t wait to get this thing. Hoping it comes next month!
You cannot capture a classic Tone Bender or a classic Fuzz. The fuzz NEEDS a, high impedence signal, the circuit is complete only with high impedance pickups. The signal used to model the pedal (or an amp) is a low impedance signal, so the fuzz works in a really different way, the response under the fingers, the compression, the glitches, all another thing.
The pedals have some type of "width" in the midrange that I don't feel is captured by the QC. And more importantly, I would guess the actual feel isn't quite the same as having the pedal in front. But, pretty close! Great vid as always!
Since it's been pretty much established that modeling Fuzz boxes are not one of its strengths. As of yet. With all the amps and overdrives that can be captured along with the included models and its undeniable sound quality, I think it is a complete game-changer. I'm definitely gonna get one. As new updates and upgrades( which is what Neural DSP is promising) come out, it would be like Christmas for guitarists and bassists much more frequently than once a year.
People with musical instrument manufacturer brand t-shirts are not interested buying actual clothes.
Love it! :D
That’s what guitarists love to wear. Guitar tshirts. At least that’s all I wear.
The reason for the higher output and saturation on the capture might be that the pinknoise while capturing has a very high output. If that's true you could try to compensate for that by dialing in a tone on the amp you want to capture, then roll of the preamp or poweramp gain (however it's called on the amp and depending on what kind of distortion you want) a little bit and then capture it. Same could work with pedals. I don't know if i am right or not, but i would be interested in finding out.
I know that the quad cortex can't do the thing the tone bender does, but as a standalone tone it sounds really fucking good.
If it can capture pedals, could it capture sounds like off a CD, or guitar audio sound from a song? I’m really a stomp pedal guy & minimum pedal. I usually just give a little boost from in front of great amps. So, you could just borrow a pedal & copy it - no need to buy various pedals just capture!
Thanks Rhett keep up the great videos!
I’m really a stomp pedal guy & minimum pedal.thumbs up
Nope, it needs to run its own signal through the pedal to capture it so you couldn’t capture audio like that. But yeah, you could totally borrow a pedal and capture it.
@@almightytreegod What does it capture,the circuit? I call my local pedal builder 😂🔥🤘
@@schipbreukeling3 it plays wide variety of sounds into the input, “listens” to the output. Figures out the difference between the input and the output and then applies this “difference” to your guitar sound
@@latchodives no that looks too much like my shrink, i'm gone
Thanks Rhett ⚓️
Every tool has it's place. There are 3 reasons to buy gear. 1.)It inspires you(new song comes out or how you play). 2.)It makes the job easier. 3.) You think its pretty(always wanted one). I see modelers as the perfect tool to make the job easier...once you dial it in.
I don't gig for a living. When I jam or gig, I want gear that inspires me, that I really enjoy playing, it's not a job. I tried the modeler thing and it wasn't for me. That said, I still think they are great tools, and they are only getting better.
Hi @Rhett this is without a doubt the most exciting feature for me, to capture pedals on my quad cortex
I have spend SO much time on pedals and do also love fuzz so much. So this video was very interesting. I cant wait to try your capture on my own Quad cortex. I am very curious though. did you adjust the level) just before the it clipped and you presses capture , i saw Rabea did this. Loved the video btw!! and hope you are making a part two or three of this pedal capture. I think both the timmy, morning glory was very close thank you for sharing!
Someone help me out with something I'm not quite understanding: This doesn't capture the "entirety" of a pedal as much as it captures "a pedal at it's current settings," is that correct?
Yes.
@@matthewharrison7868 while that has it’s drawbacks, it also makes your tone way more consistent and easy to get right
Is the use of quad cortex itself without having other pedals, cabs or amps to capture worth it? Would you just use other multieffects pedals rather than QC?
What do you recommend? -> QC without adding anything else VS. Pod Go without using anything else
I think it would be really interesting if Neural DSP provided a way to blend the internal parameter sets created for different models, to create entirely new kind of sounds.
I'd really like to see how this handles pedals other than overdrive / distortion / fuzz. Any chance we might see how it handles Reverb, Delay, Modulation, etc?
At the moment it doesn't.
Something I've discovered is that octave fuzzes confuse the hell out of it, I guess because they fold the waveform in a kind of weird way and can create strange intermodulation artefacts as a result. This may explain why there's no octave fuzz module on the QC - the QC simply can't do octave fuzz, which is pretty annoying, as it's kind of my bread and butter.
Surely if you profile anything if it doesn’t a/b directly it hasn’t captured it correctly?
I’m a Helix user and I will call this very impressive.
The QC seemed to be able to achieve the character of the pedal you were capturing. But there were the details - too much volume, too much gain, tweak the treble, whatever. This whole capture thing seems to be something that wouldn't interest me much. When you capture an amp/pedal that only has volume and tone, does the captured model have only volume and tone? And do the controls have the same range as on the real amp/pedal? I would want the same controls (pots, switches, etc.) and I don't imagine that capture can accommodate that (correct me if I am wrong). This is where good modeling is more inline with what I would want. They don't just model the tone with a certain set of settings - they model the controls too, so you can make adjustments in the same way you would on the real device. I never thought I would go with modeling, so me saying that capture doesn't appeal to me may be temporary too, but that's how I feel at the moment.
That tone bender is god dude.
Hey @RhettShull any advise on a power amp to use with the QC? I have powered monitors, but I don't really like 'feel' I get from them. Looking for a power amp to a 'real' guitar cab. Any one?