Posts by drew_fx

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Okay, so some thoughts... I'm lucky enough to own the Kemper, Helix, and now QC. I've owned the Axe FX II in the past as well. I have 5 multi-channel high-gainer valve heads, and a whole corner of pedals to boot.


    Ok....

    QC palm-mutes just seem more "real" to me than the Kemper, unfortunately. This is the overriding observation of my weekend. I REALLY noticed this in a band context. My palm mutes sat in the mix just like my valve amps do.

    I love my Kemper for a lot of things, but high-gain palm-mute riffing isn't really one of them. The Kemper has this low-mid flubb going on that can't really be dialed out, and there is a weird response where some profiles are under-hyped when doing palm mutes, and some are over-hyped. It can often sound akin to proximity effect when you put a microphone against a grille cloth. A lot of people question this observation, and of course they're free too, but time and time again it's the thing that stops me from playing my Kemper.

    The QC doesn't have this problem. Even if it sounds slightly different to the amps captured, it *feels* the same. And that's what is important.

    Despite my earlier comments about the neural captures being identical to the amp, they are not. But they're very close. The Kemper is very close too. There is a lot of subjectivity to this and a lot of perceptual differences, but to me the QC feels closer to my amp when I capture it than the Kemper.

    I didn't miss refining. At all. That part of the Kemper profiling process needs to be put out to pasture. It introduces needless subjectivity and complexity.

    I could definitely see Kemper users being annoyed by the QC. Not being able to change the definition of a capture, the pick attack, and not being able to turn down a high-gain capture to a super clean tone, and getting all of that lovely extra dynamic range... I can totally see Kemper owners really thinking that this is a backwards move for them. I don't much care for those things. They're very cool aspects of the Kemper, but they're not hugely important to my use case.

    The QC only gives you 24dB reduction, so a high-gain profile will only clean up so much. But it's more amp-like and so it felt more intuitive to use. The EQ is WAAAAAAYYYY less brutal than the one in the Kemper, feels smoother and not as drastic. So you never feel like you've totally ruined the tone.

    I thought that the reverbs and delays would be limiting on the QC. They're sooooooooo good on the Kemper. Really. Top class effects. They're pretty serviceable on the QC though, and they cut through the mix better than any of the reverbs or delays on the Helix. I like a delay to have a really long amount of echoes, with no difussion and no smearing. Helix can't do that. QC and Kemper can.

    The adaptive gate is very cool. The gate on the Kemper is best in class IMHO. Very tough to beat it, but QC does a good job.

    My QC preset was much simpler than my Helix presets on account of how little time I had to get them setup. I had to be up and running in 10 minutes, and so didn't have much time to get into the nitty gritty like I have done with my Helix. But it makes me think that doing a show with my Kemper actually wouldn't be the limiting thing I always thought it would be. I'm a bit of an effects junkie, and the limitations of the Kemper always put me off. But .... reckon it'd be fine.

    Helix tuner is pants. Kemper tuner is good. QC tuner is exceptional. Likewise with tempo readouts. QC tap tempo is great and accurate.

    Over the whole weekend, I didn't accidentally press a wrong footswitch at all. This surprises me, because I really thought it was going to be an issue, and would have returned the unit if it had turned out to be a major workflow killer.

    The touchscreen is brilliant I have to say. I was very skeptical about it. It works. It uses so many concepts that you are used to with your phone, that everything feels like second nature. You don't even have to read the manual. That is not true with the Kemper. 10 years after using Kempers, I still find the thing mega confusing, with crazy menus and 80's arcade controls that suck up more time than the operations deserve. I'm naming a preset... it should take less than 10 seconds!!

    So what didn't I enjoy??

    Setting up different parameters in scenes mode.... unless I'm dumb, you basically have to set the parameter in each scene. Let's say I have a default gain of 5.0, but I want one scene that is 3.0.... and then I decide, actually my default gain should be 4.0 .... I have to go through all the other scenes to set them to 4.0. Not sure there is any way around that. Helix has a cool thing where you press in the knob and turn it in order to assign a parameter to the scene selection, otherwise it's just global.

    I REALLY found myself wanting dB meters in order to balance the levels across my scenes. I was bringing in different amps and captures and found I had to do a lot of tweaking to get the levels. I'm used to being able to grab a knob on an amp, so this was more involved than it could be I reckon.

    Currently you're only able to send ONE midi program change per scene. This sucks. Needs improving ASAP imho. Anyone with a QC and the Stryfecta is going to be disappointed with the current midi implementation.

    The cloud stuff is confusing. Not intuitive at all when it comes to sharing presets and captures. Getting the damn things on the device took us ages and made us all feel like old men. We all work in the tech industry too, so we know what we're doing!! Not being able to share IR's.... okay, I understand why, but it sucks.

    Can't think of much else to put right now. I am certainly a fan. I've not made my mind up about selling my Kemper or my Helix yet. Time will tell. All three are great devices.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    So just got back to London. Went up to Oxford this weekend to play with the band.

    But this weekend threw me a bit of a curve ball. I took my Marshall amp and my Helix, because my plan was to switch the JVM by midi from the Helix, and run it how I always do. But since the QC arrived on Friday and we were leaving Friday evening, I decided to take it with me.

    So the JVM wouldn't respond to any midi commands, and I don't know why. I never tested it before hand. I spent ages trying to get it to work. Nothing to do with midi channel or anything like that. I think the amp is broken when it comes to midi.

    So in the end, I did the entire weekend on the QC, into the FX loop return on the JVM.

    All my effects and distortion came from the QC. No midi switching. Just using scenes mode on the thing. Two presets that I very very quickly rushed together.

    I used a Neural Capture of the Fryette Sig X for most of it. But I also took a capture of my JVM's OD1 red channel.

    Basically - cut a long story short... I loved it. I didn't miss having a full on valve amp setup at all the entire weekend, and I kept checking with a Seymour Duncan Powerstage as well, to make sure it wasn't just the Marshall power section I was loving.


    I'll post more, but I wanna collect my thoughts.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Still waiting for mine. Hopefully next week.

    The "vulgar display of power" thing is definitely an over-egged comment. It's powerful, sure. But it cannot add as many blocks as the Helix. This isn't too much of a disappointment to me, but I can see why people would be annoyed.

    For me, it all comes down to the neural capture, of which I am a big fan. Every time I use it (using a friends unit) I am impressed. Much more so than with my Kemper.

    We did compare captures of my VH4 to their actual model of the VH4, and the capture was superior in every way for us. It was actually a little disappointing to hear their model of it! But I guess this could be down to schematic differences, tube differences, etc etc.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    andreio23 None of the clips are clipping. Download them and throw them into a daw to a/b. I can even provide WAV files if you like.

    dB Cooper Thanks man. I'll post more later, got a few other amps here to profile and capture.

    In either case, I've been using my Kemper a lot the past week or so, and I do still love it. When my QC arrives no doubt there will be great things about it and not so great things, as with any piece of gear. I may even get an Axe III one day too!

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from dB Cooper

    176 (Kemper) compared to 142 (Quad Cortex) in blind tone and feel scores. Way to go, Kemper! I'm glad you introduced me to their channel. Seems like quality content.

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Two hours of listening to a ground loop?? Ugh... no thanks!

    Nobody should be using this video to demonstrate any differences or superiority between the two units. It's abysmal.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from Laimon

    Hearing somebody else's recording, maybe (but then again the same probably holds also for cleans and edge-of-breakup).

    But I've now had the QC for over 3 weeks and, I'm sorry, but the KPA wins hands down. It just sounds and feels much better. To be honest, so far the only thing I found to be better on the QC is the delays.

    My experience was 100% the exact opposite!

    I'm playing with the QC some more tomorrow. Gonna capture the rest of my amps. But the Kemper delays are amazing - much better than the QC imho!

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from V8guitar

    Do they? I'm out of date then as I know this is what happened years ago.

    I don't understand why you would pre-blend and it removes flex at mix down, especially these days with almost limitless tracks, seems so counter intuitive.

    I understand why amps are blended, but the whole point of multi track is that you do these things separately and blend in production. Its the other reason you add effects post recording unless essential because otherwise you can't correct or change it and we all know things sound very different when you add other sounds and instruments.

    Anyway, I'm absolutely an amateur in recording so I stand corrected.

    If it's good enough for Tool and Joe Baressi, it's good enough for me!

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from OneEng1

    I see your point of view and understand. For live applications, the Kemper just seems to have thought through how a real gig would need to be controlled. Having morph change multiple parameters at different rates through a single foot controller input as well as having a timed transition via a single button press simply "works" in a live setting where "reaching down to turn a knob or knobs" does not.

    Clearly there are 2 different usage models (live vs bedroom) that require different work-flows for optimal user experiences.

    Everyone's gigs are different. We don't all do the same things. I know a guy who uses the Axe FX II still, because it allows him to do amp morphing and effects morphing on a level that no other device gets him. He tried the Kemper and couldn't make it work.

    So I'm speaking from a live perspective here mostly; in a writing scenario, I'm happy to put up with most approaches.

    But for our live shows, I need slightly more flexibility than the Kemper+Remote, but I also need my setup to be simple and easy to put together. So a dedicated midi controller where I manually map all of the CC's to everything I want is a little too involved.

    Basically, morph is cool. I just wish I had more of them. Four morph parameters that I could assign to four expression pedals would probably do it; even though I only need 3 for most songs.

    The Kemper has ease of use down pat, but at the expense of flexibility and complexity. I have a Boss ES5 too, but it goes the other way; lot of complexity and flexibility, not easy to setup and actually not that trustworthy in a gigging situation. Likewise with the Morningstar midi controller I used to have.

    The Helix strikes the right balance between flexibility, complexity, and ease of use - when it comes to this control/performance aspect.

    I think the QC might be good for this too. Will have to wait and see.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from nightlight

    Ah, but this is actually only true if you use the Remote as a floor controller. I mean everyone has been demanding an automatic double tracker with the Kemper, I have already got one with midi.

    Basically, you can do anything with the Kemper that you can do with any other floor processor as far as assignments. You can even control things like the amp controls and panorama.

    Fine. But as I keep saying, it's all about workflow. The assign midi CC's to everything workflow isn't what I want either. I've been pretty clear about why I subjectively prefer the way the Helix works over the Kemper. It's complex enough to offer me a lot of choices, without requiring me to remember a ton of midi CC's and set up complex mappings. I can just grab a knob and twist it on the Helix, and get the variety I need.

    I like the Kemper + Remote combination, because they're easy to use. They're just not as flexible as the Helix. Going into midi land is going too far the other way. I think the Helix is the Goldilocks of the three approaches.

    QC is closer to the Helix experience too.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Pick909 That's cool, everyone is different. I'm not saying it's totally crap or unusable. It just isn't at the heirarchical level I like. It's definitely designed to be easy to use, but that ease costs some expressivity IMHO.

    Now... if there were 4 morph controllers, and you could assign each one to it's own expression pedal, and then each parameter got assigned to 1 of the 4 morph controllers.. we might be cooking with gas then!

    To me, the Helix is more flexible because I don't have to just rely on having one morph parameter. I can effectively have three of them - two expression pedals and then the selected snapshot.

    The Axe FX II/III feature-wise are the most advanced for controllability. But it comes at the cost of it being very involved and tricky to use. It's all a balancing act.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Maybe I just don't understand it well enough and I was overly harsh by calling it poor and I'm totally happy to accept it if that is the case. But on the Kemper it seems like you've got distinct destinations for the expression pedal inputs:

    Volume

    Pitch

    Wah

    Morph

    and that you cannot just assign them to any parameter that you want; you have to assign the expression pedal to the morph functionality, and then set the morph functionality up to change the parameters you want.

    This is distinctly different from having freely assignable expression pedals to parameters, and in some ways is easier to use and understand, but is also not quite as flexible.

    If I want one pedal to control one delay's feedback, and another pedal to control a different delay's reverse mix, and another pedal to control the reverb mix, and a final pedal to control the depth of a tremolo, and have individual control over all of these things.... Kemper wont give me that.

    It gives me a lot of control to be sure, but it's a different kind of workflow to what I'm using to from other devices, and I find it confusing and limiting.

    On Helix the way I run is I have 8 snapshots in one preset. Each snapshot controls a dozen or so parameters across 12 or so effects blocks. The built in expression pedal controls multiple blocks to create a nice washy delay oscillation effect that doesn't dominate or cloud my playing. I do this by controlling parameters on several delays, EQ, compressor, reverb, and a gain stage; all on a parallel path. The snapshots change my valve amp's channel at the same time; I have a variation of this preset that also changes the preset on my Timeline, Mobius, and BigSky too.

    The Kemper is much more narrow in it's control and automation than the Helix in my experience; simply based on the distinction that even though on Helix I have less expression pedal inputs, I can actually assign them to anything.

    I guess it comes down to the usecase - I don't jump from tone A to tone B like the Kemper offers in it's performance mode. I tend to have 8 core sounds for each song that I improvise with and play around. I'm sure you can do similar with the Kemper, but I find it a bit confusing and unwieldy.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    As doug says in the comments:

    Quote

    A few things to keep in mind: using captures with mic’d cabs should free up a lot resources. But sure, we are also working on optimizing what’s currently there in terms of resources as well as adding lighter options as well. Another item that will free up a lot of resources for extreme presets is an IR loader block as well as a single cab. The current implementation loads and interpolates between hundreds of IRs in each instance. It’s important to keep in mind that the hardware has a lot of CPU available, and that as it matures, the platform will improve in how efficiently these available resources are used.

    Now unusually I'm not worried about this. Because it's so small I can put it on a board with all my Strymons. If we were talking Kemper or Helix or Axe FX, I'd be more worried because they are bulkier and so require a more standalone approach.

    But I do hope they improve the CPU usage anyway, that would be great!

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Well I just got told by GuitarGuitar in the UK that I should have my QC either next week, or the week after. I'm quite up for re-profiling all of my amps and then neural capturing all of my amps and doing a/b comparisons.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from OneEng1

    Hi Drew,

    My comments on the live use come from the following:

    1. The Kemper has a more ergonomic layout of buttons for live use
    2. The Kemper has more buttons and therefore better functionality for the buttons it does have (ie more rigs accessible on a single layer along with more "on/off" items within each rig from the foot controller / Stage)
    3. (assumed) The Kemper foot controller and stage are less prone to breakage. This is based on the dual function of the buttons (also are knobs on QC) as well as the touch screen being more fragile than the high impact plexiglass cover over the Kemper LCD
    4. (assumed/heard it) The Kemper can change rigs very quickly and provide spill-over if desired on up to 5 performance rigs. Rumor is that changing "rigs" within the QC with fast change over is limited to the 4 parallel paths that can be turned on or off and that there is significant delay switching between performances/layers/whatever the QC calls it.
    5. The Kemper has superior output processing and control that is particularly important for monitoring/mixer feed live setups.
    6. Just a note on the person that mentioned they like the QC smaller format over their KPA Rack ..... I greatly prefer a rack unit and the Kemper foot controller to either the QC or the Kemper Stage. While I would love a "throw and go" Kemper solution some day that was smaller like the QC is, I hate the cable shuffle below my feet on stage. The Kemper FC has only a single cable that I have to route along with my mic cable and guitar cable. With respect to the guitar cable, it is a PITA to have your guitar cable routed to a box right below your feet. With the Kemper Rack, I can have the cable routed out behind me to where the Kemper Rack is located which keeps my foot area clear on stage (yes, I realize this is a disadvantage of the Kemper Stage as well ..... which is why I am still hoping for a Kemper "Mini" to be released as my "throw and go" or backup unit.
    7. The Kemper has been road tested in anger by thousands of people. Any issues in manufacturing (bad LED's anyone?) has long since been fixed (I have never had a problem with my KPA purchased in 2013) while the QC has not.
    8. Having physical controls on the floor is about as convenient as brushing your teeth while singing (again, I agree the KPA Stage also has this issue). With the Kemper Rack and toaster, having tube amp like physical controls at waist level or higher is much preferred.
    9. (Unknown) Daylight readability of the color LCD screen on the QC? Can someone snap a picture in direct sunlight that has one so we can see how it looks? I actually wish the KPA had one of those displays like the "paper white" on a Kindle. Man, those things ROCK on visibility in direct sun. I could care less about color for my foot controller. I need it to be visible in all settings I play.
    10. I greatly prefer the expensive part (my KPA Rack) be out of harms way from drunk dancers and their beer cups. Again, I understand that the Stage has this same concern. I would say that the huge vents on the sides of the QC look like a spill looking to happen IMO. I believe that even the KPA Stage is sealed and would likely fare better under a pitcher of beer accident than the QC. I know I keep hearing that people have never had this happen; however, I know why. I have taken up all of your accidents myself and left your odds lower ;). Nothing quite like finishing up the night with drying beer in your underwear ;).

    Anyway, that is my take on this. These are my reasons for saying that the KPA is a better tool for live use. While all of the KPA members are better than the QC IMO, the Rack and Toaster are particularly more suited.

    Some fair enough points.

    For me, I can count the number of times I've played in the day in the last 12 years on one hand - twice! The rest of the time, it's dark dingy rooms and clubs, or large enclosed stages. Sunlight isn't a factor for me, but my short-sightedness is. I try not to wear my glasses on stage because it looks goofy and stops the rocking out, so colour for me is a big thing - with the Helix, which I've used live for 4 years at this point (only for FX mind you) I can tell what's going on in my patches at a glance, without having to read anything.

    The drunk dancers thing has never been a concern for me; my crowds don't dance! :D

    I very rarely tweak parameters live, other than using my pre-programmed expression pedal setups. But if I do tweak anything, it'll be the amp itself, which as you point out is waist height. In those rare instances where I've wanted to do some kind of experimental pedalboard tweaking thing, I usually just bend over and grab the knobs. There's a fine line between that being musical and self indulgent though, so I try not to do it too much!

    There is not a significant delay when switching between scenes on the QC. It's the same as the Helix and Axe FX. There is a bit of a delay when switching between presets. I tend to design my presets so that I can do one whole song in a single preset, so I don't see that as something to worry about.

    There have been quite a few people who have come to their Kempers one day, booted it up, and got some dreaded OS warning dialog box, with no rhyme nor reason for it occurring. And then it goes away again, and they're left thinking wtf. I think this is as concerning as the lack of road-testing of the QC. But maybe the QC will completely fall apart in a live scenario, who knows. I doubt it, but we don't really know either way.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from drog

    So you would find it easier to press a button and then use the expression pedal, instead of just using an expression pedal already assigned ??‍♂️

    I don't have to press a button and then use an expression pedal - I can set it up however I would like.

    I'm usually not controlling the limited amount of things that the Kemper offers me. I'm controlling bands on an EQ, wet/dry on a delay and reverb, feedback on a delay, rate on a chorus, depth on a tremolo, etc etc etc. I get far more in-depth with it than the Kemper allows me, that's the basic issue.

    It's just a different way of working. I want to assign controls myself and do all the min+max settings and get tweaky with it. Kemper doesn't allow you to do that to the level that I want to.

    Also if I really want to, I can connect a midi capable expression pedal like the Source Audio one, and control a ton of stuff that way too. The lack of expression pedal inputs is not a dealbreaker for me. I have other options.