Kev

3 hours ago, MrDinsdale said:

 

I've been having a play with running some drives into the QC fx loop (before the Science Mother).

 

Most of these can easily be swapped for captures, I've already got a couple captured reasonably well. The Black Math is a spluttery monster of a fuzz and probably won't capture well. Is anyone using a fuzz in the fx loop or up front of the QC?

 

I've dipped the send level to -4.5db for unity gain, which made the pedals instantly respond in a more predictable way.

It's a quite odd bug that Neural have sort of acknowledged and implied it'll be "fixed" but this goes back many, many updates, but yes, the send gain for the loops needs to be reduced by about 4.5db for unity, and I think technically the return also needs to come down 0.1db I think someone detected 😅

No changes, just a fancier couple of photos  

Bump

Still, £95 more than a Future Impact V4 as a point of reference, does seem a tad pricey??  Would love to spend some time with one though.

Can't see the first, but the 2nd is wild for a Pro...

10 minutes ago, Quatschmacher said:

Thanks for being the first to venture a guess. Curious as to what pushed you to that choice; do tell. That recording was done before I better matched the EQ, as it was non-functional at that point. I think they are even closer now. The only difference was a slight difference in envelope response at different dynamics, mostly in the decay time. Sadly I don’t have the MuTron any more to do a new more accurate comparison. 

Its the subtleties of how the envelope sounds like it is responding to your playing, it feels more natural in the first half...but quite pronounced as well, so it could easily be a digital simulation of that subtlety 😅

41 minutes ago, Quatschmacher said:

I posted this elsewhere a while ago but couldn't say what it was. Here's Artifakt and Mutron Microtron IV side by side; can you tell which is which?

That's impressive.

I'll stick my neck out and say the Mutron was first, but very good.  Its a wonder Source Audio don't go down a proper multi effects processor route, as they seem to nail a lot of stuff.

1 hour ago, lidl e said:

This is cool

 

I can't believe this exists 😅

2 hours ago, acroxixo said:

I have this IR Hartke XL410

I don’t know if I’m sending this the right way 😆

 

Unorthodox way of sharing an IR, but can confirm it works!  

Been a user of Tidal ever since they started charging the same as Spotify but for lossless music.  No brainer, really!

I've trialed Apple Music a few times but I just prefer Tidal's interface.

3 hours ago, TheGreek said:

 

Not something I'm in favour of - I'm trying to downsize (not very successfully TBH) and the Wanted forum has been a useful outlet. I feel that I'm being punished even though I've done nothing wrong.

Best way to downsize (successfully) is to get things listed in the classifieds, surely?  

39 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

 

Maybe I didn't explain it properly , but AFAICS a "capture" is still just a single state of the captured device with the controls at fixed positions at the moment of capture. It's all very well having gain and 3 band EQ embedded into that capture, but are these fixed in their actions or can they be altered to accurately duplicate any gain and EQ controls that might be on the captured device?

 

I suspect that I'm not the sort of user this facility is aimed at. I've just had a look at what is "built-in" to my modelling device (Helix) and there are 43 distortion "pedals" plus over 100 more distortion/gain effects built in the various amp models. That's more than enough for me. If I can find the sounds that I want from these options then there is something very wrong with me. I also don't believe that only one device can produce the perfect sound for me, and I gave up "chasing sounds" in the early 80s. Mostly when I change my gear it's because the new version does what I want quicker or is in a smaller/lighter form factor, or integrates better with the other gear the band uses. If I can get exactly the same sounds out of the new device, that's great, but if I can't then I'm sure that I will be able to find something that does the same job in the context of the band sound, and that's the important thing for me, not how close it sounds to a particular old device.

Yes that is right, the gain control is, as I understand it, simply raising and lowering the input signal going into the capture, and the 3 band EQ is at fixed frequencies, at least for the time being.  I envisage that will change in a future development as the tech is all there.  Last night I actually did some captures of a Darkglass Alpha Omega pedal, went a little overboard and did 16 altogether covering various switch positions and gain/mod positions, captures are perfect, and I'm fairly confident now that I can get any useable sound that pedal is capable of getting through a mix of using one of those captures and other bits and bobs on the QC as appropriate.  A £330 pedal cloned just like that, would only take 4 or 5 pedals captured like that and the value of the QC is paid for!

But that aside, the QC of course has a range of full drive/fuzz models, guitar and bass, and loads of amps to play with as well. Not as much as the Helix of course, but relatively speaking this is still a new product and ever expanding.  I can't imagine ever hearing or wanting a drive sound and not being able to recreate it on the QC by one way or another.  Its the other stuff the QC needs to improve at, modulations, delays, anything remotely synthy etc.

2 hours ago, BigRedX said:

To me it seems very similar to trying to capture the sounds of a synthesiser using samples. You'll get each individual capture pretty much spot on but you'll never be able to get every nuance and setting, and for me a "generic" EQ and drive models that have complete variation on all the controls is far more useful than a handful of super-realistic snapshots of a device, as I can guarantee that once I no longer have access to the original I'll be needing a capture that I didn't make. I know this from experience of spending the best part of a day sampling a set of Simmons SDSV modules before selling them. Within a month I wanted sounds that at the time I hadn't thought to sample because I didn't think I'd need them.

I'm not sure you're fully understanding what a capture is and how it works, as it really isn't anything like a sampler?  You're capturing a device set up in a certain way, the Quad Cortex learns how to create that sound, and the capture reacts to your playing in the same way the real thing would, with embedded gain controls and 3 band EQ controls (with any number of effect blocks before and after) that are pretty functional in moderation.  I can't imagine ever needing to capture a device in so many different settings that it becomes cumbersome. How often do you dramatically change pedal settings?  Perhaps i'm alone with this, but I very rarely mess once I've found a particular sound I like, and the QC is more than capable of doing slight adjustments when needed.

Can you give a more specific example of a particular device you want to capture, and how you may wish to change this sound in the future?

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

 

Unless I'm mistaken it's just a snapshot of a single setting of the device you are capturing and how it reacts to whatever you happen to playing during the capture? A lot of sound processing devices will react quite differently depending on what the input signal is doing, whether it is how hard you are playing or whether you are playing single notes, simple or complex chords. I see a lot of the "how to" guides recommend playing 1st position chords (for guitar at least) as hard as possible, but surely that will only result in a capture for full chords played hard?

 

I think the people who wrote those guides haven't touched a Quad Cortex!

You don't get involved with the capture process at all.  The QC sends all kinds of waverforms into the pedal to "machine learn" how it changes the input signal to create the output.  Provided the device is gain related, with no time based or otherwise oddities in the circuit, the results are borderline perfect.  I captured all my Darkglass pedals before moving them on and the captures were completely indistinguishable from the real thing (and the QC lets you AB afterwards).

The only "flaw" in the capture system is the capturer tends to set up the pedal based on how it responds to their instrument, so the more complex the pedal is, the more likely it is any individual capture may be tailored to a certain bass or a certain setup.  Not an issue if the capturer takes captures without dialing it in first like that.

Mad this hasn't sold yet, seems the cheapest online at the mo by some way!

GLWTS

9 minutes ago, Quatschmacher said:

Portamento is a MIDI-only feature. (I have suggested a slewing function for the oscillators when triggering via audio that uses the portamento slider’s position. It is being considered.)
 

If you play stuff like hammer-ons you get a legato behaviour (pitch change without an envelope retrigger).

The Portamento on the Squeezer really helps the tracking out at moderate settings, removes glitches and give a real subtle glide when it doesn't immediately lock on, works a treat, especially when the Squeezer's tracking is less than optimal compared to the FI! 😅  Gets a bit silly on higher settings though, especially on the attack!  Full fretboard slides all over the place 😁

48 minutes ago, Quatschmacher said:

Sort of. You’re not required to play really short notes, rather just make sure the first note has been cut dead immediately before the second note is struck. The space between the notes should be as short as possible though. Basically there should be no overlapping notes. There’s not much to it other than that. 

Does the FI have any portamento function to help deal with continuous play without notable glitching?

2 minutes ago, Quatschmacher said:

I haven’t seen a single person who’s bought one complaining. They all seem to very much enjoying making music with their pedal and singing its praises. 

I understand why you're defensive over it for obvious reason, but looking it objectively, do you honestly see no issue with the pricing strategy??

Have to say, the business side of Panda seems a little chaotic.  What is this sale for?? I feel they're at real risk of irritating a lot of their customers, considering this, DV247 prices, presale prices, the bundle price from less than a week ago...

Little update on mine.  Cannot express how GOOD the OC-2 and OS sound going into some Chorus on the Quad Cortex, learning to love bass synth again 😁

Adore this bass!  What are those extra holes on the front of the headstock from??

6 hours ago, Sparky Mark said:

Whenever I've bought anything from music retailers (Andy Baxter, Bass Direct, The Gallery, PMT, etc., etc.) I've always phoned them to confirm the deal, availability and offer a deposit to secure the item(s). I'd never leave it to email.

Whilst good advice often given for this kind of thing, its no excuse to just ignore emails.  

If a shop chooses to trade online but don't actively respond to emails, they're doing it wrong.  As a working full time 9-5 fella, I don't really want to spend my lunch hour on the phone and shops are closed either side of my working day, so I will almost always choose to email.

That would come to £328 altogether from DV247 at the moment, so with current currency conversion rate it works out about the same, but does the Panda price include VAT and delivery??

Sorry to keep banging this drum, but I'm still confused by how much cheaper DV247 is! 😅

1 hour ago, Owen said:

Clearly I am in a minority here. I was scarred by pathetic attempts to programme things through tiny 2 row LCD displays back in the day. Octavious Squeezer - I am looking at you.

My fave pedal at the moment  

It's almost therapeutic when you learn to love it!

1 hour ago, Owen said:

 Said very few people ever!

😅 I'm sure you're right, but I literally can't stand having to use desktop editors or midi to change settings.  I've owned a Quad Cortex for years now and still haven't once opened the desktop interface.

36 going on 76 😎