We for sure could have spent more time load captures and dialing in better, from the outset we never really intended to do a super scientific comparison, just turn 'em on and see how they sound out of the box.
To be fair to Quad Cortex and ToneX we didn't spend much time dialing things in, just wanted to turn 'em on and see how they sounded out of the box. I know you can get some great tones from the QC and the ToneX!
What are these videos good for if everybody already knows that the qc has good capture technology, tonex close to perfect (or can you play the Witcher 3 on your qc?) and NAM creates absolutely undistinguishable digital copies. Nowadays you just need to decide for a "product", what comforts you the most and what's your budget.
It all gets muddied via all that happens between your fingers and Gretsch and my ears. I just know that at any appreciable volumes, my tube amps feel the best to me. There's an extra dimension that I can really only hear when I'm in the same room as the amp(s) I'm playing through.
Just a stock AC30 sound we pulled up. We weren't trying to do a super scientific comparison. When the Quad is dialed in with a great capture it does sound fantastic!
Something went wrong in the capture process for both units. The high end rolloff should not be this exaggerated on either unit. This is extreme. My captures do not suffer from this amount of difference.
I do think the ToneX sounded pretty good on some of the riffs and kind of fell flat on other riffs. It does take pedals well though which is a big plus for me!
Guitar playing was pretty dreadful for a demo. I think the difference between the Quad Cortex and actual amps could have been addressed with better EQ - it was way too dark. Also agree with other comments that a capture of an actual AC-30 would have been a closer comparison than the modeled amp.
I think the TONEX sounds better than the qc
Let's be honest both the real amps sounded way better than the sims but capturing the amps in the quadcortex and tonex would have been more fair...
I agree, i think it would sound way better if it was captured
“Way better”. Sure.
@@propersucio listen to what Rabea massad has done with his captures. They sound fucking amazing.
Agreed! No comparison.
We for sure could have spent more time load captures and dialing in better, from the outset we never really intended to do a super scientific comparison, just turn 'em on and see how they sound out of the box.
I think the mics in QC aren't placeD so good to replicate the sound..!
To be fair to Quad Cortex and ToneX we didn't spend much time dialing things in, just wanted to turn 'em on and see how they sounded out of the box. I know you can get some great tones from the QC and the ToneX!
Something about a gretsch and an vox amp just sounds heavenly.
Could not agree more!
It’s no Ric but it’s good.
Where download the Capture ????
What are these videos good for if everybody already knows that the qc has good capture technology, tonex close to perfect (or can you play the Witcher 3 on your qc?) and NAM creates absolutely undistinguishable digital copies. Nowadays you just need to decide for a "product", what comforts you the most and what's your budget.
Well said.
It all gets muddied via all that happens between your fingers and Gretsch and my ears. I just know that at any appreciable volumes, my tube amps feel the best to me. There's an extra dimension that I can really only hear when I'm in the same room as the amp(s) I'm playing through.
was that a stock amp in the QC or a capture?
Just a stock AC30 sound we pulled up. We weren't trying to do a super scientific comparison. When the Quad is dialed in with a great capture it does sound fantastic!
@@frequencyco capturing using the same setup would have been very difficult to tell apart
Something went wrong in the capture process for both units. The high end rolloff should not be this exaggerated on either unit. This is extreme. My captures do not suffer from this amount of difference.
1:05 REAL AMP AC30 HW
1:28 QUAD
1:55 TONEX
Hand wired is a bit brighter, open, and articulate.
ToneX sounds the most realistic but has been proved by Leon Gibson in his scientific videos. But the most accurate is now NAM
Honestly i thought the ToneX was the worst sounding in the video…
I do think the ToneX sounded pretty good on some of the riffs and kind of fell flat on other riffs. It does take pedals well though which is a big plus for me!
What is NAM?
Neural Amp Modeler (not associated with Neural DSP)
Next time maybe use the same ir... And captures from the real amps
Guitar playing was pretty dreadful for a demo. I think the difference between the Quad Cortex and actual amps could have been addressed with better EQ - it was way too dark. Also agree with other comments that a capture of an actual AC-30 would have been a closer comparison than the modeled amp.
I bought one of these QC to capture my neighbors 60’s Vox. They just can’t do it.
There is really nothing like the real thing!
@ true
“Turn the page.
Can't turn the light out.”
An Tagen wie diesen ...
Bad playing. Awesome content
Modern Vox amps are disappointing. Hoping the new handwired series lives up to the name.
Quad Cortex sounded terrible here.
when the QC sounds better than the real amp... lol.
what are you smoking
Kidding?
I have both qc and ac30tb, so you are wrong
Quad & Tonex sounds like 💩 if I compare with Real Amp. Sad but true.
You would never know the difference in a mix. Quit lying