Your stereo delay on the FM3 has the L/R Ratio set to 100%. This means there is no difference between right and left signals so it will sound mono. Reducing the L/R ratio will change the feedback of the Right side so you will hear a difference in left and right and it will sound in stereo. Not sure why 100% is the default there, but adjust that and you’ll hear it in stereo.
Possibilities to tweak is endless I guess for both (even though I don't own any single one😜) and getting them to sound the same or what you like .. IMHO win is the ease to use & mobile. On the fly & PC-less ... 🤘 Great share as usual, Leo. #staysafe
Thanks as always Leo. I currently have both and had a Kemper. I don't miss the Kemper. Currently the Fm3 has more on offer, but Neural plans a ton of feature additions as they released it too early. If your goal is to capture your own amps, the QC will not disappoint. Hopefully Neural will bring all of their effects up to speed by year end. I'm not sure if they ever plan to go into the depth that Fractal does.
Yes, I also hope they will add more effects with future firmware upgrades..I don't think they are gonna provides us with all the parameters that Fractal has...but some more parameter would be very welcome... Thank you for your message and for sharing your experience!
You can get a wider stereo delay effect on the FM3 by setting the L/R time ratio to value between 99.0% and 99.9%. Simply try with spread 100% and ratio 99.5%.
Love your vids...you have a really cool way to explain the 2 machines....keep doing this dude ....and for me I think it will be the "next fractal machine" because I think it's hard to make sound great if you do all in the pedalboard, maybe in the app on the computer it's easier but I think I will wait!!
Great video - I think the included effects in the QC could be better, for example the included wahs could be “sharper” and lack adjustment possibilities. But, for me the amp/cab simulation and capturing are more important. I have a bunch of effects that I’m planning to keep using and use the QC primarily as the amp/cabsim. So for me, the QC extends my pedalboard but replaces my amp. Thankfully, it’s very easy to combine “regular pedals” and the QC. But if someone plan to replace all their effects with one unit you might want to wait to see how the QC develops in future updates. Or order one and while waiting a couple of months for it to arrive, it might have been fixed already 😀
Congratulations Leo. Another great comparison video as always! They are both amazing units and I guess Quad Cortex will get better in the near future. I didn't have the opportunity to buy an FM3, but still have an AX8 and have used Axe-FX 2 and Kemper in the previous years. Fractal Audio products are extremely reliable and come with amazing effects. But unfortunately they suffer from limited CPU processing. Let's take "Pitchshifting" for example; 3 note harmony pitchshifting sounds good on AX8 (but not as good as Eventide Harmonizers or TC Electronic Quintessence). Octave pitchshifting is not as good as EHX POG Nano. And whammy pitchshifting is not as good as Digitech Whammy pedals. But they sound great and do the job seamlessly on a stage with the band. WIDE DELAY: To widen the stereo delay effect, you probably need to use 2 cabinets with stereo mode on. Use the delay after the cabs and Pan one of the cabinets %100 Left and the other %100 Right. And you can use Ping-Pong delay for better panning delays. CHORUS / ROTARY: They are probably one of the best chorus effects on the market at the moment. Phaser, Delay, Reverb etc... Also very good. !!! IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR USING STEREO AUDIO EFFECTS ON STAGE !!! 1- Always record your sound on a DAW before the stage. Listen in both stereo and mono. Convert the channels to mono and listen carefully if you have phase cancelling issues. 2- Tell the soundguy to insert your channels as 2 seperate mono (one panned hard Left and the other panned hard right) rather than 1 stereo input. And he should send only one of your channel (The Left one for example) to other players' mono monitors. Because your stereo guitar effects may have a phase cancelling issues on a mono monitor or in-ear if not set properly by the soundguy. Thank you once more and all the best ;)
Having had a chorus on constantly in my signal chain during the ‘80s, I am quite familiar with this effect. I prefer the Quad Cortex’ subtlety in this case. I agree, there is quite a difference apparent in the two units. I’m not quite sure why the Quad Cortex was even released…it seems to have many shortcomings and doesn’t seem ready for prime time…just my opinion. As always, I am very appreciative of the thoroughness of your videos and your skills…
Thank you George, so far the QC amp models and capture options are already great...they need to work on the effects in order to increase their number and tweackability...and of course we need the computer app...:) Thank you once more!
First let me say I love these videos, thank you. I did want to point out one thing though about the QC. You mentioned you were hitting max CPU usage but it looked like you were only using rows 1 and 2. According to the user manual, “CPU usage. • Rows 1-2 and Rows 3-4 on The Grid utilise different processor cores. If all of your device blocks are placed in Rows 1 and 2, you’re only using half of Quad Cortex’s power. For resource- hungry Presets, try splitting your blocks across all four rows.” Seems like you are only using half of the possible power.
Hi, in my opinions yes if you don't use the extreme setting of the bigsky and the timeline. In the QC you have basically less possibilities to tweak the reverb and delay compared to the Strymon pedals...but if you are fine with the QC setting...it could be enough! So far, in the QC I miss only a different and more tweakable chorus, but for delays and reverbs, I'm fine with what the QC offers. Thank you!
Great video. I cannot see an absolute clear winner here. Both seem very good fx machines with very obvious advantages on the side of the fm3, as fractal products are much longer on the market. My personal focus is always amp sound first. "Better" fx are nothing without a high quality amp sound on which you can build up soundscapes. In terms of mere amp modelling, they should be equally good but the fm3 cannot reach the high level of the qc capturing feature, I would say. As always it depends on what someone needs, of course, but I would say the QC is the all in all winner for the average live guitarist who needs perfect amp sound with good basic fx in a portable all in one mini pedalboard. If you want the same flexibility with the fm3, your pedalboard will be considerably bigger and heavier MINUS the superior amp capturing feature. Another plus for the QC are the upcoming future fw updates that will close gaps more and more. For the time the fm3 is the clear winner for fx, if fx is someone's focus.
Hi Leo! Great video as always. I have a question, considering the actual price of the QC, what’s the best deal in your opinion? I mean, I love QC amps but it has really few effects and I don’t know which one should I buy considering that I need a really versatile pedalboard
Hi, the QC is still kind of an investment in the future, and the possibility to have both modelling and profiling is super cool. On the other hand the FM3 is superior in terms of number effects and the general consensus is that they are even better sounding (but this is a matter of taste). So as of now, maybe the FM3 has a better value for money and the QC is kind of a better investment in the future. Thank you for your question!
Hi Paulo, you are welcome! If you mean my profiles of my amps done with the GE labs....actually they are in queue...for a future video...sorry and thank you for your patience!
Thank you for this comparison Leo. Do you think it might be fair to say that the FM3 sounds like it is voiced for guitar while the Quad has more general voicing - like for singers, bass, synth players as well as guitarists? That was my quick impression just from this great video. Thanks again!
Hi, this is an interesting point of view...I didn't think about that...well, I'm not sure...it's just the chorus for me that is weak, the delay and reverb are just fine. I think that Neural just need to provide us with more options to tweack the effects, especially the chorus and the delay. I think it's just a matter of time and the QC will for sure improve in future. Fractal is working on his effects since almost a decade so far...Neural has just started his journey. Thank you so much!
Hi Jim, maybe...but also with the FM3 you can rise the depth, I mean, at the end the chorus of the FM3 seems to have more possibilities / teachability. Thank you!
Hi Leo, I'm confused a little with QC effect. Didn't expect such limited variety that is close to budget chinese brands processors. Of course effects in their plugins are very pleasant (I really like delay and reverbs) and maybe they want to make other on the same level. If only neyral had some cooperation with eventide
Maybe, I'm on a verge of QC purchase and number of effects is one of the main concern. After boss, line 6 helix, Zoom and Mooer modellers I'm get used for much more versatile possibilities
@@cousteaujeanyves4551 updates are coming 2 weeks and they will update as it moves along. Captures are where it shines. I've captured several of my rare amps perfectly. It does great at capturing od pedals and amps. No computer needed as well.
Amp capturing is the main thing why I'm interested in QC, hope effects bank will increase soon. Right now it looks like QC needs to be combined with other multi-effect units for my purposes
Hi, I think they will add more and more effects with future firmware upgrades, as they also announced in their web site. QC has been just released, Fractal is working on his effects since more than a decade so far, so I think it's pretty normal that the Fractal effect section is richer. Thank you for your message!
Hi Leo, two question for my curiosity: Wich real modelled counterparts of chorus are you comparing? And do you have tryed in QC with split mode, and wet chorus fx at 100%, and working on the mix between dry and wet (on splitted chain)? Nik
Hi NIck, actually I don't know which is the real counterpart...in the QC there are just two choruses and this one was the one that sounded more close to the one in the FM3. As regards wet / dry I tweack a little bit the mix in the sound comparison section of this video, to match the two units. Thank you for your message!
@@LeoGibsonGtr i hope in future updates, in years i mean, not now. But i'm pretty shure of this. Also.. i don't need 3468 amps and 3905 fx =) good amps, most important fx.. and go. But the 4 way usb reamp in a song is amazing feature =) i have more pc power for drums and synths now =)
Only an idiot with more money than sense would buy the cortex (especially given its recent price increase) at this stage of its development. I'll re-evaluate it in a couple of years time. By when hopefully not only will it's modelling amp and effects be more numerous and more musical, but it WON'T have a separate psu, but it WILL have a decent pc/Mac/iOS interface/editor. PS great video, as always, Leo.
@@r.llynch4124 i don't know, not sure of that, there is a strange noise with the quad. By the way it's a personnal opinion and the only thing i'm sure, it's that both unit sound great.
I'm surprised there's really a big difference in sound quality between these 2, I thought they were much closer (not speaking of tweakability here, just sound quality). There's a lot of annoying high pitched noises in the processed fx of the FM3. By themselves these fx are not pleasant to the ear, and I'm afraid stacking several of them might degrade a complete mixed song... I know the FM3 sounds good, but in this video it sounds very artificial compared to the QC 🤷🏻♂️
Hi, thank you for sharing your opinion. Actually, I don't think they sound so bad...obviously tone is a personal fact...and maybe the sound not natural to your hear because there is not an amp in the signal chain... Thank you
Clear winner for me is the FM3. First, at this price not being able to edit on a PC is a deal breaker. Second is the sound- FM3 wins. You get access to the Fractal ecosystem which has been fine tuned over the last 10 years. It also costs much less than the QC and the list goes on and on. The QC doesn't even come with their plug-ins. At least to me, it is not really close.
The fact that you have to deep dive to configure parameters via PC application SHOULD be a deal breaker. In the event that Fractal eventually discontinues software support due to obsolescence will brick your hardware. I have older working hardware from Behringer, Blackstar, Johnson, Yamaha and Roland that are door stops because they decided not to support software updates for newer OSes. I have learned the hard way, to only buy hardware that do NOT REQUIRE PC support for configuration. (:
@@bkhawaii 1. I highly doubt that Fractal will ever brick the FM9...but point taken. I am willing to roll those dice. I know many people who still use old legacy Fractal units w/out any significant issues. Your concern is not commonly shared- but again, I understand and appreciate your point. 2. You do not have to use the PC for editing. It has one of the best and largest control panels on the unit. Even larger display on FM9. 3. The PC interface simply allows the option for identical configurations on a huge screen. If your recording you will want this anyway. The audio interface is also pro level. 4. Also, once you save e.g., your top 20 presets technically you will never have to make or change presets again. So what unit would you use over the FM9?
Capture is the way to go imo. FM3 is harder for new users to understand and limited with 3 foot switches no dual amps /cabs either. Sold my FM3 after getting the QC. LOVE IT!!
@@richo144 exactly. I never use the modeled stuff either, why would you? It's way easier than the Kemper I had as well. Although the Kemper still sounds great I much prefer the whole QC package.
@@richo144 I hear it rather feel a lot of presence in the captures though. It doesn’t have the mid thing the kemper has but it hurts my ear after a while
@@LeoGibsonGtr thx leo... just to point out that full size AxeFX should not a lot more powerful, but yet the QC appears to struggle with the lower cost FM3.... sounds like they have a lot of work to do !
20:15 Wow, this is the first time i heard about it. Thaks for this important imformation.
Yes, if you want more than one amp, you have to go with the FX III.
Thank you for your message!
Here comes the man!
Thank you!!!
Your stereo delay on the FM3 has the L/R Ratio set to 100%. This means there is no difference between right and left signals so it will sound mono. Reducing the L/R ratio will change the feedback of the Right side so you will hear a difference in left and right and it will sound in stereo. Not sure why 100% is the default there, but adjust that and you’ll hear it in stereo.
Hi, thank you for sharing!
Sold my FM3 after getting the QC NO problems here happy, happy, happy
Hi, thank you for sharing your experience!
Possibilities to tweak is endless I guess for both (even though I don't own any single one😜) and getting them to sound the same or what you like .. IMHO win is the ease to use & mobile. On the fly & PC-less ... 🤘 Great share as usual, Leo. #staysafe
Hi, thank you for sharing...good points!
Thanks as always Leo. I currently have both and had a Kemper. I don't miss the Kemper. Currently the Fm3 has more on offer, but Neural plans a ton of feature additions as they released it too early. If your goal is to capture your own amps, the QC will not disappoint. Hopefully Neural will bring all of their effects up to speed by year end. I'm not sure if they ever plan to go into the depth that Fractal does.
Yes, I also hope they will add more effects with future firmware upgrades..I don't think they are gonna provides us with all the parameters that Fractal has...but some more parameter would be very welcome...
Thank you for your message and for sharing your experience!
You can get a wider stereo delay effect on the FM3 by setting the L/R time ratio to value between 99.0% and 99.9%. Simply try with spread 100% and ratio 99.5%.
you can do that with the QC too. dual delays
@@r.llynch4124At 15:03 Leo asked if he's doing something wrong in the settings regarding the spread control - I think that's the case.
@@RockGuitarVibes Yeah, I think He's misunderstanding the control.
Love your vids...you have a really cool way to explain the 2 machines....keep doing this dude ....and for me I think it will be the "next fractal machine" because I think it's hard to make sound great if you do all in the pedalboard, maybe in the app on the computer it's easier but I think I will wait!!
Hi Ricardo, thank you! Both for sharing your opinion and for the compliments...that make happy!
@@LeoGibsonGtr thanks dude for the videos, are just amazing and really helpful...Keep doing it!!
I can't say thank you enough!
@@LeoGibsonGtr me too...you are amazing and always respond all msj!!
Definitely FM3 for me. The effect quality sound much better and much more tweakable .
Hi Sam, thank you for sharing! And I hope QC will evolve with future firmware upgrades...
Great video - I think the included effects in the QC could be better, for example the included wahs could be “sharper” and lack adjustment possibilities. But, for me the amp/cab simulation and capturing are more important. I have a bunch of effects that I’m planning to keep using and use the QC primarily as the amp/cabsim. So for me, the QC extends my pedalboard but replaces my amp.
Thankfully, it’s very easy to combine “regular pedals” and the QC. But if someone plan to replace all their effects with one unit you might want to wait to see how the QC develops in future updates. Or order one and while waiting a couple of months for it to arrive, it might have been fixed already 😀
Hi Robert, good points, thank you for sharing!
Thanks for shareing
You are welcome!
Congratulations Leo. Another great comparison video as always!
They are both amazing units and I guess Quad Cortex will get better in the near future.
I didn't have the opportunity to buy an FM3, but still have an AX8 and have used Axe-FX 2 and Kemper in the previous years. Fractal Audio products are extremely reliable and come with amazing effects. But unfortunately they suffer from limited CPU processing.
Let's take "Pitchshifting" for example; 3 note harmony pitchshifting sounds good on AX8 (but not as good as Eventide Harmonizers or TC Electronic Quintessence). Octave pitchshifting is not as good as EHX POG Nano. And whammy pitchshifting is not as good as Digitech Whammy pedals. But they sound great and do the job seamlessly on a stage with the band.
WIDE DELAY: To widen the stereo delay effect, you probably need to use 2 cabinets with stereo mode on. Use the delay after the cabs and Pan one of the cabinets %100 Left and the other %100 Right. And you can use Ping-Pong delay for better panning delays.
CHORUS / ROTARY: They are probably one of the best chorus effects on the market at the moment.
Phaser, Delay, Reverb etc... Also very good.
!!! IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR USING STEREO AUDIO EFFECTS ON STAGE !!!
1- Always record your sound on a DAW before the stage. Listen in both stereo and mono. Convert the channels to mono and listen carefully if you have phase cancelling issues.
2- Tell the soundguy to insert your channels as 2 seperate mono (one panned hard Left and the other panned hard right) rather than 1 stereo input. And he should send only one of your channel (The Left one for example) to other players' mono monitors. Because your stereo guitar effects may have a phase cancelling issues on a mono monitor or in-ear if not set properly by the soundguy.
Thank you once more and all the best ;)
Hi Omer, I'm super happy you like the video!
Thank you also for sharing your opinion and experience, with such useful tips!!!
Having had a chorus on constantly in my signal chain during the ‘80s, I am quite familiar with this effect. I prefer the Quad Cortex’ subtlety in this case. I agree, there is quite a difference apparent in the two units. I’m not quite sure why the Quad Cortex was even released…it seems to have many shortcomings and doesn’t seem ready for prime time…just my opinion. As always, I am very appreciative of the thoroughness of your videos and your skills…
Thank you George, so far the QC amp models and capture options are already great...they need to work on the effects in order to increase their number and tweackability...and of course we need the computer app...:)
Thank you once more!
First let me say I love these videos, thank you. I did want to point out one thing though about the QC. You mentioned you were hitting max CPU usage but it looked like you were only using rows 1 and 2. According to the user manual, “CPU usage.
• Rows 1-2 and Rows 3-4 on The Grid utilise different processor cores. If all of your device blocks are placed in Rows 1 and 2, you’re only using half of Quad Cortex’s power. For resource- hungry Presets, try splitting your blocks across all four rows.” Seems like you are only using half of the possible power.
Hi Ashton, thank you for sharing… great tips! and I’m happy you like the videos!!!
Leo, what do you think, can Cortex replace Strymon bigsky and timeline pedals?
Hi, in my opinions yes if you don't use the extreme setting of the bigsky and the timeline. In the QC you have basically less possibilities to tweak the reverb and delay compared to the Strymon pedals...but if you are fine with the QC setting...it could be enough! So far, in the QC I miss only a different and more tweakable chorus, but for delays and reverbs, I'm fine with what the QC offers.
Thank you!
Great video. I cannot see an absolute clear winner here. Both seem very good fx machines with very obvious advantages on the side of the fm3, as fractal products are much longer on the market. My personal focus is always amp sound first. "Better" fx are nothing without a high quality amp sound on which you can build up soundscapes. In terms of mere amp modelling, they should be equally good but the fm3 cannot reach the high level of the qc capturing feature, I would say. As always it depends on what someone needs, of course, but I would say the QC is the all in all winner for the average live guitarist who needs perfect amp sound with good basic fx in a portable all in one mini pedalboard. If you want the same flexibility with the fm3, your pedalboard will be considerably bigger and heavier MINUS the superior amp capturing feature. Another plus for the QC are the upcoming future fw updates that will close gaps more and more. For the time the fm3 is the clear winner for fx, if fx is someone's focus.
Hi, thank you, both for liking the video and for sharing your opinion...pretty clever considerations...thank you!
Hi Leo! Great video as always. I have a question, considering the actual price of the QC, what’s the best deal in your opinion?
I mean, I love QC amps but it has really few effects and I don’t know which one should I buy considering that I need a really versatile pedalboard
Hi, the QC is still kind of an investment in the future, and the possibility to have both modelling and profiling is super cool. On the other hand the FM3 is superior in terms of number effects and the general consensus is that they are even better sounding (but this is a matter of taste). So as of now, maybe the FM3 has a better value for money and the QC is kind of a better investment in the future.
Thank you for your question!
Excelente revisión, esperamos alguna vez tener subtítulos para verlo en español para los hispanohablantes
Thank you! I'm sorry for the subtitles...So far I can't find the time to create them.
Thank you once more!
Gracias 💪🏽
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Long life to my Kemper.
Hi, thank you for sharing!
15:04
maybe this width parameter is somethinge like modulation in the fm3
I will check it out...thank you for sharing!
Thanks for the tests, Leo. Any news on the Mooer GE300 regarding amp capture?
Hi Paulo, you are welcome! If you mean my profiles of my amps done with the GE labs....actually they are in queue...for a future video...sorry and thank you for your patience!
@@LeoGibsonGtr Thank you for all the effort! Looking forward to hear them!
Thank you for this comparison Leo. Do you think it might be fair to say that the FM3 sounds like it is voiced for guitar while the Quad has more general voicing - like for singers, bass, synth players as well as guitarists? That was my quick impression just from this great video. Thanks again!
Hi, this is an interesting point of view...I didn't think about that...well, I'm not sure...it's just the chorus for me that is weak, the delay and reverb are just fine. I think that Neural just need to provide us with more options to tweack the effects, especially the chorus and the delay. I think it's just a matter of time and the QC will for sure improve in future. Fractal is working on his effects since almost a decade so far...Neural has just started his journey.
Thank you so much!
Would turning up the depth on the QC provide a chorus more similar to FM3?
L
Hi Jim, maybe...but also with the FM3 you can rise the depth, I mean, at the end the chorus of the FM3 seems to have more possibilities / teachability.
Thank you!
Can you share some of your amp captures??? Please :)
Hi, so far I have done only the profile of my Soldano...I should make more profiles...Thank you!
So many expensive toys .. love this chanel
Thank you, I'm happy you like the channel!!!!
Hi Leo, I'm confused a little with QC effect. Didn't expect such limited variety that is close to budget chinese brands processors. Of course effects in their plugins are very pleasant (I really like delay and reverbs) and maybe they want to make other on the same level. If only neyral had some cooperation with eventide
Maybe you try first before posting??
Maybe, I'm on a verge of QC purchase and number of effects is one of the main concern. After boss, line 6 helix, Zoom and Mooer modellers I'm get used for much more versatile possibilities
@@cousteaujeanyves4551 updates are coming 2 weeks and they will update as it moves along. Captures are where it shines. I've captured several of my rare amps perfectly. It does great at capturing od pedals and amps. No computer needed as well.
Amp capturing is the main thing why I'm interested in QC, hope effects bank will increase soon. Right now it looks like QC needs to be combined with other multi-effect units for my purposes
Hi, I think they will add more and more effects with future firmware upgrades, as they also announced in their web site. QC has been just released, Fractal is working on his effects since more than a decade so far, so I think it's pretty normal that the Fractal effect section is richer.
Thank you for your message!
Helix user here FM3 sounded wider and clearer !
Hi Christopher, thank you for sharing your opinion!
Hi Leo, two question for my curiosity:
Wich real modelled counterparts of chorus are you comparing?
And do you have tryed in QC with split mode, and wet chorus fx at 100%, and working on the mix between dry and wet (on splitted chain)?
Nik
Hi NIck, actually I don't know which is the real counterpart...in the QC there are just two choruses and this one was the one that sounded more close to the one in the FM3. As regards wet / dry I tweack a little bit the mix in the sound comparison section of this video, to match the two units.
Thank you for your message!
@@LeoGibsonGtr i hope in future updates, in years i mean, not now. But i'm pretty shure of this.
Also.. i don't need 3468 amps and 3905 fx =) good amps, most important fx.. and go.
But the 4 way usb reamp in a song is amazing feature =) i have more pc power for drums and synths now =)
prefiro minha voxman. valeu
Ok, thank you for sharing
Only an idiot with more money than sense would buy the cortex (especially given its recent price increase) at this stage of its development. I'll re-evaluate it in a couple of years time. By when hopefully not only will it's modelling amp and effects be more numerous and more musical, but it WON'T have a separate psu, but it WILL have a decent pc/Mac/iOS interface/editor.
PS great video, as always, Leo.
Thank you, I'm happy you like the video!
Thank you also for sharing your opinion!
There is not bad choice, but the more i hear, the more i'm sure that go with the FM3 was the good choice for me.
you must be listening to the wrong vids dude head to head for amp tones it pushed my FM3 out the door
@@r.llynch4124 i don't know, not sure of that, there is a strange noise with the quad. By the way it's a personnal opinion and the only thing i'm sure, it's that both unit sound great.
I'm surprised there's really a big difference in sound quality between these 2, I thought they were much closer (not speaking of tweakability here, just sound quality). There's a lot of annoying high pitched noises in the processed fx of the FM3. By themselves these fx are not pleasant to the ear, and I'm afraid stacking several of them might degrade a complete mixed song... I know the FM3 sounds good, but in this video it sounds very artificial compared to the QC 🤷🏻♂️
Hi, thank you for sharing your opinion. Actually, I don't think they sound so bad...obviously tone is a personal fact...and maybe the sound not natural to your hear because there is not an amp in the signal chain...
Thank you
Clear winner for me is the FM3. First, at this price not being able to edit on a PC is a deal breaker. Second is the sound- FM3 wins. You get access to the Fractal ecosystem which has been fine tuned over the last 10 years. It also costs much less than the QC and the list goes on and on. The QC doesn't even come with their plug-ins. At least to me, it is not really close.
Hi, thank you for sharing your opinion!
The fact that you have to deep dive to configure parameters via PC application SHOULD be a deal breaker. In the event that Fractal eventually discontinues software support due to obsolescence will brick your hardware. I have older working hardware from Behringer, Blackstar, Johnson, Yamaha and Roland that are door stops because they decided not to support software updates for newer OSes. I have learned the hard way, to only buy hardware that do NOT REQUIRE PC support for configuration. (:
@@bkhawaii 1. I highly doubt that Fractal will ever brick the FM9...but point taken. I am willing to roll those dice. I know many people who still use old legacy Fractal units w/out any significant issues. Your concern is not commonly shared- but again, I understand and appreciate your point.
2. You do not have to use the PC for editing. It has one of the best and largest control panels on the unit. Even larger display on FM9.
3. The PC interface simply allows the option for identical configurations on a huge screen. If your recording you will want this anyway. The audio interface is also pro level.
4. Also, once you save e.g., your top 20 presets technically you will never have to make or change presets again.
So what unit would you use over the FM9?
The FM3 is modeler but the Quad Cortex is not
Capture is the way to go imo. FM3 is harder for new users to understand and limited with 3 foot switches no dual amps /cabs either. Sold my FM3 after getting the QC. LOVE IT!!
QC is a modeler and also a "Profiler", amps captures are so good that I have not used the modeled amps tho...
@@richo144 exactly. I never use the modeled stuff either, why would you? It's way easier than the Kemper I had as well. Although the Kemper still sounds great I much prefer the whole QC package.
Hi, actually I think that the QC is both a modeler and a profiler.
Thank you for your message!
@@richo144 I hear it rather feel a lot of presence in the captures though. It doesn’t have the mid thing the kemper has but it hurts my ear after a while
Quad isn't the most powerful modeller. 🤔
Hi Ken...they need to work on the FX...I am sure they will with future firmware upgrades.
Thank you for your message!
@@LeoGibsonGtr thx leo... just to point out that full size AxeFX should not a lot more powerful, but yet the QC appears to struggle with the lower cost FM3.... sounds like they have a lot of work to do !