Also I realized that during the high gain demo, the tab I had on Cortex Control was the drive pedal. Just reiterating that both FM9 and QC were running the same amp and drive settings. You can tell just by listening how similar they are.
The 6160 and 6160+ gain structure was updated a few months ago in firmware 21.02 for the FX3 in the Fractal to answer your question on updates for that model.
As it stands right now, it's either too flubby or too revealing of the harsh honky midrange in either direction. If they just address the bass frequencies/knobs, I actually think it would be good.
@@marcelo_campitelli Personally I like comparing how these amps are modeled with the same settings to showcase the differences between the units. Unless explicitly stated, it's impossible for me to know what settings an amp profile/capture were shot with.
I have the Fender based EVH 50 watt head which was my gigging amp for years. Having said that I love the 5150 amp in my Quad Cortex. It is my favorite amp for distortion. I don't play heavy metal. Mostly 70's, 80's, and 90's rock. I think both units can be dialed in for great guitar tone, and I've always been a Tube amp user. I've read of many Fractal users selling their FM3 and FM9's after receiving the Quad Cortex. AND i'm sure the reverse it true. So I think it's just a matter of individuals ears, which you pretty much eluded to. Both are great units.
Dont feel bad about not knowing about the Green Crunch in the Fractal. Cliff just added it not too long ago. It didnt show up till the axe fx 3. It wasnt in any of the other units lol.
1. FM9 has the aggressive “chainsaw” feel which QC is missing. QC is kinda more like “tactile feeling of satin finish.” 2. FM9 “growls” harder at mid-range(and above) frequency when you play harder, while QC doesn’t do that as intensively as FM9. 3. Sagging is the beauty of real amps, but maybe QC sagged too much. I get annoyed by the volume drop(compression) when palm-muting heavily.
So, the 5150 II, whilst having an extra preamp tube, actually has considerably less gain than the original. Apparently it's due to input filtering, specifically the filtering out of low end frequencies. The overall result is a tighter low end, but with less low end hitting the preamp, there's less overall gain (distortion) achieved. But yeah, rhythm channel boosted is where it's at imo
I definitely noticed that when I tried the "6160+" model in the Fractal that it was much cleaner than either the Block Letter or 6505 modeled. Thanks for sharing!
which one has the best footswitches, the ones that will last for a good solid 5 years? Fractals has these "SSS" switches, anybody know what they are really like?
Tbqh, for sound quality and feel, these two are trade blows with just slightly different flavors. Rather, the difference is in the workflow IMHO; I think the stock amps are better in the Fractal, but amp captures on Neural can be darn close, and a lot simpler to manage than on the Fractal.
I'm surprised, but I like the QC a little better here. The more chewy and slower gain quality makes it sound more 5150 ish. The mids are also a little more pushed in QC. Cheers Goose
As a 5150 Block owner. I can say that the QC is more accurate even if the crunch isn’t as pleasant than the Fractal’s model. Most people would use the Red channel as high gain but the Green Channel when dialled in right is crushing for high gain. Robb Flynn from Machine Head is an advocate for the Green Channel for high gain and Red channel for cleans. Great video mate
when its comes to modeling no device can compete with fractal but the strong side of the QC is the capture feature and not the modeling,i even the helix does a better modeling job than the QC
On all scenario Fractal even without profiling has best tone you can get from modeling hardware. In mix, on live is the best. I tested a lot of this and Fractal beatem all.
High Gain, QC was thinner, less like the thump of the real amp. It was a usable tone, just not as accurate. And on the lower gain, egads the QC was a woofy mess. AFTER you dialed for that, it still had some bade digital artifacts, sounded like cheaper modelers. AND, not using parameters on one unit, because the other is less featured isn't 'fair'. It's patently unfair to the unit with more functionality.
Also I realized that during the high gain demo, the tab I had on Cortex Control was the drive pedal.
Just reiterating that both FM9 and QC were running the same amp and drive settings. You can tell just by listening how similar they are.
3:20 My desk was shaking from the chugs. Love it.
The 6160 and 6160+ gain structure was updated a few months ago in firmware 21.02 for the FX3 in the Fractal to answer your question on updates for that model.
Thanks! It sounds great.
When I heard that QC crunch channel, let me tell you I was SHOOK. Great video comparison
As it stands right now, it's either too flubby or too revealing of the harsh honky midrange in either direction. If they just address the bass frequencies/knobs, I actually think it would be good.
@@TheGooseChaseMusic why not using one of the many profiles made by people? and not just only the one that comes with the QC?
@@marcelo_campitelli Personally I like comparing how these amps are modeled with the same settings to showcase the differences between the units. Unless explicitly stated, it's impossible for me to know what settings an amp profile/capture were shot with.
Thumbs up for pedals, thumbs down for sunburns
I actually delayed this video by a day because of peeling.
I have the Fender based EVH 50 watt head which was my gigging amp for years. Having said that I love the 5150 amp in my Quad Cortex. It is my favorite amp for distortion. I don't play heavy metal. Mostly 70's, 80's, and 90's rock. I think both units can be dialed in for great guitar tone, and I've always been a Tube amp user. I've read of many Fractal users selling their FM3 and FM9's after receiving the Quad Cortex. AND i'm sure the reverse it true. So I think it's just a matter of individuals ears, which you pretty much eluded to. Both are great units.
Just want to say, I love this positivity 🙏 it's definitely a matter of preferences, no one loses with these choices.
How many amp can you play at once and blend in your chain? Trying to compare FM9 to QC.
Dont feel bad about not knowing about the Green Crunch in the Fractal. Cliff just added it not too long ago. It didnt show up till the axe fx 3. It wasnt in any of the other units lol.
1. FM9 has the aggressive “chainsaw” feel which QC is missing. QC is kinda more like “tactile feeling of satin finish.”
2. FM9 “growls” harder at mid-range(and above) frequency when you play harder, while QC doesn’t do that as intensively as FM9.
3. Sagging is the beauty of real amps, but maybe QC sagged too much. I get annoyed by the volume drop(compression) when palm-muting heavily.
I love the Soldano plug-in. Maybe before 2030 Neural will port the plug-ins over.
please make the riff at 4:10 something if it isn't already. That is SUCH a sick KSE meets ATR riff. holy SHEEEESh. Sweet video!
Widowmaker by TBDM!
Im a little sentimentally biased to the FM9.....it looks built like a Titan standout without the need to anything more
With a expression pedal connected, I could definitely use the FM9 on its own for almost anything.
So, the 5150 II, whilst having an extra preamp tube, actually has considerably less gain than the original. Apparently it's due to input filtering, specifically the filtering out of low end frequencies. The overall result is a tighter low end, but with less low end hitting the preamp, there's less overall gain (distortion) achieved.
But yeah, rhythm channel boosted is where it's at imo
I definitely noticed that when I tried the "6160+" model in the Fractal that it was much cleaner than either the Block Letter or 6505 modeled.
Thanks for sharing!
which one has the best footswitches, the ones that will last for a good solid 5 years? Fractals has these "SSS" switches, anybody know what they are really like?
Late to the show, but great video! What IR are you using to get that tone?
@@kelvindam3306 Ownhammer rockbox 2018 V30s!
@@TheGooseChaseMusic Thanks! Ill look into those
this is what i wanted. i haven’t try it before, so which one you prefer of both? for sound quality and feel.
Tbqh, for sound quality and feel, these two are trade blows with just slightly different flavors. Rather, the difference is in the workflow IMHO; I think the stock amps are better in the Fractal, but amp captures on Neural can be darn close, and a lot simpler to manage than on the Fractal.
Cool! :)
what was the tuning? sounds like drop c but i could be wrong. great demo
I'm surprised, but I like the QC a little better here. The more chewy and slower gain quality makes it sound more 5150 ish. The mids are also a little more pushed in QC.
Cheers Goose
As a 5150 Block owner. I can say that the QC is more accurate even if the crunch isn’t as pleasant than the Fractal’s model.
Most people would use the Red channel as high gain but the Green Channel when dialled in right is crushing for high gain. Robb Flynn from Machine Head is an advocate for the Green Channel for high gain and Red channel for cleans.
Great video mate
when its comes to modeling no device can compete with fractal but the strong side of the QC is the capture feature and not the modeling,i even the helix does a better modeling job than the QC
On all scenario Fractal even without profiling has best tone you can get from modeling hardware. In mix, on live is the best. I tested a lot of this and Fractal beatem all.
High Gain, QC was thinner, less like the thump of the real amp. It was a usable tone, just not as accurate. And on the lower gain, egads the QC was a woofy mess. AFTER you dialed for that, it still had some bade digital artifacts, sounded like cheaper modelers. AND, not using parameters on one unit, because the other is less featured isn't 'fair'. It's patently unfair to the unit with more functionality.