Will ToneX Kill the Quad Cortex? Capture vs Capture - Neural DSP vs IK Multimedia

[@AndrewStonerock]

They're so close. Everything now days is so good. It really is the best time to be a musician.

[@SteveSterlacci]

We are indeed spoiled!

[@robmurrah3224]

It's the worst time to be a musician, because there's no money in it anymore.

[@scottakam]

Definitely a wakeup call for QC and Line 6. Wouldn't surprise me if IK came out with an all-in-one box next.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I love that they all have to keep pushing the envelope

[@brunoluznunes]

If this had FX at this price, would have been instant buy! I'll wait for the all in one

[@budgetguitarist]

@@brunoluznunes SAME! And I already own an HX Stomp, and I love it.

[@mfkato]

Yes! I need more flexible routing, a pre power amp send in order to use real amps + cab sim live... HX Stomp works wonders on my setup, but would love to have Tonex amps

[@LULZCAPTAIN]

@@brunoluznunes Doesn't it have FX pedals integrated in the software?

[@JackFossett]

I love the double Anchorman camera angle.

[@SteveSterlacci]

UNIQUE NEW YORK. UNIQUE NEW YORK

[@joeygentile7829]

As with all your videos, the comparison was good, and with tweaking, I think both would sound identical. The QC seems a bit hotter and brighter, but in a live setting, I don’t think anyone would be able to tell which unit you were playing. Plus, you hit the nail on the head regarding players that have a lot of money invested in their pedals and would like to continue to use them. The Tonex will fill that gap nicely.

[@DanielBellezza89]

i think that brighter and hotter tone will have a negative effect for the sound engineer. Ease to mix is gonna be an important factor for this kinds of stuff. A real amp is much easier to mix and retain energy and tone in a live environment. Many people and how they setup their digital pedals tend to differ drastically on how well they're setup and how the player plays into the unit.

[@vanalhalen]

ToneX and HX Effects could be a killer combo. I really hope Line6 will step up soon on the capture capabilities (and fingers crossed for a new version of the Helix

[@caseyscott1766]

Pushed with the Nobels, the QC definitely got muddy. Steve, I think you were right: there’s much better string to string articulation in the ToneX. I’ve been using a Headrush MX5 for my amps on my smaller gigging board, and I’m looking forward to replacing that with the ToneX.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Use them together! put Tonex in the loop

[@jdubbs9655]

Thanks Steve. What if you ran the ToneX captures on the QC?

[@SteveSterlacci]

Then it becomes self aware and calls all your exes telling them you still have feelings for them

[@jdubbs9655]

@@SteveSterlacci LOL! but nobody believes them anyway.

[@HerroYuy246]

I think it's nice to finally have an amp pedal with true amp selection and capture capability. It's crazy the price point it is at too!

[@SteveSterlacci]

Absolutely!

[@JoeDogInKC]

The ToneX pedal comes with the ToneX software AND Amplitube 5, so you can build a bunch of patches, with effects and store them on the device. It's obviously limited in number of foot switches, but I believe you could add on additional ones somehow and turn it into something very capable and similar to the QC.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I wish the Amplitube came in a box too

[@JoeDogInKC]

@@SteveSterlacci So, you can’t add effects with the Amplitube software and save it all as a patch that’s stored on the pedal?

[@SteveSterlacci]

@@JoeDogInKC correct. Unfortunate, but correct

[@rockr8840]

Less foot switches means not good for live gigging?? But pairing with guitar multi effects units in the FX loop would be a good option..

[@SteveSterlacci]

I do this in my more recent videos!

[@cechichan]

Man i love how your LP looks ;D

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thanks! I have a full video on it somewhere on the channel

[@ProducerDudes]

in my studio, the ToneX has a ground issue/ringing in the high end and is much thinner sounding than the Quad. Quad cortex has a ton of low mid body to the sound the ToneX didn't have at all on the DC30. Quad was also dead silent. ToneX has such a weird sound through the whole thing in this video. I'm typing and then watching more of the video and its so weird the ringing/high pitch ring happening with the ToneX. You didn't label a change around 11:25 and I knew you switched to the ToneX based on that weird high pitch ringing. Either way, Thanks for the video, I'm pretty confidently going with the Quad C after this. Solid AB process on this.

[@ProducerDudes]

ooo you went to the blind tapping and I can tell exactly when its QC vs the ToneX with the ringing.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Interesting. I am wondering if this could've been from my interface. I've had a few commenters mention that high end ringing that I totally missed during tracking. I don't notice any ringing in my other vids using it. If you don't mind, can you check out the video I put it in the fx loop of my fractal and see if you're still picking up the ringing? I think anyone already happy with their QC have nothing to worry about as well 🤘

[@ProducerDudes]

@@SteveSterlacci Hey, just checked out the other video and I hear it there too. Its like a 15k-17k kind of ringing behind when you play. Its behind what you're playing so it def isn't like an equal volume, I just notice it. Doubt it would be an actual issue in the context of a performance. I use a Jazzmaster and ground noise is just part of my life, so its def not a deal breaker. haha

[@ProducerDudes]

@@SteveSterlacci ​ I think a solid test would be to have it powered by an isolated power unit like a cioks or zuma with a ground on the IEC and see if it goes away. Like maybe whatever preparatory power supply isn't properly grounding the unit. I've heard that the Quad Cortex's headphone is similar in that way where its noisy unless plugged into a power supply with a ground or interface similarly.

[@RokDAWG1]

Honestly the tones are so close, so VERY close that it wouldn't make a difference in a live mix. Possibly in a recording but nobody would notice in a live situation. I'm leaning towards the ToneX because it's really similar to what I use for my setup. I use a Quilter Superblock UK on my pedal board. So the ToneX would be much closer in convenience to me. I'm seriously impressed.

[@filetofishish]

Just a little something in the high end on the quad. Definitely prefer the tone x though. They are both very close though.I just picked up a tonics about a month ago and absolutely Love it! My first patch on it is a DC-30 and that thing sounds killer

[@LucaBignardi]

Thank you Steve for this video. The biggest difference I feel between the 2 is about dynamics and envelopes. The more distorted is the sound the more is squashed in Quad Cortex, as in many other similar devices. It looks that TONEX better preserves details regarding envelopes. I suppose this means that it better represents the transfer function on all frequencies at different audio levels even if distorted sounds have not a linear transfer function

[@SteveSterlacci]

I never felt an envelope while playing guitar. I only use them when the mailman drops them off!

[@LucaBignardi]

@@SteveSterlacci What I mean is the physical envelope of the sound. Strings in a guitar have a fast attack phase and a decay without sustain. Of course this changes when using distortion, but this was my meaning. Not an envelope effect. The difference between the 2 sounds can be better heard in the attack part of the sound. I feel that everyone can hear when focusing on attack.

[@reyals66]

Hi Steve, I stumbled upon your channel a couple of days ago and instantly subscribed. What pedal would you recommend to go alongside the ToneX? I'm not a professional(as yet) but intend to take it up seriously and wanna build a rig that should last me a couple of years without having to worry about upgrading anything. I was torn between line 6 Pod Go & Headrush MX5 before I heard about ToneX. Would love to know your thoughts, thanks!

[@SteveSterlacci]

Hey Hari! Check out my video from this passed week about tonex and hx stomp. Thats where i would go!

[@reyals66]

@@SteveSterlacci Thanks Steve, I'll check it out.

[@SteveSterlacci]

@@reyals66 i appreciate you being here. Thanks for joining

[@blazeofglory1982]

Great videos! Can’t wait to try it out.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thanks! Hope to have earned your sub

[@okaight7248]

The high end you describe is the exact issue with every single amp sim. It's deeper than that, that "feeling" of it being too overly in your face applies to all frequencies and you can really start to notice it if and when you mix. While amp sims have improved A LOT, they can still feel like just an EQ'd digital white noise as compared to the real deal. They'll be a combination of too boomy, muddy, middy, harsh, and hissy. Eq'ing all that out just hollows out the tone, and you start chasing your tail. I think that's the the reality of an IR being a single static capture and then amp sims still needing more and more processing power to get closer to all the detail of real distortion. When you're talking about the string separation section, on the QC I hear a painfully glowing OOOOOOOOOO in the mids for every note you hit in that chord arpeggio. That volume of that frequency never changes; constantly just a wall of it. You can hyper focus on almost any frequency and kinda have the same effect. The Tonex does a great job of pulling back on those issues from what I hear in this. I hear that it reacts frequency wise more naturally responsive as if the speaker or amp is responding to the adjustment of frequency response from the guitar as opposed to just having all frequencies on all the time. Overall just another layer of focus and one step further away from EQ'd digital white noise. I guess the question is "How far does it need to be for it to be useable?". Many will say QC is significantly more than enough. As someone who hears professional records and wonder why I can't achieve THAT expensive guitar tone that I like without the expensive wall analog gear and amps/cabs, I'm needing closer like the Tonex. Thanks for the vid!

[@adamicinec]

Wow man! Exactly my feelings! Spot on!

[@okaight7248]

@@adamicinec I’m glad someone agrees. I dweebed out way too hard lmao but whatever 🤣

[@StratsRUs]

I mainly use Helix and Boss Core GT1000. By the time I get a new computer, Tonex 2 will be out ! Thanks for your great channel , playing and personality 👍🏆

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thanks for watching HK! Nothing wrong with those options

[@rockr8840]

Aren't helix and boss gt 1000 not good enough?? The only difference i could find is they are modellers and tonex is not.. The stock amps and cabinets are great in both the boss and helix...

[@kasakka]

I can hear a slight chirp in the real amp and the Tonex capture that the QC failed to capture. But I think it's worth mentioning the QC can run up to 8 captures in a single preset. If you mostly care about just having an amp/cab and pair it with your favorite pedals, then the ToneX will be more than enough.

[@gffg387]

Yeah, that chirp is kind of annoying, but I think the amp has it. He played too little the real amp for me to be sure. Quad Cortex cleaned all that chirp and muddied the tone a bit.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I am curious if the chirp couldve been editing the mic out? I didnt notice any chirp as an artifact sound. If you have a specific time to listen, I can let you know for sure

[@gffg387]

@@SteveSterlacci at 4:53, for example, you can clearly hear it in the real amp. It's almost like a valve rattling. It's a metallic rattling behind the sound, if that makes sense. Listening again the Tonex has this chirp as much as the real amp. So another point to IK. The QC completely missed/cleaned that.

[@cechichan]

@@gffg387 Nice catch, sometimes NOT sounding like the real thing ain't such a bad thing ;D

[@tarheeltone]

Good job Steve! The captures are really close honestly. As far as an all in one unit, the QC, hands down!

[@SteveSterlacci]

For all in one, there is no contest

[@BlackWolfTribe]

Well Duh, ToneX isn’t a all in one 😂 amp capture however is better lol

[@ImSeeD]

If you got the money, it`s an easy call

[@ImSeeD]

@@BlackWolfTribe Is it ?? In this video it sounded `the same` haha

[@BlackWolfTribe]

@@ImSeeD nah there was very minor differences, the QC had a little bit more high end while the Tx was warmer which is more realistic and it also had a tad better not much but tad better string separation

[@SunshineHB]

Tonex pedal in QC loop for more amps? I personally have no problem with QC for live and felt like it sounded much better than I could ever get my Helix to sound. Glad to see more options on the market, though.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I don't think its a great companion for QC either. More for the HX stuff is where it is a great combo. QC on its own is an amazing unit

[@SunshineHB]

@@SteveSterlacci I thought I could build a mini rig with the stomp, ended up buying a Morningstar midi switcher, learned how to do that tedious set up… Then realized I would have to do that every time I wanted to change a parameter (was using the MC6 to control individual effect parameters and bypasses to sort of create my own snapshots) If they would have just added a couple more snapshots to the HX Stomp it would have been so much better. I was spoiled with the Helix rack and foot controller. After all that the Stomp XL came out 😂

[@TheFrozenDesert]

Your summary absolutely nailed it. Now I just need to wait for Sweetwater to send my ToneX.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Nice!

[@robertbuffalo8287]

What about two ToneX pedals? One for amps and the other for OD, distortion, fuzz, and boost pedals?

[@flashbak01]

Just had a look on TGP for sale forum. Two QC's got listed today and additional two were already listed bringing it to a total of 4 QC's currently up for sale on it.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Wow!

[@flashbak01]

@@SteveSterlacci Just checked, another QC just went up for sale today on TGP for sale forum.

[@gary.vondran]

Very educational video. I heard slight differences, but I find it's hard to distinguish And with the price difference, the ToneX is quite interesting. Question, can you use a HX Stomp as the capture interface. I thought it is a re-amp box, and assume can plug in mics to it's inputs and use it's send/returns and outs to drive the profiling signal to the amp. Just wondering as it would save me the $250 for the capture box.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I guess you could try using the instrument send and return to do the re amp part. I haven't tried it

[@imcrazedandconfused]

Yes, the ToneX definitely sounds more realistic in your comparison. Which is not that surprising, IMHO the capturing process is much more streamlined. What I seriously miss in the ToneX capturing process is the possibility to capture in-the-box amps or whole pedal/amp/console emulations. E.g. I have the excellent Otto Audio 11 11 11 11 and would like to use the amp sounds that I can create there in a device like the ToneX. As of now, I can not find a way to easily do that. I would have to deal with interface loopbacks etc. It would be great, if I could capture a VST chain as well, to capture exactly the sound of a studio production and use it on stage. I also would like to have a dedicated DI out XLR. Also, a reverb is nice, but I would love to have JUST a delay additionally, and it would buy me in instantly. Still, the sound really beats the Quad Cortex. And, since the model IS more realistic, the Kemper as well. I know a producer who sold and re-bought the Kemper at least 4 times, because he is never sure if it really is a good replacement for the real thing. I am pretty sure, the ToneX would end that discussion. Last but not least, the neuronal network modeling used in ToneX is also used in some freeware/open source software/hardware, esp. the Proteus and NeuralPi of GuitarML. This guy did it definitely right, and everyone with an affinity to electronics and computers can build a device like the ToneX, PLUS the option to build in an effects chain. Because .... the modeling only takes around half of the Pi's processing capacity, with reverb and delay after the modeler. So, there is room for more pre and post effect prosessing. And, you can feed the model learning with just several recorded audios, and even have a parameter to change the model dynamically, like e.g. a functional "GAIN" knob. All works really great, if you are willing to dive into it. The Proteus plugin already did the ToneX job for me on several occasions, just in the process to build the hardware (~200 bucks),,,, Still, there is no final tutorial for that one, but ... if you know electronics a bit, this is a GREAT opportunity.

[@SteveSterlacci]

The way I run it is off of my laptop. So I use the Axe IO interface on my laptop, then run the signal chain through my desktop computer with my fancy mic pres and plug ins. works great! That GuitarML is interesting . Would love to try it

[@imcrazedandconfused]

@@SteveSterlacci Problem with running off a laptop is latency. Even with very low buffer settings you have the minimum latency due to USB being a not audio optimized serial interfacing standard. You get at least a few milliseconds loop latency, no matter what. With a dedicated real-time OS like the one used in the Proteus-Board of GuitarML, you are in the same ultra-low latency ballpark as other hi-end modelling boards. Actually, they use similar microprocessors and operating systems internally. For, let's say, fast djent stuff, this makes a serious difference. Many guitarists therefore use a dedicated device and record both, the external model/amp signal and a pure DI signal for re-amping. They then use analog cue/direct monitoring of their computer sound card interface. Very, very low latency for recording. Works definitely best. A simple 2ch Focusrite interface already does the trick. For example, Misha Mansoor uses such a simple setup to record at home. One could argument, that you also have latency on stage due to distance to the amp stack / cabinet, which is true, however, the brain can not be tricked easily to accept that headphones are NOT having zero latency, LOL. I hope you get the point ... PS: I just got it, how your setup is meant to be. Yes, this works for capturing software amps for sure. I wonder, if latency there does compromise the quality of the neuronal network models. I don't know, if the ToneX does try to time align signals correctly before machine learning, which would get best results.

[@evankolpack]

I don't currently own either so no bias here. The QC has arguably slightly better sound quality (especially with newest OS 3.0 update), it has great pedals, pedal modeling, great intuitive touch screen ui, way more i/o (mic inputs, effects loops, etc), multiple fx paths that leverage that i/o, the hardware itself is super powerful and intended to be future proof in terms of future upgrades, and since you released this video the new 3.0 update and editor have solved a lot of the issues the QC was having. Oh, and it's $250 cheaper now @ $1600 MSRP. So while the Tonex is a great platform, I'd go with the QC if those things mentioned are a concern for you.

[@ThePlanarchist]

Excellent. Don't think I was really in the Quad market at the moment ($$$$$) but great to see that for what I probably want the Tonex will do the job as well and maybe work with my HX Stomp and other old pedals to free up some its DSP. Very interesting times (good to push the competition).....nicely done, Steve!

[@jimamsden]

I don't find captures that compelling in practice. I pick an amp model that produces the sound I want and then use the amp controls, often using scenes to change parameters for different songs. I suppose if you want to use a lot of captures and do a lot of preset switching, ToneX could work. But I don't prefer that approach for live playing. I also think that using analog pedalboards with ToneX or Quad Cortex has to be done carefully to avoid driving the inputs too hard and getting digital clipping. For my purposes, Quad Cortex provides a good overall solution for amps and effects. But ToneX is certainly a nice option.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I feel the same! Quad as an all in one is tough to beat

[@msturner79]

I use the quad cortex as an all in one plus a strymon big sky. But I ordered the tonex to see if like it better with a small board like you did I the other video. Also quad cortex can run dual amps. I don’t think tonex does that.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Yeah as you add stuff, the QC definitely pulls away with all things considered. Its more than 4x the price for a reason!

[@sboy1955]

Maybe get another ToneX box… total $798. Still in it for less than half of a QC.

[@filipenevesgtr]

I’ve been using helix floor I’m really thinking to buy a tonex and blue sky etc I’ll save money and I’ll improve my tone

[@SteveSterlacci]

That'll be cool!

[@BrokenDreamRox]

In overall sound quality and closeness to the amps it seems Tonex has a miniscule edge over QC. For me it's Tonex for most amps into my HXFX/Stomp combo for effects and the occasional amp 2. But I think you said there was zero lag switching so maybe Helix just for FX

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thats such a killer combo right now. This is exactly what the Helix needs TBH

[@deskducker]

It’s not minuscule on quality frfr for comparison. It’s not that close. Tonex better

[@lhrocker]

They both sound really good. I own a Kemper and QC and i just bought the Tonex based on all the internet hype. I like the unit but I feel it's more of a "profile player" (somthing that Kemper should have done years ago), albeit a great sounding player. You need to use a computer to capture and then load the sound where the others can profile directly from hardware. Still getting my feet wet with the unit, but for what it is, it's great. Thanx for the content!

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thank you Peter. I don't mind hooking into the computer for all the connections in exchange for less space when playing it out. Kemper definitely should've done this years ago! Hope to have earned your sub 🤘

[@lhrocker]

@@SteveSterlacci Subbed :)

[@checkitout611]

I do like my QC but my biggest issue is and has been the waiting game for the desktop editor which IK has ALWAYS had for Amplitube and ToneX. Now that this ToneX pedal has come out for me the QC will likely go on the shelf hoping updates will be coming including editor and also being able to integrate their plugins. Like you said the QC can do far more but I kind of like that the fact that Tonex is basically JUST your amp. You can then add effects of your choice in front of it and STILL just bring a pedal board and not bring your amps. Also like you said because it's so cheap you can easily buy 2 ToneX units (for backup and have it ready to go should something go wrong) and still be far cheaper than the QC. Again I DO like my QC and it for sure can do a complete rig (effects, etc) but the fact they came out with the ToneX pedal is just awesome. Thanks Steve!

[@ironblast5]

Tone x is 24 bit at 192khz and has a plugin for in the studio for many it will be the best option with the bonus of it costing 4x's less then Quad cortex or Kemper.

[@akaerik1]

really enjoyed the video you did with the hx stomp controlling the toneX thinking of doing the same with my gt1000core. seems to me that for about 800.00 less you could have something similar to the QC

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thanks! Yeah that will absolutely work great 🤘 i havent tried the gt1000

[@JustinZak7]

It’s got me thinking of swapping out my QC for a ToneX/Stomp XL board.

[@jasonvai4951]

The high end fizz is done with a high cut 😊

[@SteveSterlacci]

Is there high end fizz?

[@phowell333]

Personally, as someone who jumped into digital on the day 1 announcement of the Helix (I also own a QC), I find that I download or purchase captures and use the built-in effects of the unit. Even most players with pedalboards don't have multiple expensive amps. I do agree that NeuralDSP is dragging its feet. I'm sure they're moving a little faster now. Come one Neural - do you want to be most known for being behind? The big question is what about Line 6? They have limited DSP and I can't see them doing years of free updates for its users and then leaving them behind. Maybe a "sidecar" attachment for the Helix is the answer...THAT'S what I am most curious about.

[@mightymikeamps9317]

I imported a killer Matchless Independence capture from tonenet into the Tonex pedal Then plugged that into send1/return 1 of my Quad Cortex and created a killer patch with boost pedal, delay, and reverb. I’m having a nightmare getting the QC to control the Tonex pedal via midi I would like to have other patches like this, which is easy to create , but I have to manually change the tone model until I figure it out. This setup sounds amazing, will be a killer compact pedal board rig once I figure out the switching.

[@planzed.2]

11:16 dude I was thinking it & then you said it, definitely there’s a difference in definition . In headphones I heard slightly more low energy in the QC that muddies a touch, TX doesn’t seem to have that same (subtle but could probably be EQ’d). Cool vid man, thanks!

[@PastelComGini]

IMO the real question is: will NAM kill all the profilers or will they adopt it like IR and we'll ve able to use profiles in whatever we want?

[@SteveSterlacci]

If Steve can get it into a pedal, i am all in

[@jasonzdora]

I cannot hear enough of a difference that it makes any kind of make-or-break kind of difference. Its so minimal it doesnt matter. I can understand the hair-splitting aspect of a KZbin video but in a live scenario or in a mix, theres no way anyone could tell. Tonex hardware is a cool unit but limited. Its awesome for simple setups. Only 1 input but doesnt matter for the majority of users. My only big gripe is that theres no 2nd slot for a Tonex boost pedal capture and theres no parallel processing for stereo amps or IRs. Smart of them to leave all of the Capturing tech on your computer so they can make the hardware much cheaper to produce. Theyre both awesome but in different leagues, aside from the fact that they both employ the "capture" kind of amp sim tech. Quad Cortex is way more complex and its up to the user to decide if thats what they need or not.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I think you nailed the analysis here. I wish we could make a 3 button signal chain in the tonex like use a pedal capture and be able to engage/ disengage instead of having to bake them into a separate capture

[@mattgilley8789]

@@SteveSterlacci… do you know if you can use the expression input with a single button foot switch to control on / off of an overdrive capture inside of the tone model?

[@Johncb15]

Absolutely correct. Total difference sets of capabilities with totally different price points.

[@jasonzdora]

​@@SteveSterlacci Yeah, exactly @re-baking. I think thats going to become a big thing now. People setting up a sound with Tonex plugin inside their DAW (with overdrive and amp captures running) and then basically making a new Tonex capture of that composite sound into 1 model. Folks with audio routing know-how will be able to pull it off but still kind of a pain. In your use of the hardware, how quick is the switching from 1 preset to the next? I thought maybe, with the 3 captures loaded into each preset that its possible for them to update the firmware and allow for all 3 of those to be used in series. The idea being that the individual presets probably load all 3 simultaneously anyways since that helps with "silent switching" between the 3 of them. Just guessing and hoping, of course.

[@SteveSterlacci]

@@jasonzdora That all makes sense! The preset switching is seamless. I do that at the end of the video with the HX Stomp yesterday. That included switching to a diff bank

[@metalliholic]

If you only play at home, and have plug ins or even the tonex software on my computer with studio monitors. Is there any reason to get this pedal? Is the pedal more for people on the go?

[@Tt-nt1iu]

I’m listening to this on a set of Bowers and Wilkins PX7’s …. Not exactly shit cans. The TX sounds less gainy (is that a word?) than the QC. It’s not by much but it’s there. Seems like something you can account for going into the capture though? I’m looking into getting one of these capture boxes so I don’t have to lug my head to two different practice spots for two different bands. Also, at 39, dragging that shit to gigs is getting old …… like me.

[@isaacisback8786]

There's something very weird happening, here : when the guitar's running through the Tone X (and not the QC), we can hear some high pitch sounds giving the impression that there's a tambourine rattling just next to the mic capturing the sound. It's very disturbing. I wonder what causes that. Otherwise, great video, mate.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I've heard this from a few people and really have no idea what happened or why lol. I do hear some weird harmonic things when I blast it in headphones, but nothing thats overly offensive. I should just re do it! Thanks for being here and checking it out

[@isaacisback8786]

@@SteveSterlacci Try on hi-fi speakers: it's more blatant than through headphones. Anyway, I'm sure it's just circumstantial. At least, I hope... HA!

[@SteveSterlacci]

@Isaac Is Back its def something i must have done 🤣😅 i seem to be the only one whos done that in their video so its def likely to be a "me" issue

[@Awesomelvis]

There is a difference I noticed with the nobels. The cortex is "cleaner" but the tone x is "scronggier"? Still really close and both sound good. It's up to us to decide if that translation matters in a mix and live

[@SteveSterlacci]

Yep, up to the players!

[@Johncb15]

Hey Steve. I really had trouble hearing any difference in captures from ToneX vs QC (with my audio I/F and Adam Audio studio monitors). I think that it is safe to say that the ToneX can now add a very affordable way to add amp captures to your pedal board instead of hauling the amps to every gig. I personally use the Quad Cortex as an all in one amp and effects unit with the best user interface on the market and therefore for me, comparing the two units is like apples and oranges as far a features and price. Thanks for a great demo of the captures, I am every impressed by what ToneX offers for the price. Cheers.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thanks John! Your rig sounds super fun to play through. As an all in one, you really cant go wrong with QC

[@stevekannes89]

I’m still getting the ToneX brother! Can’t wait until they get in stock!🎸

[@markinthemix6055]

Kemper has pretty solidified its position in the hardware profiling, modeling arena. QC seems to have such a strong fanboy/HATE base. Yes you are correct that the Tone X is a killer to the QC emotional rollercoaster we have witnessed.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Man the fanboi/hate base is so true lol you should see this thread in the FB groups where I shared this vid

[@sboy1955]

Pretty sure Kemper could release a small box like this with similar basic capture capabilities. With this unit now in the field, they will lose market share if they don’t.

[@markinthemix6055]

@@sboy1955 Tone X doesn’t capture or profile. Kemper can offer a similar unit. I have NEVER used the profiling capabilities of my unit. I buy profiles and l’m perfectly happy

[@sboy1955]

@@markinthemix6055 - My bad, I thought it could do a single capture? I really need to go read up on it.

[@markinthemix6055]

@@sboy1955 l still think it’s a great product. I kinda want one. I’m crazy about my Kemper at the same time. I just keep waiting on a Kemper release. I have an incredible collection of Kemper profiles that are great so it makes sense to keep track with Kemper products. I thought about getting the Tone X to play around with.

[@MotoRiff77]

I put the Tonex in my Helix loop, Wow so much easier to get a good amp tone, I A/B the stock amps and it's crazy how much crisp and clearer the Tonex is

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thats a great idea and surely gonna kill!

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thanks Ben. Hope you're enjoying your shadow ban 🤣🤣🤣 i did make a higher gain capture of my soldano in my first tonex vid

[@BlackWolfTribe]

@@benburnett8109 completely unnecessary if you have a helix 😂. Amp sounds on helix, especially the tone match ir’s, are extremely good.

[@justinTime077]

I use fractal and I love the authenticity of tone and feel they achieve. How did the tonex compare?

[@juancarlosprevostzarate7077]

Would like to know about that

[@justinTime077]

@@juancarlosprevostzarate7077 the TONEX app is actually free on all platforms. Just found out after I wrote this. I tested it tonight a bit. It seems on equal footing. It just might sound even more authentic, and beyond the stock profiles I’m sure it will be extremely excellent. I’m still deciding. Not enough time with it yet.

[@justinTime077]

@@juancarlosprevostzarate7077 honestly the stuff good AI does is just amazing and when it gets more refined it will conquer all. Really.

[@21stcenturymetal31]

Its the perfect fit for me. I like using pedals and for me this fits the bill. I can use my favorite stomps and have all my favorite amps in a small foot print. I mean 399 you get the software and the unit. Its really a bargain.

[@matthewearl9824]

i bought this thing the day it came out and i LOVE it. I have an axefx 3, quad cortex, headrush and kemper. i have now captured my Marshall 8100 and my GK 250ML and LOVE the sound i get.

[@ccamacho9333]

Which one you like more??

[@RyanChansler]

I'm planning on keeping my QC and buying a Tonex Pedal. I can see using the Tonex pedal when I don't need an all in one solution. I play in different tributes and cover bands as well as churches. Some situations require a more complex setup. Others require very little. I think it's getting down to splitting hairs when comparing capturex. I know you're just comparing just the captures, but comparing the overall units, it really turns into comparing apples to oranges. As you said, the Tonex is primarily an amp capture device. It's probably not going to grow much further than that. The QC is all in one and has a lot of room to grow, albeit slowly up to this point. I totally understand the frustration some have over the slow firmware update. It's not affecting me that much because I just purchased it back in November, but I do understand the irritation of promises taking forever to become reality. I also understand setbacks, and knowing that the UI and directory was completely overhauled, I can understand why it would take time for all of that, especially since they are a small company, so I wasn't too put off by it. I think I was more put off by a lack of transparency. I feel like they could have eased the tension more if they had someone like Digital Igloo (Eric from Line 6, answering questions , keeping people posted, and putting out fires. Hopefully, since this big overhaul update is finished, they can focus on the promises they hopefully plan to keep!

[@fraenkiboii]

00:55 "they're a little bit behind on updates." - Neural DSP has just released a gigantic v2.0 update in January.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I'm aware being that I have one lol. One giant update doesn't catch them up on the last 2 years of minimal updates. Its still a fully capable unit, but it needs a few more things still

[@dancotterman1267]

My own preferences is using Tonex for preamp and purchase a used Pod HD 500x . They are less than 200.00 for the FX. It has over 500 presets, in stomp mode the inside eight buttons are all on/off, has tuner/looper, wah, go from Tonex into the pod, add FX pre or post Tonex. Those who want pedals at home no problem but playing out use the pod with the Tonex. Total cost; 600.00 compared to 1850.00 for the QC. Yes everyone has their preferences though. On a budget, or price is no object. You get to decide, options are great.

[@Zygnus]

Perhaps it's my 50 year old ears or KZbin compression, but I struggle to hear a difference. However, I think a bigger factor when comparing these two is the future availability of captures on their respective clouds. QC has had a year or two of advantage, but I'm thinking that perhaps by next year ToneX is going to have far more captures on its cloud, given the affordability and convenience, and particularly given that you only need to have a 100-150 $ software to make new captures. And I say this as a QC owner. Neural should quickly come out with the desktop editor, make the capturing process more clear as you point out, integrate their commercial plugins as they promised back in the day, and perhaps also release a capture / playback affordable software-only solution as well, if they want to compete.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Totally agree!!

[@johngrosz8596]

Great video... I'm really considering a Tonex and hoping there is a "community" with the Tonex that makes "captures" available like the Kemper... PAGING MICHAEL BRITT....

[@SteveSterlacci]

Absolutely! I will be putting a tonex section on my store and will capture my amps

[@tonegarage4491]

An amazing piece of kit for sure but I’ve decided personally to hold out for the Amplitube 5 hardware box (fingers crossed)

[@SteveSterlacci]

That will be an awesome box

[@rejuvenator8966]

Honestly I ALMOST regret getting the QC last summer as I'm not a big Neural fan and there are many things lackluster in QC. But it is just too convenient to bring to a gig versus a combination board of my HX Effects + Tonex (I already have HX FX and now ordered Tonex pedal). Convenience as a working musician still keeps me with QC and it is a good piece of gear even with my gripes with it...

[@SteveSterlacci]

Yep! At the end of the day, you can't beat convenience!

[@DeloreanDave]

Please let me know if worth it for someone who only has hx effects. Really considering tonex to use with it

[@rejuvenator8966]

@@DeloreanDave I'll let you know when I get it and test drive it

[@Bobby_Digital37]

I just could never pull the trigger on a Quad, it always seemed so overpriced to me… and the Tonex just proved that and I will eventually buy one 🥸

[@rejuvenator8966]

@@Bobby_Digital37 Good choice honestly 😄 QC is overpriced for what it is

[@paulbradshawguitar]

cool video and comparison, for me given the format i feel it's more of a competition for the Iridium/UA 65/Dream/Walrus amp sim in a box pedals out there, obviously the modelling pits it against a Kemper/QC, but outside of reverb/NG/compressor it's not really an all in one box like those units, and is priced accordingly, awesome to get more options in any case on the lower gain comparisons at 4-6 minutes i was hearing some kind of pinging noise in the hi-end on the capture not sure why that was

[@3mstudiospalmdesert]

It's pretty close in sound and cost per feature. I don't want to lug a pedal board, but I would like to hear my Tonex captures with no latency, so I'll get the Tonex box but I'll gig the Quad Cortex.

[@SteveSterlacci]

well, you can also use your cortex as an interface and use the tonex plugin at home!~

[@3mstudiospalmdesert]

@@SteveSterlacci have you tried to play your captures through the computer? Even at the lowest buffer settings, I swear I can still detect some latency.

[@SteveSterlacci]

@Mark Gregg i think thats interface and computer dependent no?

[@3mstudiospalmdesert]

@@SteveSterlacci Brand new Macbook Pro and Midas 40r interface...

[@3mstudiospalmdesert]

That A/D to D/A takes a few milliseconds. I can feel it.

[@sonofploppy]

I am going to get a tonex and put it in the loop of my es8 and run it into my power amp of my mark 5. Its going to give me access to so many great amps

[@chrismruz9014]

Theres a fullness to the tone x I’m not hearing from the qc.. why don’t you use the fm9 live anymore?

[@SteveSterlacci]

I still use all of them. I try to change it up based on how I feel. Helix always comes on tour because if god forbid something were to happen, i can go to any store and get one right away or have them ship me one. I can't do that with fm9 unless fractal calls to work something out! Lol

[@chrismruz9014]

@@SteveSterlacci ty for getting back..love the content. just got an fm9 and have first gig coming up with it in a couple weeks.. ax8 user for years and it never let me down..so im hoping the fm9 will be as reliable as tge ax8 was for years to come .. lol keep the channel going its very informative.

[@dmock66]

... yeah... they're really close. I'm glad I'll have both. 🙂 Good video Steve! I also get that our ears can play games with us with respect to which is better. I think your summary with respect to Use Cases and which device serves each is on the mark.

[@galelongputt]

At times, I could hear very little difference between the two. Where I did was at the beginning half of your video, and the Quad had that unpleasant 4k harshness😳. Already having the Helix and adding a Tonex seems a better choice than the Quad IMO. Good work 👏 Thanks, Gale

[@jeffdubuque3755]

hello what do you use for this my fender princeton doen`ent have a effects loop what type of specker system im new to this sruff. thanks

[@encryptor6710]

QC has just a little more oomf than the ToneX. I can hear it, but can that be fixed with some EQ? Probably.

[@SteveSterlacci]

For sure! any raw amp sound can be tweaked a bit

[@YeatzeeGuitar]

Interesting vid Steve! ToneX Seemed to have less body than the QC, which then in turn made the QC come across a bit woofier with the ODR. Makes sense. ToneX seems like a winner for a lot of people. Wish it'd do stereo in, but I understand my use case might not be the norm and most are fine running mono direct 🙂

[@SteveSterlacci]

Can just buy 2 then! LOL Thanks for checking it out bro

[@YeatzeeGuitar]

@@SteveSterlacci I bet some people definitely will.. though they're a lot bigger than I was expecting so not sure how many will be able to cram two on a pedalboard 😆 Too much of a hassle lugging around two different units and two different power supplies for my limited use case, just hope it pushes NDSP to get their act together and keep improving the QC.

[@hallongview]

You can always capture your amp direct then use the VIR to load up IRs of your mics (not sure if you can do multiple IRs/mic options of VIR in the pedal, someone check me on this)

[@MarcoRaaphorst]

yes I am hearing a little more low mids in the QC but the outputs are not 100% the same, Tonex a hair lower in volume it seems. So tricky stuff.I would say: both sound great without any doubt. Tonex seems like a nice affordable box. Super interesting for pedalboard users who want a device for one purpose. Thanks for the video!

[@podxtv]

I think Neural need to ramp up the updates .. this notion of "things coming soon" isn't good enough on a unit at this price point - and be afraid Neural ...IK seems to have everything sorted at release time. And hopefully you can actually go buy a Tonex Pedal and not have to wait around for stock.

[@AndGuitar]

Ordered from IK on 2/16 and arrived 3 days later. Works nicely with QC and Tonex captures work great / sound great. Best part is it only takes 4 minutes to capture instead of hours 😉

[@SteveSterlacci]

This should definitely add some pressure

[@ImSeeD]

Sounds the same! But the cool thing with the Quad Cortex is you can then have...6 Captures of you amps and drive/OD pedals in the Same preset and switch true with scenes, that is the big selling point. + when it sounds the same, but the capture time on the QC is 5 mins, and the ToneX is 15-20-30-60 minutes and that comes down to what spec you have in your PC/MAC.

[@SteveSterlacci]

well the QC isnt that much faster when you do the "default training time" but the QC really does a crap ton more lol

[@npiofficiel]

I hesitate between Qc and tonex+hx stomp. Can we have some free good amps on tonex like on QC?

[@SteveSterlacci]

For sure! There is the ToneNet

[@npiofficiel]

@@SteveSterlacci Thanks. If it was you, you would prefer tonex+hx stomp? I have a Helix lt but bored to tweak it to improve my sound. To sound, it needs Always eq, comp....

[@SteveSterlacci]

@@npiofficiel try tonex in the fx loop of the LT. If you like that, get the stomp. QC still has a ways to go IMO

[@npiofficiel]

Thanks Steve. Can i put tonex where i want in the Helix chain?

[@SteveSterlacci]

@@npiofficiel of course!

[@lihatjalanan1979]

I'm using Helix for the long time and now I'm using both Helix + ToneX

[@SteveSterlacci]

nice!!

[@tonepilot]

Have you not noticed the volume knob on the QC? And, you say you’re going to compare the Tonex feature set to the Quad Cortex but you’re not going to talk about what the QC does above and beyond the Tonex? Also, many of us have been gigging successfully with the Quad Cortex for years. If you say it’s not gig ready I’ll say that’s a Steve problem, not a QC problem.

[@SteveSterlacci]

There's a volume knob? No way! ... I said the QC does way more and that it can't be a unit for unit comparison, so I am just comparing captured tones in this vid (i did explain this, no?). If you've used any other modeler, they all have way more to offer in terms of gigging experience that I discuss in depth in other videos. I use these all professionally and compare them in depth. You don't need to agree if you are happy, but don't discredit others' opinions that have compared the rest. I advocate for QC having the potential to be better than the rest on the market, but its not there yet

[@tonepilot]

@@SteveSterlacci Sarcasm Cool. At 3:09, you say (after disparaging the QC for gigging) "On the Tonex, if you have to tweak volume, it's right there". Insinuating the QC doesn't have this feature. Yes, have used all the modelers except Kemper. I used Amplitube live and in a DAW for many years. The tones aren't even close to what I'd want from the variety of sounds I need. If there is one feature I wish the QC had, it would be the amp controls as physical knobs. I think that's brilliant. My opinion is that the QC is superior to the Helix and the Fractal products for getting the tones in my head.

[@SteveSterlacci]

@TonePilot thats a fair and cool point to make that its best for getting the sounds in your head! I was breaking balls with the volume knob comment. I meant that as any parameter. I disable my big volume knob with all modelers to FOH. So, what I meant was changing any parameter on the fly. With QC, you need to swipe out of gig view, press the block, adjust it, exit, then swipe back to gig view. I show this in one of the other vids as my main source of frustration. It's not a bad thing to have issues with your chosen device. All of them have their own issues, and they won't get resolved if no one talks about them. Its not meant to be offensive to happy users. I just hope they can make it as good as it can be

[@tonepilot]

@@SteveSterlacci I enjoy sarcasm :). I've leveled out all my patches on the QC and then the FOH can adjust the mix to suit the room (really changes when the audience arrives). But, I do have an expression pedal that I use for a small range of volume adjustments as FOH doesn't always know I'm about to play a solo (especially as I'm 95% the rhythm guitarist). To be completely honest. Had Amplitube come out with this 5 years ago, I probably never would have discovered all-in-one modelling such as those offered by the Kemper/QC/Fractal. That's the direction I was heading until I bought the GT1000. Cheers

[@heikkileppanen9605]

They sound really close, that´s true, and from the price point this is a no-brainer choice. BUT I find the ToneX flatter sounding and more compressed, and there is a tiny bit weird hi-pitched noise ringing on the ToneX sounds. Or is it just me hearing it?

[@pb25193]

It's just you. There's plenty of science showing that people will make the expensive product benchmark for no reason. If you watch comparisons between QC and axe fx3, you will see people hearing "flatter sounds" on the QC. Conveniently enough, these golden ears always fail the blind tests.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I actually felt the opposite when making the video! LOL I think the QC has an added high end that I discuss like 3/4 through

[@SteveSterlacci]

I am always down to challenge those with the golden ears that swear! LOL

[@pb25193]

@@SteveSterlacci the next 10 years are going to transform the way guitarists carry their sound and I am waiting for it!

[@thetimsterxxx]

I heard it too

[@jimsimmons2674]

I think it would have been much better if the Tonex Pedal had a Send Return loop for your other pedals,it would make your pedal board setup more complete this way!I just had another thought,if anyone has a older guitar effects floorboard like the Boss GT-3,GT-6 or other guitar processors with a Send Return loop this would be a good way to use the Tonex Pedal with all the good boss effects!I still have a Boss GT-3 and i might just try it myself with the Tonex if i decide to get one!The Boss GT Floorboards let you put your effects units(like the Tonex) in any order in the effects chain!

[@SteveSterlacci]

Hey Jim! Check out the video I posted yesterday where I did this exact idea using an HX Stomp. The ToneX was designed to be in the middle of a board, so it really doesnt need a loop as you can position the amp sound wherever you want

[@abehaddad]

Splitting hairs on tone and comparing apples to oranges on use cases and features brother. They both sound fantastic and are very different products kudos to IK Multimedia for capitalising on the one biggest selling feature of the QC which is its capture. what you should be saying is if you want to spend $650 for an amp capture pedal then the ToneX is king but if you want an all in one gigging and capture solution the QC reings supreme. BTW I own both and you can easily adjust volume on the QC on the fly it's one tap on screen and turn of the corresponding pedal switch.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Hey Abe! You need to do 4 things to change a parameter on a gig using QC. 1) swipe out of gig view, 2)tap the pedal 3)adjust setting 4) swipe to gig view. Thats where it loses me personally. Im working with someone on a midi controller to help with that

[@sasmitha8446]

I just hear a really really high sort of a snare drum string rattling sound on the ToneX.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Im curious what you're listening on. I'd like to try to hear it as well

[@cheeher3212]

This is a wake up call for the amp capture units like Kemper and QC

[@SteveSterlacci]

Yep!

[@Michael-hh7nl]

I hear a fuller sound from the QC especially in the low mids.

[@SteveSterlacci]

oh yah?! What are you listening on for you reference?

[@Michael-hh7nl]

@@SteveSterlacci I listened through my studio monitors and a pair of QSC k8’s.

[@JessicaLynnCountry]

👏👏👏

[@SteveSterlacci]

Hi!

[@Paul_Lenard_Ewing]

The best thing about the ToneX is you are not sacrificing tone quality. What I heard was equal. In a recording situation my DAW covers any extras with plug-ins so a good 90% of what the Quad does is simply unnecessary. In the end who uses more than 5 amps to do the tunes they play? Yes you can get picky with the right 5 but with what the unit has, what you can download to buy or even get free must certainly cover all the bases. I got by with pedals and a single amp for years. No one went home because my amp sound didn't cut it.

[@aviator_bryan]

They're all pretty great. It's a great time to be a musician for sure. Some people swear by profiles/captures a la Kemper, QC, Tonex. It's cool I guess, if you have beloved amps etc that you want to take with you. Personally, I have no use for it, as I prefer high quality component modeling. In the Fractal world, there's almost nothing that you can't create with the palette of onboard amps & cabs. Factor in world class effects, a killer software editor (if you want to use it) and frequent firmware updates and improvements... for me the choice was easy. I could see the Tonex as a killer addition to a small board with other effects, but now you have a bigger footprint than an FM9 or Helix. IMO, the tonex would compete against an FM3, ie similar size, and 3 buttons... however the FM3 has all of those great effects. To each their own tho. You can't beat the Tone X price/value. That's pretty killer. They all sound pretty great tho - just pick what feature set works best for you.

[@garyweideman8968]

ToneX looks like a great pedal but I need an FX loop so this is a no go for me .. maybe the next version will have it

[@SteveSterlacci]

Unless youre doing stereo amp sounds, you can just put it in the middle of the board and use stereo FX post amp

[@AkiraSpectrum]

Tonex sounds better to me. Great video thanks!

[@valuedhumanoid6574]

I grew tired of hauling all my crap to rehearsals and then back home. One rig for this, one rig for that, the logistics were a nightmare. I chose to simplify. Line 6 Relay G10 wireless into the Helix, one cable from the Helix into the Thomas Blug Amp1 Iridium with it's own foot controller, then one cable to a EVH 2x12 cab. That's it. If you guys have not tried out the Iridium amp your missing the best in life. A 4 channel, 100w tube amp with all the features like effects loop, controls for each channel and the thing is the size of an EHX multi-effect pedal. My amp and pedals on one board. Two cables total, one instrument and one speaker. I have it all into one power strip mounted to the board, so only one 120v power plug needed. The speaker cab is on 6" diameter air filled rubber tires so that is the "truck", the board and guitar case go on top and my whole rig rolls smoothly and the tires isolate the cab from the floor. I also made a pulling latch that hooks up to the steering end so I can tow it, or push. It has made my life so much better, and the tones I can get are studio grade.

[@SteveSterlacci]

very nice! I want to try the blug stuff

[@valuedhumanoid6574]

@@SteveSterlacci It is really amazing stuff. A 100w tube amp with 4 channels and all the features/controls of a full size amp. And the tones are just heaven in a box. Especially the cleans. A touch of reverb and a little chorus and you got magic.

[@TudorAdrian]

Good review Steve. Looking forward to see what both IK and NDSP bring forward. While you're on the "profiling" topic, the free / open-source NAM's a *lot* more accurate than both of these but it's only plugin form.

[@deskducker]

It’s only slightly better than Tonex. But def better than qc

[@Christian.Means.]

Both sound good to me, except the Tonex has some kind of high end ring to it that isn't present in the QC. Idk if it's noise, but it's like a sharp unpleasant ringing noise everytime you hit a chord. But then again for the money, sounds wonderful.

[@ruanddu]

I am hearing that too!

[@TheOnlyGuitarFather]

Tonex models are the best on the market.. their Mesa Reference pack are the best models I’ve ever heard

[@davidjoel111]

I don’t think these units compete directly, yes they both capture but the quad cortex is intended to be an all in one unit, if it’s successful at that it’s up to the user, the tone x is intended to be used with other pedals. The quad cortex has a lot to improve, for an all in one I think I would prefer a fractal FM9. For capturing the tone x is hard to beat for the price.

[@SteveSterlacci]

I make the same points in the video and agree. FM9 is a great option !

[@davidjoel111]

@@SteveSterlacci i was not interested in the Tone X until I saw your video using it with an hx stomp, I have a stomp and have been struggling with light breakup tones, don’t think it’s an excuse to buy new gear but honestly for $400 the tone x is very tempting.

[@HerroYuy246]

Man IK media being the amazing under dog here!!

[@SteveSterlacci]

for sure! they've come to play

[@poorbrokeguitarist]

I'm a Helix guy but I like the idea of the Tonex. It could put an end to the overpriced processors.

[@fedboy21]

Which one has "chewiness" of a real amp??? No one talks about that

[@SteveSterlacci]

I never chewed on an amp. How do you get it in your mouth?

[@fedboy21]

@@SteveSterlacci u wouldnt believe it LOL. Its just my term for the sound and feel, i dont know how to describe it. Its a real amp thingy.

[@SteveSterlacci]

@fedboy21 i know man! I'm just messing with ya. In an isolated blind contest, i think you'd still be hard pressed to hear or feel the difference. Depends on how you dial in!

[@Solaratheband]

Not a chance. Neural has confirmed that all the archetypes will be available shortly for the QC, it’s wireless and has an incredible cloud. The QC will eventually replace all modelers. Wait and see.

[@SteveSterlacci]

Thats been my hope and theory from day one as well. Just up to them to deliver!

[@goodguy2627]

ToneX is definitely a great unit and it sure can capture anything you put in it. However I still think that QC sounds better...... just a little bit better but better. I believe Neural DSP will deliver everything they promised to their customers and the next level the QC will be a killer machine.

[@SteveSterlacci]

If and when they do, I will definitely be singing their praises more

[@enricofugazzi5206]

It´s almost impossible to tell the difference, specially with KZbin compressing. Plus I think in a mix no one will be able to tell what is what.

[@scottbronder]

For an avid pedal person, the Tone X makes sense. The comparison is obviously click bate, so I'll let you slide. Me personally, I hate pedals all over the floor and my OCD makes me twitch when I get to that state and then have to Reverb them all. I love that IK is coming out of nowhere with hardware that goes along with their software, but for now I prefer my all in one's. QC and HX Stomp. Maybe LIne 6 can wake up and offer capturing. Then we could crown the winner.

[@franknavarro9364]

Bear in mind That the Tonex is kind of a BETA app, hopefully we get an update soon. (for little more easy fine tweaking in computer 😋

[@SteveSterlacci]

I'm sure over time it'll get better

[@HiredGoonage]

Quad Cortex is done. Line 6 will be just fine - they have great customer support and do timely updates.

[@danyeo]

ANY interest I ever had in the QC is now gone.

[@HiredGoonage]

@@danyeo that thing was just a $2000 lateral move from the Kemper with a fancy touch screen.

[@FlameDeathcrash]

I feel that quad cortex is better

[@jahjah67]

My ears rate the Tone X superior in accuracy. I’m impressed