I used our singer's QC for about a month when he first got it so I could setup everything and build some patches for our shows and the narrow footswitch spacing is an actual problem. On stage when you're moving around, focusing on the mic and hoping you got your foot in the right spot, yeah you can accidentally hit the wrong switch or... you know... if it's late in the night and those whiskey shots have taken over.... The only two real reasons I think the nano is better than the QC is size and price. After going through spending a LOT of time with the high gain amp models in the QC, I found that 99.99% of the time, I greatly preferred the sound of high quality captures. I don't see the nano missing the amp models being a drawback. Good captures just plain sound better to my ears and my singer so I won't miss them in the nano. And the small size is great. I didn't like any of the drive boosts in the QC and after capturing a few of my drive pedals, it just didn't feel or sound like the analog pedal. Something was off. It will be interesting to see A) what updates and new features will Neural add to the nano and B) how quickly will the new features get rolled out. I think that, like the QC when it was first launched, it's a very capable hardware platform but is missing features that make it truly compelling for the masses and I am assuming they added enough stuff to it to make it palatable to enough buyers that they could confidently launch the product and start making money but it needs more to steal any thunder from the competitors.
It's a really intertesting idea. I'm almost wishing I waited one more month before diving back into the QC and just gotten this instead, I only use captures from my QC and my effects are coming from pedals anyways. Are you still using both Aaron?
No I sold the Nano on and kept the Quad Cortex as I use it as my interface now as well. I just bought a Kemper Player as my super compact rig as it gives me no compromises in a tiny pedal.
I compared and they sound the same BUT the ‘cabs’ in the Nano only have 6 positions and one mic so there will be sonic differences there. I didn’t try making a capture with it.
If it’s a part of a pedalboard then I get it and it will mean there are more captures in the cloud. I guess QC owners don’t need to worry about it. I just hope some of the features come to QC. I really want a mobile editor.
BONUS: The Nano Cortex has a physical ground lift switch!!!
Did you get the special sale edition? Mine I had to pay extra for!
@@donniejean What do you mean?
@@aaronshortmusic I think I was trying to make a joke that I had to pay extra for the ground switch. Don’t mind me, a lot of my jokes suck 😂
I used our singer's QC for about a month when he first got it so I could setup everything and build some patches for our shows and the narrow footswitch spacing is an actual problem. On stage when you're moving around, focusing on the mic and hoping you got your foot in the right spot, yeah you can accidentally hit the wrong switch or... you know... if it's late in the night and those whiskey shots have taken over....
The only two real reasons I think the nano is better than the QC is size and price. After going through spending a LOT of time with the high gain amp models in the QC, I found that 99.99% of the time, I greatly preferred the sound of high quality captures. I don't see the nano missing the amp models being a drawback. Good captures just plain sound better to my ears and my singer so I won't miss them in the nano.
And the small size is great. I didn't like any of the drive boosts in the QC and after capturing a few of my drive pedals, it just didn't feel or sound like the analog pedal. Something was off.
It will be interesting to see A) what updates and new features will Neural add to the nano and B) how quickly will the new features get rolled out. I think that, like the QC when it was first launched, it's a very capable hardware platform but is missing features that make it truly compelling for the masses and I am assuming they added enough stuff to it to make it palatable to enough buyers that they could confidently launch the product and start making money but it needs more to steal any thunder from the competitors.
Great points. Thanks for your comment.
It's a really intertesting idea. I'm almost wishing I waited one more month before diving back into the QC and just gotten this instead, I only use captures from my QC and my effects are coming from pedals anyways. Are you still using both Aaron?
No I sold the Nano on and kept the Quad Cortex as I use it as my interface now as well. I just bought a Kemper Player as my super compact rig as it gives me no compromises in a tiny pedal.
We are really digging deep for reasons. Thanks.
Not really, they were all immediately apparent. I just wanted to make a video about it to discuss.
"I'm pretty sure the next version of the Quad Cortex will have USB-C but how long will that B, we'll have to C" - Aaron's line of the year. ;)
Ha!
This is the only device on the market WHERIN you can capture the entire signal chain not just amps ….its a game changer
You can’t capture the entire signal chain. Drive, amp, cab, EQ. still need the time based effects.
Another great video, well explained.
can you power this with a 500ma adapter from strymon?
Not sure I think it just needs a regular power supply though. My Boss pedal power supply works fine.
there is a setting on the quad cortex that allows you to turn off what the big nob does. I only have the headphones enable on mine.
Yes but this has both on separate Knobs.
Some people are saying that the Nano cortex sounds better than the original quad cortex with the same captures. Is that true?
It’s exact same tech and algorithm
I compared and they sound the same BUT the ‘cabs’ in the Nano only have 6 positions and one mic so there will be sonic differences there. I didn’t try making a capture with it.
it sounds less artificial digital than the qc in all videos and some people test them both and say exactly the same
@@katseazzz Guess I know what tomorrow’s video will be! :-)
@@katseazzz sounds like cope to me
It’s different. I am puzzled as to why not the modelling too, even simply selected in the app. Can’t wait for mine to arrive
The models take way more DSP than the captures. I have a feeling the Nano is only running one processor. Maybe they will make a Dual Cortex next…
@@aaronshortmusic yeah, not sure that would interest me, the QC isn’t that big.
@@andrewmorgan1640 Right. That’s why I liked it in the first place!
“Tina, is code for Karen”
Who said that?
Ah okay, this one, at the end he says Tina doesn’t do capturing so I was referring how horrible women bosses are named “Karen” not Tina
How long will that "B" we'll have to "C" 😂😂. Nice one
LOL!!!
A most excellent choice of words. We'll done
Thanks!
Still not convinced..
Stay tuned for my review video. Mine arrives tomorrow. Not paid, not endorsed and it will be on the stage with me for a true real world review.
Valid
Nano is a Nono in anybodies vucabulary....lol What the hell were they thinking. From a masterpiece the Quad Cortex to a Nano lemon. Sorry...lol
If it’s a part of a pedalboard then I get it and it will mean there are more captures in the cloud. I guess QC owners don’t need to worry about it. I just hope some of the features come to QC. I really want a mobile editor.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Just starting a discussion. I really hope some of these come to Quad Cortex.
5 reasons to waste your time. More click bait.
The QC is still better in every way
Thank’s for the comment!
Thanks for the stupid video
Thanks for the stupid video