Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Nano Cortex
- Thread starter gtirard
- Start date
Ooh, colour me interested. I was thinking about a Quad Cortex but just don't need all the options.
I was hoping they would call it the medulla and it would do what I need without me having to consciously think about it.
Kind of a maddening review. He should have just had some sounds set up to roll instead of making the viewer watch him scroll through menus.
YouTube videos have erased 50 years of editing education.
Then you will believe it even less that it´s not an Output, but just an Input for Capturings (Mic)
I've just watched a few other (guitars) videos, they're much better than this only bass video.
This pedal seems to be very well thought out, with good features/price ratio IMO and a good user experience for the size of the box.
But for bass, I'm not sure it is as useful as for guitar, because the user interface is focused more on the amp sim than the effects, and I don't think we need to change our amp models in the middle of a gig/song as often as guitarists do. On the contrary, access to the effects is mainly done with your smartphone.
I understand the choices, they have to make compromises because of the size. I think they made the right choices, but it's more relevant for guitar than bass, or at least it's not really for me / my needs and taste.
I agree it's sad there is no DI out.
This pedal seems to be very well thought out, with good features/price ratio IMO and a good user experience for the size of the box.
But for bass, I'm not sure it is as useful as for guitar, because the user interface is focused more on the amp sim than the effects, and I don't think we need to change our amp models in the middle of a gig/song as often as guitarists do. On the contrary, access to the effects is mainly done with your smartphone.
I understand the choices, they have to make compromises because of the size. I think they made the right choices, but it's more relevant for guitar than bass, or at least it's not really for me / my needs and taste.
I agree it's sad there is no DI out.
Never said it was an output, it’s a bad spot for an XLR if you’re putting it on a pedalboard. You have to take it off every time you want to use it.Then you will believe it even less that it´s not an Output, but just an Input for Capturings (Mic)
Isn't it a little bit of a bummer not to have an XLR output on the unit itself?
No parallel processing, can’t change effect order, only one capture to be used in a preset at a time, and need a phone to use the tuner.
I’m sticking with my HX Stomp for now.
I’m sticking with my HX Stomp for now.
I wonder which of these limitations are really necessary to reduce the size of the pedal, and which ones are deliberate marketing decisions to justify the cost of the QC?
I'm trying to imagine the marketing meetings where they defined the specs of the Nano... "the nano must be attractive for segments Xx and Yy of the market, but not too much for segment Zz if we want to keep selling the QC" or something like that. "ok let's remove the XLR out then..."
Maybe some of the limitations are purely at software level and could be removed later via updates (like the number of blocks in the HX Stomp). I'm sure they could make a software update to allow ordering effects freely - if they want to.
I'm trying to imagine the marketing meetings where they defined the specs of the Nano... "the nano must be attractive for segments Xx and Yy of the market, but not too much for segment Zz if we want to keep selling the QC" or something like that. "ok let's remove the XLR out then..."
Maybe some of the limitations are purely at software level and could be removed later via updates (like the number of blocks in the HX Stomp). I'm sure they could make a software update to allow ordering effects freely - if they want to.
I'd take a I I guess that the limitations on blocks and their position allow for the gapless switching of patches. It'd be cool to see some flexibility in the future, though.
I still think the Transpose is useless without an FX Loop, as most folks will presumably want some drives in front.
It's worth noting (as was pointed out to me in a different thread) that outs 1 & 2 are balanced TRS, so including a separate DI would be a little redundant.
I think the target audience is the opposite end of the spectrum, to compete with Tonex, Opus, and Kemper Profiler Player rather than the Stomp and GT1000core.
If they brought out a middle range one in a Stomp sized package, which truly was a cut down QC, I'd probably be trading my QC for sure, though. This isn't for me.
I still think the Transpose is useless without an FX Loop, as most folks will presumably want some drives in front.
It's worth noting (as was pointed out to me in a different thread) that outs 1 & 2 are balanced TRS, so including a separate DI would be a little redundant.
I think the target audience is the opposite end of the spectrum, to compete with Tonex, Opus, and Kemper Profiler Player rather than the Stomp and GT1000core.
If they brought out a middle range one in a Stomp sized package, which truly was a cut down QC, I'd probably be trading my QC for sure, though. This isn't for me.
I am wondering, why are those knobs not rotaries? They have a LED ring so would a rotary not make more sense? On the Andertons video you can see they constantly have to 'reset' the knob when setting a new value to a preset. The digital Darkglass pedals also have this combination. Maybe I am missing something here...can someone tell me if there is an advantage to this set-up?
