Anyone moved from QC to Fractal and why?

MayPRS

MayPRS

Member
I'm "between" modelers as some of you might recall from previous posts.

I started the journey with an Helix LT but, in the end, I ended up using it in 4 CM with my AC30 so it was overkill for what I wanted - a piece of gear that can let me leave the amp at home!

After that I went with the QC and did half tour with it (from February to July) - I found a capture that kinda worked although it didn't clean'd up well on volume roll and lost lots of FOH volume when I did that (techs had to mess around with my volumes when I tried "clean"). I couldn't get the Treble Booster + AC30 block to sound even decent on the QC. That's my base tone and I want it to work as it should - creamy saturated on guitar full volume, sparkly glass cleans on roll back without losing volume (as it works on real TB + real AC30). I know we need to have some compromisses on modelling but, at least, get as close as I can.

I also had a Fender Tone Master Pro for some days and although the base tone above was almost there, it lack several essential "Brian May features" such as delays above 1500 ms and a proper pitch shifter. On a 1500+ EUR unit I cannot concede that it doesn't have this - a specialized effect of course, something peculiar, but a simple delay above 1500 ms? No way I would had another pedal on the board and spend more money on this.

I'm modeler-less at the moment and still weighting pros and cons to get one or another. Really keen on hearing your stories on why you moved to Fractal, difficulties and achievements.

Many thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
It's funny how most of us will first pick all the wrong solutions before landing on the best one... ;)

On another question, it's incomprehensible to me how anyone can consider all those devices more or less in the same class when it's not even close (esp. considering everything) (but ok, let's say it also depends on your needs). For me this came from discovering FAS very early and seeing countless eCliffanies becoming reality that I have not seen from others much (OTOH, I haven't followed others much, because there was no need). If someone has no clue about that, I do understand why they seem so confused... ;)

I'm still even drooling on sounds the first gen could make >15 years ago...
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/80s-landau-sounds.18154/
 
I gave in to curiosity about a month or so ago and got a QC

I just played around with it exclusively for a week.
Thought it was sounding great.
Fired up the AXFXIII
Started laughing cause it was like going from 2d to 3d.
Everything more detailed and articulate.

The QC modelling is OK, and there are some great captures out there.
It has plenty of good things, but is very underdeveloped - it actually amazes me some of the clunky processes it has

But each and every time I find sounds I like on there, or on my Kemper Player, I try and match them on the Fractal and end up prefering the Fractal.

There's so much better options in Fractal-sphere , switching, effects, to me, it just all sounds better.

I do enjoying playing with the other units. But there's no question the Fractal wins out for me
 
Don’t own a QC but several friends do so I’ve spent quite a bit of time on this unit building presets for them. Main downsides of QC compared to FM9:

1. Footswitches too close together for me and I have smaller feet
2. Footswitch knobs is disgusting, imagine using a venue bathroom then stepping on those switches then touching them to adjust parameters.
3. No footswitch screens
4. No footswitch hold functions, only tap. They just added momentary switching recently.
5. Limited footswitch flexibility, only stomp, snapshot, and preset modes vs. fractal’s 9 fully customizable layouts, all with tap and hold functions and customizable labels. Once you figure out the best workflow for you it will be the best live rig you’ve ever used. I use a modified version of OFM9G with 4 layouts.
6. Wall wart power supply and cheap thin DC power cable. Would never rely on this on the road. They sacrificed an IEC input just to make the unit smaller and crowd the footswitches together.
7. Touch screen is clunky imo. Swiping from the top or bottom doesn’t work half the time, feels like a crappy phone from 10+ years ago.
8. They copied the worst part about helix: the fixed linear signal path with limited parallel routing and no block bypass dry through options. Fractal’s grid signal flow system is much better unless your signal chains are extremely simple.
9. No block channels. This fractal feature means it has effectively 4x the DSP of any other unit. Don’t know how I ever lived without it, other units feel so crippled by comparison.
10. Can’t import/export presets to your computer, you have to use their clunky walled garden app interface and connect your unit to the internet. This makes sharing presets with friends incredibly annoying. You have to find their account, add them to friends, share the preset, then they have to hope the preset shows up on their account (worked about half the time ime), then they have to click download on their phone or the unit.
11. Fewer amp models, fewer effects models
12. The amp modeling is good but once you try fractal nothing else compares. One of my buddies just switched back to fractal after using the QC bc of the size for awhile and his exact word to describe the fractal was “inspiring.”
13. Their marketing department somehow got people to celebrate having to pay for new amp models by dishonestly implying the unit runs Neural’s plugins. But they’re just ports of the plugin amp models and effects, and after you pay for the new amp model you can share presets back and forth to the plugin, which helix has had for years now for free.

The only downside to the FM9 or other fractal units is the initial learning curve is tougher because the unit is far more powerful. But honestly 5 minutes after getting my first axefx I had a better tone than I got after 5 years with helix. It just sounds good effortlessly with no tweaking. Of course this is all assuming you’re comfortable monitoring mic’d guitar sounds through whatever speakers you’re using and aren’t expecting the modeler to magically transform the direct signal (a mic’d signal from a guitar cab in another room) monitored thru cheap plastic speakers into a roaring AC30 in the room with you.
 
I bought one out of curiosity and it had some spikes in some eq bands I had to do some drastic cuts to make it sound decent. No global blocks was really a deal breaker in the end.
 
strabes said:
Don’t own a QC but several friends do so I’ve spent quite a bit of time on this unit building presets for them. Main downsides of QC compared to FM9:

1. Footswitches too close together for me and I have smaller feet
2. Footswitch knobs is disgusting, imagine using a venue bathroom then stepping on those switches then touching them to adjust parameters.
3. No footswitch screens
4. No footswitch hold functions, only tap. They just added momentary switching recently.
5. Limited footswitch flexibility, only stomp, snapshot, and preset modes vs. fractal’s 9 fully customizable layouts, all with tap and hold functions and customizable labels. Once you figure out the best workflow for you it will be the best live rig you’ve ever used. I use a modified version of OFM9G with 4 layouts.
6. Wall wart power supply and cheap thin DC power cable. Would never rely on this on the road. They sacrificed an IEC input just to make the unit smaller and crowd the footswitches together.
7. Touch screen is clunky imo. Swiping from the top or bottom doesn’t work half the time, feels like a crappy phone from 10+ years ago.
8. They copied the worst part about helix: the fixed linear signal path with limited parallel routing and no block bypass dry through options. Fractal’s grid signal flow system is much better unless your signal chains are extremely simple.
9. No block channels. This fractal feature means it has effectively 4x the DSP of any other unit. Don’t know how I ever lived without it, other units feel so crippled by comparison.
10. Can’t import/export presets to your computer, you have to use their clunky walled garden app interface and connect your unit to the internet. This makes sharing presets with friends incredibly annoying. You have to find their account, add them to friends, share the preset, then they have to hope the preset shows up on their account (worked about half the time ime), then they have to click download on their phone or the unit.
11. Fewer amp models, fewer effects models
12. The amp modeling is good but once you try fractal nothing else compares. One of my buddies just switched back to fractal after using the QC bc of the size for awhile and his exact word to describe the fractal was “inspiring.”
13. Their marketing department somehow got people to celebrate having to pay for new amp models by dishonestly implying the unit runs Neural’s plugins. But they’re just ports of the plugin amp models and effects, and after you pay for the new amp model you can share presets back and forth to the plugin, which helix has had for years now for free.

The only downside to the FM9 or other fractal units is the initial learning curve is tougher because the unit is far more powerful. But honestly 5 minutes after getting my first axefx I had a better tone than I got after 5 years with helix. It just sounds good effortlessly with no tweaking. Of course this is all assuming you’re comfortable monitoring mic’d guitar sounds through whatever speakers you’re using and aren’t expecting the modeler to magically transform the direct signal (a mic’d signal from a guitar cab in another room) monitored thru cheap plastic speakers into a roaring AC30 in the room with you.
Click to expand...
This drove me nuts... unless I was missing something, you couldn't backup or export a single preset. Not being able to restore a single preset is puzzling. That breaks the workflow that I have been using for many years.

10. Can’t import/export presets to your computer, you have to use their clunky walled garden app interface and connect your unit to the internet. This makes sharing presets with friends incredibly annoying. You have to find their account, add them to friends, share the preset, then they have to hope the preset shows up on their account (worked about half the time ime), then they have to click download on their phone or the unit.
 
Admin M@ said:
Well, I am told that Brian May owns an Axe-Fx III.
There's also this, and it was previous generation tech!
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/a-fractal-queen-story-from-tristan-avakian.128098/
Click to expand...
Oh wow thanks!

I'm just debating on FM3 vs FM9... FM9 lots of money for me, but I'm afraid I would "compromise" something... I made a "switch usage" on the set-list and realized I use switch "4" for 2 songs... rest of the songs I can manage with 3 scenes only! Of course there's bank up/down and preset change.

The FM3 is in my budget, I like the form factor but I know input impedance plays a role when TB is first in line... I'm afraid that the fixed input impedance at 1 MOhm would make the tone shrill/can like and won't clean up as well on volume roll back.

Decisions, decisions....
 
Admin M@ said:
FM9 gives you dual amps, which in my educated opinion is the very best way to get multitracked harmonies -- which could be fundamental to your May experience.
Click to expand...
Thank you Matt - all things considered of course FM9 would be more suitable for the job, I just need to stretch out my budget to reach it o_O
 
strabes said:
Don’t own a QC but several friends do so I’ve spent quite a bit of time on this unit building presets for them. Main downsides of QC compared to FM9:

1. Footswitches too close together for me and I have smaller feet
2. Footswitch knobs is disgusting, imagine using a venue bathroom then stepping on those switches then touching them to adjust parameters.
3. No footswitch screens
4. No footswitch hold functions, only tap. They just added momentary switching recently.
5. Limited footswitch flexibility, only stomp, snapshot, and preset modes vs. fractal’s 9 fully customizable layouts, all with tap and hold functions and customizable labels. Once you figure out the best workflow for you it will be the best live rig you’ve ever used. I use a modified version of OFM9G with 4 layouts.
6. Wall wart power supply and cheap thin DC power cable. Would never rely on this on the road. They sacrificed an IEC input just to make the unit smaller and crowd the footswitches together.
7. Touch screen is clunky imo. Swiping from the top or bottom doesn’t work half the time, feels like a crappy phone from 10+ years ago.
8. They copied the worst part about helix: the fixed linear signal path with limited parallel routing and no block bypass dry through options. Fractal’s grid signal flow system is much better unless your signal chains are extremely simple.
9. No block channels. This fractal feature means it has effectively 4x the DSP of any other unit. Don’t know how I ever lived without it, other units feel so crippled by comparison.
10. Can’t import/export presets to your computer, you have to use their clunky walled garden app interface and connect your unit to the internet. This makes sharing presets with friends incredibly annoying. You have to find their account, add them to friends, share the preset, then they have to hope the preset shows up on their account (worked about half the time ime), then they have to click download on their phone or the unit.
11. Fewer amp models, fewer effects models
12. The amp modeling is good but once you try fractal nothing else compares. One of my buddies just switched back to fractal after using the QC bc of the size for awhile and his exact word to describe the fractal was “inspiring.”
13. Their marketing department somehow got people to celebrate having to pay for new amp models by dishonestly implying the unit runs Neural’s plugins. But they’re just ports of the plugin amp models and effects, and after you pay for the new amp model you can share presets back and forth to the plugin, which helix has had for years now for free.

The only downside to the FM9 or other fractal units is the initial learning curve is tougher because the unit is far more powerful. But honestly 5 minutes after getting my first axefx I had a better tone than I got after 5 years with helix. It just sounds good effortlessly with no tweaking. Of course this is all assuming you’re comfortable monitoring mic’d guitar sounds through whatever speakers you’re using and aren’t expecting the modeler to magically transform the direct signal (a mic’d signal from a guitar cab in another room) monitored thru cheap plastic speakers into a roaring AC30 in the room with you.
Click to expand...
i have QC, i try to reply to several point, but at the END a personal opinion (but for me...not only opinion..)

1) Footswitches distance is personal taste, a lot of user uses QC switch without problem
2) You can use 40€ of midi controller, beer is dangerous always, not only bathroom
3) - ok, but.. boh
4) - ok, for me .. not important today, personal taste
5) yes but not so important at the and in live performance, this units today are configurable in other ways
6) what a problem
7) The touch MUST be reliable, as automotive or nautic. (As who requests the usb-c in professional units......)
8) transparent blend does miracles in 4 rows if addresses with brain
9) not understand
10) for me the system is relly smart, or we have to copy on usb or mail? no problem
11) a lot of... we use 3 or 4 amps =)
12) my last sentence at the end
13) opinions

My conclusion.
Flex Prime for me has better modelling of QC. ;-D
With 4.0 firmware and revalver cabs or good IR rightly selected is outstanding. Big step forward.
QC, cleaning for example, amps as 5150 family, Soldano or High Gain amps (with dynamic pick) don't respect the correct behaviour of these amps, and don't respect the "string" characteristic. Or partially. (on MODELS... because capture are another league, but my concept is MODELS, for me it is the good and better way to create good sounds for our guitar).
Flex (or Prime family) today (with latest firmware 4.0) has a more autentic sound on this behaviour.
The highs on QC too for me are a problem.. aliasing? i don't know (i know pics form Cliff, but i'm not shure hearing this);
but in this case too, Prime highs are organic, natural, moving... QC highs are.. i would say.. compressed, disturbing.. you have to cut cut and so on..
Guys, we are speaking of good units, not shit, but i want to share my experience.


Why all these words? because :
if you are searching good tones with a fantastic and IMMEDIATE UI, grab QC
If you are searching TONE, grab FRACTAL, because at this moments QC models lacks in several aspects (also they sounds good, eh)

(today at least... future developements are unknow for us, but they can change the story...)
Nik
 
Last edited:
I have the QC since a few days and a Fm9/3. currently i really like the QC Sound. It is a bit more polished and bouncy but by no means bad. I wouldn’t call it a night and day difference to fractal. Just a bit different. UI and Virtual Capo are better on the QC. Fractal can‘t be beaten in effects.
 
I've been using Fractal forever. (Axe Ultra was my first unit)
I bought a QC when they came out (because I love trying new toys).
I tried my best to get great tones out of it. I captured my own amps, etc.
Short story - it's not as clear/full on the top end. It was grainy. I ended up really disliking it.
Selling the QC and getting all my money back was one of the happiest days I've had.
I tried their plugins too....they all sound the same after a while. Couldn't not bond with them.
 
BBN said:
Selling the QC and getting all my money back was one of the happiest days I've had.
Click to expand...
I have little personal experience but I recently replaced four of them on an artist on tour. They had switched from a Fractal Audio product but when both a main and a spare of the new rigs had problems they changed them right in the middle of the run. Now they also say the sound is "better and more 3d".
 
Admin M@ said:
I have little personal experience but I recently replaced four of them on an artist on tour. They had switched from a Fractal Audio product but when both a main and a spare of the new rigs had problems they changed them right in the middle of the run. Now they also say the sound is "better and more 3d".
Click to expand...
Please say it was Megadeth. :) I was sad to see them switch away from Fractal.
 
I have been using FAS units since 2009. I was an early adopter of QC just because I wanted a small floor unit with more switches than the FM3. When I finally got the QC after a long wait I fired it up and was immediately disappointed by the sounds. Mucked around a couple of hours and put it on the shelf. Finally sold it after a year or so for more than I paid for it, so no bad feelings.
I have an AXE FX3 Turbo, a FM9 Turbo and a FM3...each unit for different use cases. I cannot recommend something else. Yes I´m biased and...spoiled! Feels good.
 
i'll post an example on my words (words are words, sounds are facts) to explain my problem with QC (in fact i compare the plexi50 of Prime 4.0, imho more authentic on behaviour, and plexi 50 of QC, that for my taste has a sort of strange "coating" in mid higs and highs (all in the same IR)
 
I report the description under my video :
Same IR on the two unitsImho HR is more natural..! At first listening, QC might seem fuller, but in fact, when you try to cleanup the distortion with the pick, Headrush (firmware 4.0) seems more authentic, the unit behaves like the real marshall, and it has more "respect" for the string soul.And this at the end on the whole sound (and not only with this amp).Quad Cortex has strange highs (not too much.. but strange) on mids and mod-highs (try to hear the cleanup sequences.. strange fzfzfzzfzf always present)All this.. imho

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom