Quad Cortex vs Fractal FM9 - Which Floor Modeller Is Better Value for Money? 

I think your analysis was spot on. Fractal stands alone in the depth of parameters that can be adjusted, and it's got a great sound. Despite it's complexity, the FM9 looks like it can easily withstand the rigors of Turing. The QC looks like they've hit the sweet spot of size and ease of use. Yes, the are some important things they need to improve on for practical use on Gigs. It looks a bit fragile compared to the FM9. The new Looper is a fantastic improvement. I really like that the QC can comfortably sit on a desk or floor and function well. Makes it more versatile.

love the tones... i'm on the waiting list for an FM-9.. this video adds to my excitement... great playing too btw..

RJM PBC/6X Loop Switcher with a 3 good drive pedals, few midi delay, reverb, modulation pedals and Strymon Iridium is way ,way better way to go anyway. In reality we all use about 4 sounds: 1) Clean with some hair on it, 2) Crunch like AC/DC or ZZ TOP, 3) Hi gain for sustained lead solos 4) Metal . Everything else is time effects and modulation. I would argue that 2 things are most important for your tone: a) Equalizer , and b) Speaker/ Cabinet or for others Impulse response.

Thanks very much for the video. Very helpful!

Gorgeous playing brother!

I think the QC is getting there, but had the FM9 been out when I bought the QC, I would've bought the FM9, no question.

I have FM9 and the feeling is incredible, like when I play my classical guitar, with any note you can feel it own variation on the tone and the dynamic.

Received the invitation for the FM9 and ended up buying the QC. The FM9 is killer but I didn’t wanted to tweak and tweak. With the QC I have a great sounding presets in a minute and that for me is huge. Captures are gold and the thing is well built, don’t let the videos fool you, once you have a QC in your hands you know is well made. Is great to have many options and competition.

Hey John good day to you! What would you say about Quad Cortex vs FM3? I obviously get that great part of switching options are lost vs FM9, but I'm very interested in both form factors, low stage noise for the not so friendly sound guys and the ease of having ready to go presets. I do most of the tweaking prior gigs anyways and I don't tend to loop a lot in our band setting. Would like to have your feedback on it

My curiosity would be hearing the two devices set on using the same amp model, same reverb, delay etc and hear if there's any noticeable difference. Just a thought. I love your channel mate and you sound great.

I run my entire rig now (vocal, 2 guitar chains from 2 pickups, 1 percussive stomp /drum chain) off one quad cortex now in a tiny ABS custom flight case, where the lid lifts off It’s not too small or weak for live use. I dropped it on its corner from holding it on a stage; so about 15foot off the ground, the corner dented and nothing else happened. It’s pretty tough It’s definitely a fully usable one pedal rig on any tour

Please do a comparison of same amp with same IR but use Capture of the real amp for QC. Also, may be compare a amp model which both have... That would really help us understand the difference. Thanks my man , Cordy. I am glad you are also focusing in other modelers other then Helix. You may be one of the top guys for modeler in youtube who are brand antagonist.

Interesting and thanks for making this. I just got a QC and have been enjoying seeing what I can do with it. Based on all the videos I watched beforehand, the amp tones in the QC are better than the FM9, but I didn't get a chance for a hands-on comparison. I agree on the "shortage" of delays and modulation for the QC, but so far what is on it for delays and reverbs are very useful to me. I haven't found a Chorus I really like yet though, and that's disappointing. There are quite a few captures and presets on the Cortex Cloud and so far, ones I have downloaded and tried I really like. I favor the UI on the QC over the FM9, that was my deciding factor, along with the overall tones. I am not sure that criticizing the QC's capture from the FM9 is really fair, either - it's not really meant to do that, but that it does, is impressive enough. It DOES capture amps and overdrives/boosts very well, and easily. The depth of features in the FM9 is impressive, but way more than I want to mess with. I like the approach of the QC; plenty to tweak and adjust, and you can always build or stack effects - and even amps and overdrives - to get to a sound/tone you want, but I just don't want to spend hours tweaking a tone that I'm trying to emulate from an amp that in real life has a few tone knobs and drive and master knobs, or an overdrive that in real life has volume, gain and tone adjustments! Obviously the modeler choices are awesome today, and like guitars and amps, we will all have favorites! Thanks again!

Hi John - Firstly thanks for the video's... you have become my benchmark for all things tone 🙏... I am a QC owner, although it's very good and I enjoy recording with it I can't help thinking the FM9 would have been a better purchase for a crunchy delay/reverb lover like me... Is this the way?

I own a FM9, and a AX FXIII as to adding anything to them from the pedal world, it’s just not necessary. Anything that is on my old pedal board is not needed. As to the amps. Well I sold my beloved Marshall TSL and my Mesa stiletto. Now I use a full range powered wedge. Best rig I’ve ever owned period. I never use the on board controls for much. The laptop editor is phenomenal, and the tools are easy to use. this is the rig I have always searched for, I’m never going back.

The capture seeming to lose a little feel is kinda negligible imo, especially in a live mix context. But they both still sound absolutely amazing.

I have the FM3 and the QC. I've used the FM3 a bit longer because I just got the QC a few weeks ago. I love them both. You can get great tones out of both units and even the same kind of tones. The FM has a lot more room for tweaking but I cannot say which one is "better" :) Any chance you could make a video on how to capture a fm9 / fm3 preset into the quad cortex?

Which preset are you using for the FM9 Source Tone around the 7 min area? Beautiful!! BTW, I purchased your presets a few weeks ago. All of them nice.

The "Quad Cortex" capture seems to have less mids a little less sparkle and slightly more bass ! You could make adjustments to bring it closer to whatever source you're "Profiling" !

I think they both are great Just what works for you really

So is this like...the new Xbox vs playstation vs Nintendo?

4:05 cool that Doug asked you about the looper.

FM9 turbo Mark 2 on the way! Upgrading from Helix! Super excited!! Nice video man!

Wow, the looper on the Quad is fantastic. Fractal will come up with an equivalent I'm sure.

Nice tones! Nice playing brother! Is that Lollars in that Tele? 🙏

def a good and interessting video!

They both sound great, but I'll choose fm9 simply because of the power supply

Thanks for a superb informative video and comparison. Seriously considering the QC but want to make sure I'm not going to be limited by the built-in reverb options, etc. As a worse case, would it be possible to (hopefully easily) run a Eventide H9 or similar reverb/delay pedal in the QC sound chain or is it truly limited by the built-in ones?

Had both, sold the qc. The fm9 has everything you would ever need. Even with the qc being underdeveloped, the workflow of the qc is not great. Flakey 2.4ghz Wifi, phone starring to download, cloud backups, no digial out. I'm happy it's gone.

Hello John What about the feel of the captures? I have fm9 and it's the last day to sent it back if I want. I just want something that has the best feel. The sounds from the fm9 are just the best. Nothing compares to this. But maybe the feel of QC or the captures is better? How do you feel it?

I love all the amps and effects in the FM9, and the text above each button, but it’s just too big for me. The FM3 is smaller, but doesn’t have enough foot switches and lacks a few features from the FM9. Same thing with the Helix vs the HX stomp for me. So despite the shortcomings, the QC is the only one that has the small form factor but plenty of foot switches. Until someone else can equal that form factor, the QC wins for me.

Hello thank you for the video can you help me with something please im thinking about buy the fm9 im on the waitlist but i will plug it only into usb and listen from the daw and from my rme babyface as a sound card does it will sound the same as a axe fx iii where if i buy this one i will plug the direct outmut of axe to the monitors without the rme Thank you very much have a nice day

2 years since i bought the QC.. 2.0 out now.. if i knew what i know now,, the FM9 should have been my choice!!! QC for sale ;-)

I have the QC and AxeFX 3 (Turbo). in terms of effects, those are not even comparibe. with the Axe you can explore more music. in terms of amps the axe has too many and to be honest no one needs so much. in terms of cabs the axe has beyond too many. I/O the axe wins. ease of use.. well you learn it and its fine with the axe. I did found some killer(!!!) sounds on the QC, clean, edge of breakup and overdrives. I think that even one of them might be "better" each one of them can make great sounds. if Neural DSP will start putting their plugins to the QC that will be great, but it seems they dont. the QC size is great. I enjoy both gf them.

Having owned an FM3 and now the FM9 there is no comparison to the tweakability of these units to what I see coming from the QC. That being said, many do not need or want that level of control and just want a good or great sound without looking at a mass of controls that the FM9 offers. However the FM9 can sound really good with some of its standard presets without much of any tweaks. In any case, as far as the looper goes, if you are really into looping you probably will have a separate looper for far more functionality than either the QC of FM9 offer. The FM9 looper block is great at helping create a new preset/scene or adjust a current one. Would agree that the smaller footprint of the QC combined with its power would be an advantage to some. The FM9 units hardware edit controls are a bit of a challenge to learn and use while the OC seems simpler. However I have never really liked touch screen offerings but may not be an issue for others. The FM9's footswitch layout, switch display and versatility wins hands down. For now I am keeping the FM9 but this was an interesting comparison, thanks to John.

I think both units are great. I have to go with the FM9 because I need pitch shifting with totally custom scales, flexible FC footswitching, and compatibility with my Axe-FX III. But I'd love to have the QC as well. They are BOTH freaking awesome.

Hey Cordy what about fir singer songwriter mic and amp at the same time? Which one is better? And more amp realistic at the same time?

How does the Quad do with crunch rock tones? I have always struggled to dial in crunch rock tones in the Fractal. They sound thin. Gain and clean are it's best tones. Likely user error lol

both are good. For me personally? AXE FX FM 9...but this is only my point of view...

Anyone know what the bass sample/synth/sound is in the intro tune?

I guess FM9 is the more complete equipment with more options at the moment. But for QuadCortex, the fact that it is not large is a very good weapon. And it is more intuitive to use. If I had to choose between the two, I would go with the QuadCortex. It's great to be able to take it anywhere without much effort.

On can still present a totally Pro piece of work with a few real amps and pedals. The client cares only about the quality of the work not whether you chose the perfect Fender Deluxe for that music. The player usually has very limited time to get the work done and has little time or patience to choose from endless choices. Add to that most players decide which for example are the best amps and never chooses a different one as it feels like choosing second best. In short more is not more. I have an associate that has both the Quad and an Axe. He has found that he is always choosing the Quad as he finds like I said he only needs a few amps etc. and that he does not feel anxious or frustrated getting started on a project with the Quad. In the end the completed work done reigns supreme. The second best hammer in the hands of the best carpenter wins every time.

The only thing that is aberrant with Fractal (AXE FX3, FM9, FM3) is to spend a crazy amount of time pressing a lot of knobs, knobs, knobs...etc... to get a sound and it happens sometimes (even often) to do it in several times (4 x 3hours if you are a perfectionist like me) Moreover, there are only 4 channels for 8 scenes whereas there should have been 8 channels for the 8 scenes... quite simply. And finally, the sound gap between each preset changes is 600 milliseconds whereas on the BOSS GX100 it is totally instantaneous. I hope Fractal will improve this in the futur. Love, Phil from Dunlirk

witch one sounds better there's some people out there that say the QC sounds better. i know that's their opinion what is your opinion. i like to know because you do a great job with all these units.

Observations or obviously spot on, but the technology in the FM9 is from Axe FX. This would be like QC 5 years from now having developed their editor, plug-in integration, more effects, etc… and then jamming the history of their company into a new interface. I’m riding with the QC, mainly because I’m not effect needy, and I love the form factor. I’m pretty sure the rest will come soon, and if it doesn’t I’m good. Keep the videos coming!

Have You noticed any drops of audio in changing patches / channels on fm9 and fm3? Is it bad or You could live with this? :)

I had an interesting moment recently relating to the differences between the QC and the FM3. I own both and I’ve gigged them with a couple of bands. Pros and cons for both really in terms of practicality. With some thought, you can get them both to do what’s needed and they sound fine. The other day I was playing through the QC using an AC30 preset. I then switched to an AC30 preset on the FM3. What struck me immediately was the difference in feel. Using the FM3 I felt much more connected to my guitar. It responded better and I felt I played a little better. OK, it’s all subjective but I was surprised. I’ve never noticed anything like that previously and I honestly didn’t expect too. I’m happy to gig with either unit but I shall probably err towards the FM3 for a while just to see if there’s any mileage in the concept of better/worse feel through digital devices.

Great video John. I definitely prefer the FM9 - it let’s the guitar shine through the unit more than the Cortex. The dynamics are also way better on the FM9❤️

you know in the capture comparison, it felt to me like the FM9 was played with passive pickups and the quad cortex was played like EMGs. Through kind of the same rig. That's what it sounded like to me. Interesting!

I don’t disagree with much of what you say in this video, but why did you use a capture of a modeler to compare? I think it would be more fair to try and dial in the same tone in both and then compare.

How dis you get that guitar finish

Thank you for doing this. Been on the FM9 waiting list for months and am hoping for a resolution soon.

For me two things come into play, seize and stompbox mode/gig view icons. scribble strips are useless to me in for daylight gigs, but a screen I can put a antiglare cover on. The qc seems way too tiny and the fm9 seems way too big, but since the fractal doesn't have a gig view I would have to go with the qc. If only they had a pod go with 2 more buttons and twice the power, I would be very happy. I hate lugging the helix lt around and my stomp xl the screen is too tiny, I use an expression pedal so I can't add the 2 button footswitch, but even so It could use a tad more power. We're stuck in limbo. Everything seems to hang on what L6 is gonna do next.

Hey John Which one would u say sound better, the quad or the fm9? Or would u say they both r equally good?

How about the fact that you plug in FM9 directly to power but for quad cortex you need adapter.

5:09? is there a specific link for that song

I don’t need 290 amps and 103+ delays etc. Hence why I switched back to Kemper and probably will get a QC. Question: Why would you capture a modeler and compare the sounds? Of course the source sounds will sound better. Just wondering. Great video describing the differences though!

You still clearly prefer the Helix family to the FM3/9 going by usage

Fractal needs to hire the UI guys from Nueral DSP ... and lift the looper features

Paused at 1:00 and just wanted to ask if I could get you a dryer. Those wrinkles in your t-shirt are like 64th notes in a Paul Gilbert solo.

if they put the PLugins on the QC its an easy decision for me due to the size of the unit but its been years and its not happened. - I already have alot of money spent on plugins. power supply looks a bit suspect though? flimsy.

Judging from all the videos I saw of the QC, I would go with that….I thought the capture feature was better than the other amp/effects module….. I also thought that the touch sensitivity was better and it sounds more amp like but in this video, the FM9 sounds pretty good too….because the effects seemed to be better

I'm in the market to upgrade to a proper modeler and really want the FM9 - but I don't know when it will even be in stock for me to buy. But also I don't want to buy the Helix or Quad Cortex just in case.

quad cortex still sounds like a neural dsp vst, fm9 still sounds like a proper amp simulation...

The Quad Cortex sounds amazing to my ears, even head to head with the FM9 in videos, the Quad sounds more musical to me. I don’t care about quantity, I care about quality. I will admit the FM9 looks more flexible with its switches but the Quad has a very usable platform.

I can' t wait for Line 6 to put out a Helix 2...Helix+FM9+Quad Cortex all rolled into one...That would be my dream...cause let's face it...The Helix is still the most usable device...Too bad it doesn't have the power and touch screen of the QC and the Models and tweakability of the FM9...

They need a STOP button on the quad cortex looper!!!! The only thing I don’t like about it.

my main question here is... why uggs in the summer???

Awesome video but I still think it's a little early to compare the two. Fractal is Worlds ahead of the QC right now but I do prefer the QC for ease of use because I am not needing to tweak to the degree that you would with a fractal.

I owned a QC and sent it back. I just didn't think it was quite "there" yet. I will own another some day I'm sure. I have never owned a Fractal unit but would love an FM9 if they ever become easily available. As for the comparison between the two regarding the amount of "stuff" on each one...I can't imagine needing 300+ amps. The differences in sound between the basic designs is so minute as to not matter. You're just not going to find 300+ different and usable sounds; indeed, most of us use 1 or 2 basic models and tweak them to sound like we always do anyway! Same goes for having hundreds of delays or reverbs. I'm not suggesting that Fractal should reduce the amount of "stuff", but some of it is redundant. I'm sure I will get flamed here by some, but my intention is not to belittle Fractal or Fractal fans. It's just an opinion which nobody should take personally.

No ducking on QC delays...!

There is something in Quad Cortex that sound to me a bit digital in all demos I hear. I love how you play.

18:21 ‘stribble scrips’ 😉

Dunno about complexity, but so much more low-mids on FM9 orig. tone compared to capture...

Besides a full overhaul on the UI, I really can't imagine that the fractal would ever need another update. With the Klon finally added, it has pretty much has everything that has ever existed. Maybe some experimental glitch effects would be nice? Regarding the Captures, they sound great in an A/B with no other effects. But once I started putting drives and reverbs into them, they sounded pretty drastically different from the original source.

i don’t think the QC is optimized when capturing drives from other modellers. sounds a lot like a copy of a copy to me.

The "not so great c"lean amp sounds and" not good sounding "compressor on the AXE FX was the deal killer for me,. Fractal needs to make those two things a lot better .

All Guitars in this song are completly recorded with the MOOER GE200 Amp Modeler. Rain Air - Sitz Platz Bleib (Rammstein Style) Official Video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xxxjsjRtIRg.html

I’ve owned a fractal product since 2011. I have the FM9 turbo. I just bought the archetype Petrucci plugin yesterday. It blew me away and in my opinion blows away my FM9. I’ve never been able to get that good of tone and that easy of a tone on any fractal unit.

Just some observational rambling. The capture section just after the 7 minute mark. I was curious about that so I did some test here (engineer, bored). Keep in mind this is just on what is coming to me after going through RU-vid but I would assume the original signal would be similar. Both of these units are bringing the played note and the primary overtone to the front, as if they are grouped, which is great, and then treating the other overtones as secondary objects. The difference it that the FM9 is creating more space between the played note / primary overtone and the secondary overtones than is the QC. Its as if the target audience is different. The FM9 signal would be better for a live gig. You would not clash as much with the keyboard player or another guitar player. The QC signal would be better suited for a recorded track in a studio as it would give the engineer a wider pallet to work with without the signal becoming to thin. 20:00 you said "flattens it out".. that is a good generalization of what is happening to the frequency curve being generated.. The QC is taking the bump sections of the note and primary overtone and bringing them closer to the other part of the signal being represented.

A friend of mine brought over the quad last night and we compared it to the FM3. I thought the Fm3 was to clear and almost to perfect. The Quad was more amp like, at least that is what I thought.

QC has more clarity, sweetness, and fuller tone

Neither unit can be purchased at the moment. Kind of a moot point, unfortunately. I am wait-listed for both.

Quad has a looper as a preset

I treat your noise as a rumour that the painful time for us FM-9 "waiting listers / list waitings" ends soon.

The thing is, option paralysis isn’t great and with 290 amps, I don’t see why you need that and the QC brings out stuff all the time. Same thing for effects. I think compact makes it way better realistically. You have to think realistically.

Fractal units are ridiculously heavy. That reduces the mobility compared to QC or Kemper Toaster

I disagree with everything and i will send a letter of complain to the United Nations. That said i want the FM3 and the QC both :) FM9 would be fine as well :) Amazing gear!

When Metallica, Steve Vai, John Mayer, Petrucci and The Edge move to Neural DSP maybe but maybe I will 😊

I live in the UK and have owned an Axe-Fx3 for the past two years, having previously owned a Helix and Kemper, I haven't experienced a Quad-Cortex. I love my Axe-Fx3... for me it's streets ahead of any other digital-modeller, but if you live in the UK there is still no Fractal distributor. Absolutely crazy... In terms of the demo I'd say that the QC is equivalent to an FM3 in terms of processing power, so comparing it to an FM9 is disingenuous both in terms of power and price. The FM9 has way more amps, cabs and better effects and twice the processing power. The QC has a really cool design, and I also love the Looper GUI. I'd ask Fractal why I had to purchase my Axe-FX3, FC12 and Volume/Wah-controller pedal from Hungary, rather than from a dealer in the UK ? I have a couple of friends who have Fractals and we all had to take the plunge and order from abroad... we love their products, but it seems that they don't love us Brits enough.

One is the most dynamic comprehensive amp and effects unit with every combination of studio quality effects flexible routing and editor unbeatable and without doubt the best unit out there The other is the part finished poorly supported and over promised overhyped Quad Cortex !! - lol 😂

Why capture the fm9. It's better to compare a real amp capture

there's alotta owner bias in the comments. i observe this way too often online.

QC capture isn’t supposed to work well with time based or modulation effects. If those effects were part of the FM9 patch he captured, I’m surprised it sounds as good as it does…

Qc is awesome, But I would still go for the Fractal 🙌🏻

fractal win

Interesting. Quad Cortex wins easily in my opinion 😲 I have watched quite many comparisons and QC keeps winning.

Takeaway is in every other area; Fractal wins.

You rock man!! FM9 all the way..

Can line6 sue Neural DSP?.