A few little ideas from the Quad Cortex

[littlespaceman]

Hi everyone. Ok, first off, I am not one of those who keep going on about how much better another device is, and as a newbie to the Stadium from the Quad Cortex, I'm really enjoying the Helix so far (not my first time, I did have OG Helix but sold that in 2020 thinking the Mk 2 would be coming soon!)

In particular I like MANY things about the Stadium U/I over the QC. In fact I'd go as far as to say there are too many things about the QC U/I that are just awful. BUT there are a few things that I think the QC does better, and I'd like to get your thoughts on them to see if they're worth submitting feature requests for;

1) Displaying what Mode you're in, when on the Home page: Can you do this on the Stadium or is it just guesswork, based on the colours of the footswitch rings, or do you just have to keep hitting the Home button to bring up the Play view, then close the Play view to go back to the Home matrix?
On the QC there is a small icon that ALWAYS shows what Mode you're in when on the Home page. This is REALLY useful as you can use the footswitches to freely to go up and down the Snapshots while editing, taking the guesswork out of the equation. For example, I'm editing an amp block on the Stadium, in Snapshot 1 (which is F/S 8). I want to press F/S 9 to see how the amp settings compare in the next Snapshot 2, BUT if I'm NOT in Snapshot Mode, then I accidentally change Preset to the next preset up. So the only way as far as I can see to tell if I'm in Snapshot Mode is to press the Home button to go to Play View, then after checking, press the Home button again to go back to the editing matrix. A small icon to take the guesswork out, or to avoid this lengthy series of switch actions just to check could go next to the Snapshot Icon in the top right of the display.

2) Double tapping a block to turn it On or Off even if this is not your selected block: Also a really useful feature. I get that each block on the Stadium has a little on/off button to the right of the description on the parameters bar, but being able to do a quick double tap to turn a block on/off save a huge amount of hand movement down to that button when editing, and even more importantly it allows you to turn on/off UN-selected blocks. So say I'm tweaking amp gain, and I have a Drive pedal in front. I have the amp selected, so I see the parameters for the amp, but I want to hear how it sounds with the Drive on and with it off, and I can do this with a quick double tap of the Drive pedal block icon, which leaves the amp edit window open (ie, if I double tap quickly enough it doesn't bring up the Drive edit window, it just turns it on or off, allowing me to continue editing the amp accordingly, without having to jump between block screens)

3) Looper UI; Took me a while to work out how the looper on the Stadium works; am I right that the only way to bring up the Looper transport is to be in Stomp Mode and press the F/S assigned to the Looper? This is really long winded if you're tweaking parameters, and want to throw down a quick loop to help you tweak. On the QC, whenever you select the Looper in the Home page, it brings up both the parameters to edit AND the Looper transport. The Stadium has a huge screen to take advantage of, so it seems a waste of that space when I tap on the Looper block on the Home Page that the transport doesn't come up automatically, to be operated by either the touch screen or the footswitches (on the QC the footswitches allocated to the Looper will automatically map to the Looper when you open the Looper transport, regardless of what Mode you're in.

4) Looper Threshold: On the QC the Looper can be activated by F/S press OR by detecting a signal, and you can vary the signal threshold at which it activate - really useful when the unit is on your desk so you can't operate the footswitches to operate the Looper while holding your guitar. Does the Stadium have an auto-activate feature? I can't find one so far...

Anyway, as I said, I'm not one to bang on about other devices, but I do think these are just a few simple ideas that can make your workflow so much easier.

[Kfletchah]

Hey Spaceman. Good thoughts. I recognize you from the QC forum. I have both and enjoy using both but have been more used to the QC. I had a hx stomp before I got the QC but never had a full helix. 
 

i keep double tapping on blocks to try to disengage them. Would be a nice easy thing to incorporate. 
 

I agree with your looper thoughts too. 
 

 

[XONE]

I think Line 6 needs to take a HUGE look at the Capture process of the Quad Cortex. It's the best. Hands down.

 

Instead, they seem to have copied the Kemper process which is OK. It's not great.

Sure, Kemper started Profiling/Capturing,

but the Quad Cortex sets the standard.

It makes Captures quickly,

and sometimes the Captures even sound better than the real amp.

 

Right now, Proxy will not capture Hi-Gain amps effectively, rendering it useluess.

Time to get humble and see that you're late to the Capture party,

and you need to study the best: Neural Quad Cortex

 

 

 

[silverhead]

On 5/30/2026 at 1:11 PM, XONE said:

….

and sometimes the Captures even sound better than the real amp.

…

 

Interesting comment. Surely the measure of quality for a proxy/clone capture is the degree to which it matches the sound of the original. If it sounds subjectively different, for better or worse, then the capture is inaccurate. No?

[FarleyUK]

I’ve had nothing but issues with Proxy. Every capture - regardless of process - has buzz as the note dies out. Especially obvious when you roll the guitar volume down.
 

I’ve been telling Line 6 this for months but they seem to be ignoring it.
 

Never had any issues with the QC cloning.  

[XONE]

On 5/31/2026 at 7:05 AM, silverhead said:

Interesting comment. Surely the measure of quality for a proxy/clone capture is the degree to which it matches the sound of the original. If it sounds subjectively different, for better or worse, then the capture is inaccurate. No?

It's a phenomenon that you have to experience yourself,

not expound about from behind a computer keyboard.

 

Go make over 2000 Quad Cortex Captures, and you'll experience at least once, the QC nail an amp's soul and yet, even maker it better.

The rest of the time, the QC just nails the feel, tone, and soul of an amp with every capture. And fast.

 

Proxy is way behind. Period. See any You Tube videos by Hi-Gain folks? Nope. That speaks volumes.

Perhaps Capturing/Profiling is not quite as simple as they assumed it was.

[silverhead]

On 6/1/2026 at 2:55 AM, XONE said:

It's a phenomenon that you have to experience yourself,

not expound about from behind a computer keyboard.

 

Go make over 2000 Quad Cortex Captures, and you'll experience at least once, the QC nail an amp's soul and yet, even maker it better.

The rest of the time, the QC just nails the feel, tone, and soul of an amp with every capture. And fast.

 

Proxy is way behind. Period. See any You Tube videos by Hi-Gain folks? Nope. That speaks volumes.

Perhaps Capturing/Profiling is not quite as simple as they assumed it was.

Wow. Seems I hit a nerve. I said nothing about comparing Stadium to Quad Cortex or any other Capture/Proxy technology. I simply stated the obvious: If the result of any capture process is audibly different from the target sound (which is what you have stated twice now) the capture is inaccurate. If you think the difference sounds better, that's great. I’m sure you’ve found Stadium Proxy captures that sound worse. No argument here. But producing a sound that’s audibly different is neither the intention nor purpose of Capturing/Cloning.

 

"... expound about from behind a computer keyboard''' "? I'm not stating an opinion; just a tautology. If a Capture/Proxy sounds different from the target it’s inaccurate. Full stop.

[XONE]

On 6/1/2026 at 5:47 AM, silverhead said:

Wow. Seems I hit a nerve. I said nothing about comparing Stadium to Quad Cortex or any other Capture/Proxy technology. I simply stated the obvious: If the result of any capture process is audibly different from the target sound (which is what you have stated twice now) the capture is inaccurate. If you think the difference sounds better, that's great. I’m sure you’ve found Stadium Proxy captures that sound worse. No argument here. But producing a sound that’s audibly different is neither the intention nor purpose of Capturing/Cloning.

 

"... expound about from behind a computer keyboard''' "? I'm not stating an opinion; just a tautology. If a Capture/Proxy sounds different from the target it’s inaccurate. Full stop.

You're trying to make something out of nothing.

 

QC nails the feel, tone, and soul of an amp every time.

Experience it over 2000 times, and you'll see what I'm talking about can't be quantified in a statement.

It's just a rare phenomenon when it "sounds better". It can't really be explained with words.

 

Line 6 is a long way from that.

[Kfletchah]

Soo validating to hear!!  I too have felt the high gain captures sub par. I haven’t heard or seen this too much on the web. But the captures do not sound nearly as satisfying as in the QC. 
 

and Xone I totally have experienced the capture “improving” the amp somewhat on the QC. Particularly for high gain, tight rhythm tones, sometimes the QC doesn’t nail the amp perfectly but the result is somehow MORE inspiring to play. Haven’t experience that with Proxy. 
 

I really hope Proxy is a work in progress and improvements will be made. 

[jester700]

How long was it before the QC was fully functional? I seem to remember that it was legendary for its level of "failure to deliver". Stadium is new. Of COURSE it's a work in progress.

[Kfletchah]

True the QC has been a nightmare in terms of its development process. Very slow, overhyped. Under delivered in terms of updates.
 

BUT the capture process and how they sound has been exceptional since the very beginning.  Line 6 has a history of making very steady and meaningful improvements.  And I know they take their user bases opinions to heart. 
 

I know Line 6 can make proxy exceptional if they devote the resources and I hope they do. 

[XONE]

On 6/1/2026 at 6:58 PM, jester700 said:

How long was it before the QC was fully functional? I seem to remember that it was legendary for its level of "failure to deliver". Stadium is new. Of COURSE it's a work in progress.

That was only for not porting the Plugins onto the QC immediately. It took them 3 years to re-tool the Plugins.

 

I bought the QC for the Capturing.

It has worked perfect from day one, and I still prefer their V1 Capture over the new V2 Captures.

Proxy is far from that.

[XONE]

On 6/1/2026 at 7:18 PM, Kfletchah said:

True the QC has been a nightmare in terms of its development process. Very slow, overhyped. Under delivered in terms of updates.
 

BUT the capture process and how they sound has been exceptional since the very beginning.  Line 6 has a history of making very steady and meaningful improvements.  And I know they take their user bases opinions to heart. 
 

I know Line 6 can make proxy exceptional if they devote the resources and I hope they do. 

 

I agree. I'm hoping Line 6 develops Proxy into something Next Level,

but they've been a bit smug about the tech,

and now they may be realizing it's not as simple as they thought it was,

and it shows in Proxy. Fingers Crossed.

 

I'm so glad you've experienced the same phenomenon with the QC.

It's hard to explain to folks who haven't experienced it.

When Line 6 reaches that level, they are serious about Capture Tech.

 

Until then, they'll be chasing QC and Tonex....and may not even know it

[Melodioso]

Honestly, I still don't understand why they have not "simply" provided support for NAM. I see competitors using that strategy which makes more sense imo, especially if you have already purchased NAM profiles form commercial vendors. You can re-use them across platforms and NAM is now a mature and accurate system.

[FarleyUK]

Especially when NAM v2 is now out and able to run on hardware with much fewer resources. Also - note the comparisons on the proxy / NAM / QC / ToneX quality. Not looking good for Line 6.

https://www.tone3000.com/blog/introducing-neural-amp-modeler-nam-architecture-2-a2

[silverhead]

 Very interesting article. Thanks for the link.