[Wish] Minimum of wires, maximum freedom

[Aleksey]

Sorry my english very bad.
I do not have this device. This video (i can not add video (anti-spam... palm-face - sorry)) is made on the example of other manufacturers' equipment.
if you wont video use search on youtube
What do I dislike about guitar processors? And how to fix it
This topic is more relevant to such devices as the AX8.
Because few people will risk, drag every day, if device cost like fighter.
Although here you can use some of the principial solutions.
My main requirement is to remove the USB cable connection and made wireless interface.
Example.
By the way, it's not necessary to use this principle only in a guitar processor ...

Image on PC controller - it is game Backgammon.

One of the possible ways of developing my thought.

Maybe I'm an "junkie" ... maybe.
Or maybe I'm outraged by the conservatism of the target audience (guitarists) who, because of the trees do not see forest. And are accustomed to being strangled cables like in the old days
And maybe I'll live to the point where I can see my idea not in fantasy

to summarize, the idea is this:

1) have a PC built-in to the guitar processor - so a simple Windows computer inside the Axe-Fx III. this computer would be handling Axe-Edit, all connections, recording, music playback, etc.

2) use ANOTHER computer to remote view the built-in computer's screen. this 2nd computer doesn't do any heavy lifting, just controls and views the other built-in computer.

this idea is solely to avoid having to plug in an USB cable when recording guitar videos at home, since he has to sit farther away from the computer so the camera can see his face and the guitar.

Thanks this moderator. The brief and understandable translation of my idea into English.

 

[chris]

wireless is not developed enough for this yet. it costs thousands of dollars per microphone for the best wireless and it still has problems.

there are wireless MIDI options available. but they are not reliable for the large amounts of data used. a footswitch that sends 1 command at a time can be wireless (yet can still fail). but for constant streams of data, it just doesn't work well.



this has nothing to do with the AX8 or other Fractal Audio gear. scientists need to make wireless better first.

 

[Aleksey]

wireless is not developed enough for this yet. it costs thousands of dollars per microphone for the best wireless and it still has problems.
there are wireless MIDI options available. but they are not reliable for the large amounts of data used. a footswitch that sends 1 command at a time can be wireless (yet can still fail). but for constant streams of data, it just doesn't work well.
this has nothing to do with the AX8 or other Fractal Audio gear. scientists need to make wireless better first.

Sorry but you see my video?
I made it in 4 minutes. And you say it's impossible ... There are no data transmissions. Everything happens inside the processor - sound monitoring, input guitar signal and record. On our PC we see only image transfered with wireless.
Simply - we put the PC and the processor in one package, we replace the connection of these devices with USB to a faster one ... for example, PCI-E whose bandwidth is many times higher. And send to the user PC only the image.
As a result, we get rid of the USB cord (leaving it as a spare function maximum)

My prototype is wrapped in a regular cardboard box and does not look like $ 5,000, but it works. Although he has a maximum price of $ 200.

 

[chris]

so you want a PC built-in to the guitar processor?

it seems like your Laptop idea is already accomplishing this. how would the guitar processor maker choose what computer you want?

 

[Aleksey]

so you want a PC built-in to the guitar processor?

Exactly.
As a bonus, you will be able to install the unify components in the PC and do not customize perfomance your processor for different user configurations.
It is game console conception.
where obviously worse components yield more stable and predictable perfomance
Your processor does not give in the user PC mathematical calculations. Imagine if he did it? And the bottleneck remains usb interface in this bundle.
More, recording one of the videos I accidentally tripped over the cord and broke the USB port ...

 

[chris]

I don’t want a PC in my Axe-Fx. I have a computer.

Can this computer get viruses? So now my Axe-Fx has viruses? Just so I don’t have to use 1 USB cable?

 

[Aleksey]

I don’t want a PC in my Axe-Fx. I have a computer.

Can this computer get viruses? So now my Axe-Fx has viruses? Just so I don’t have to use 1 USB cable?

First. This is your private opinion
Second. May be You PC already has viruses, and your Axe connected in its. What changes? I not see difference.
And search in google BadUSB theme
If you follow this logic, then no color printer with an internal RIPs(raster -image proccesor) in nature should not exist. And they are much more expensive than 5000 thousand dollars. For 13 years of servicing this equipment, I do not know of any cases of infection of its viruses

 

[yek]

What you propose (combined computer and sound processing) already exists: a DAW running plugins and software modelers.

It makes no sense to build a computer into a hardware guitar processor, just for the purpose of minimizing cables.

Furthermore it would increase the price, even for users who don't want a computer in their processor.

 

[chris]

First. This is your private opinion
Second. May be You PC already has viruses, and your Axe connected in its. What changes? I not see difference.
And search in google BadUSB theme

My computer doesn’t have viruses.

And my Axe-Fx will never get a virus. That’s the difference.

What changes? I don’t have a virus computer permanently connected to my Axe-Fx.

 

[Aleksey]

My computer doesn’t have viruses.

And my Axe-Fx will never get a virus. That’s the difference.

What changes? I don’t have a virus computer permanently connected to my Axe-Fx.

Sorry but Lol. Tell it to manufacturers of copying equipment like Xerox. I'll laugh with them. Equipment costs several times more and works much longer in a day. So you always disconnect and connect the cable? And how often does it break?
In the answer of your colleague of sense in times more.
Although again, whether there were studies - what users want? the simplest voting on forum.
And if i can use the AX8 not only at the table, but also on the couch, in comfortable conditions, and record ... and not drag the cable through the house or the PC and AX8 themselves.

 

[chris]

So you always disconnect and connect the cable? And how often does it break?

Yes. Never.

Most people who want portability use a Laptop.

I just don’t see anyone ever adding a PC into a POD, or GT, or Axe-Fx.

 

[Aleksey]

Yes. Never.

Most people who want portability use a Laptop.

I just don’t see anyone ever adding a PC into a POD, or GT, or Axe-Fx.

In the early 20th century, the owners of horses also spoke about cars.
Where are the horses now and where are the cars?
in early 2000, the owner TubeAmp also spok about guitar processor.
If you do not want to repeat the history of horses, then you will have to deal with this issue sooner or later.
Example
GT added the ability to manage from the smartphone. Small but still a step. And he's a direct competitor to your AX8

I'll open the secret. Nobody wants to buy a lot of boxes. everyone wants one box and that sounds like everyone else and could do everything that everyone else does

 

[yek]

Okay, I’m out.

 

[Rane]

This thread is .

I’ll play along, though.

I was looking forward to finally getting one of those Star Trek transporters, but I guess having an Axe-Fx XXVII app in my phone with all wireless peripherals would be cool too.

Picture this: middle of your gig and your wife decides to call you about grabbing laundry soap on your way home. Next thing you know, your glorious amp tone is being drowned out by your iPhone 342 ringer.

 

[Aleksey]

Picture this: middle of your gig and your wife decides to call you about grabbing laundry soap on your way home.

Thank. I smiled)))
But I do not know how you are, but there are rules of decency. During a speech in the theater, disable the phones))) And this can be part of the show)))
Or sound ringer - transported in input your amp)))

 

[steadystate]

I want a George Jetson briefcase that pops open into a full studio.

 

[woodbutcher65]

Taking the idea to the extreme, the DSP engine that makes the Axe-FX the monster that it is becomes a plug-in card in a computer. On a laptop it could be an ExpressCard, to give an example. The software that runs it is just an installable package. On a desktop, the hardware becomes a PCI-E plugin card.

The idea seems good at first glance but what is the standardized high bandwidth plug-in slot in the laptop industry today, spanning PC and Macs both? There isn't one. So that idea's dead before the concept brief is even completed.

Some people have some very far-fetched concepts of what they want what's already the greatest guitar tone generator on earth to become in the next iteration.

The OP's idea is just TOO far out there. I would not want to have to enter a virtual reality environment to control my guitar amplifier. I'm all in favor of keeping things (reasonably) simple.

Now, if I were to suggest changes, honestly I'd like to see a more conventional guitar amplifier type user interface on the unit. A row of maybe 10 or 12 normally sized knobs and...here's a thought...each one is over or under a good sized LCD display that is highly readable. The function of those knobs, and the label on the LCD, is defined in software. A user interface that every guitar player already knows how to work. And with a degree of consistency in the layout. Certain controls are always the same thing regardless of the chosen preset. Bass, middle, treble, volume, gain, master, presence, reverb. Those don't even need LCD displays on them, just clear legends.

Doesn't that make sense? Knowing that you can reach for a specific knob without having to check the LCD display to verify that it has the function you think it does?

Come to think of it, that might be something that would be implemented as a box you can plug into the MIDI or USB port, and then you can have a user interface that is just what guitar players are most used to.

I would personally find this to be more useful than the MFC-101 MkIII that's sitting in front of my own unit.

If I had to criticize anything about the Axe-FX processors, it is that: Its user interface is not instantly familiar to a guitarist who's been using conventional guitar amps since he started his musical adventure.

 

[zenaxe]

Yes. Never.

Most people who want portability use a Laptop.

I just don’t see anyone ever adding a PC into a POD, or GT, or Axe-Fx.

Pretty much this. If you want a PC based rig, build one. There is nothing stopping you. Load something like Helix Native on it or some other modeler software of your choice; some of it is quite solid. PCs are portable and you can carry a backup. As far as wireless goes as noted earlier, the tech is no there. The lag is still too high for most serious applications.

 

[Aleksey]

The idea seems good at first glance but what is the standardized high bandwidth plug-in slot in the laptop industry today, spanning PC and Macs both?
The OP's idea is just TOO far out there. I would not want to have to enter a virtual reality environment to control my guitar amplifier.

I suggest using the PCI-E only as an example of a more high-speed bus. At this place could be 100Gbe ( IEEE 802.3ba-2010). I only about, nobody tried to remove from the chain grandfather (USB) with a crutch. Just like no one has tried until recently to abandon internal combustion engines. Which is used by habit, and not because he is so super effective.

Usability of the user interface. Yes it is really problem. For many interface (Cubase, Reaper and other programm) did not for people... my ideal user interface it is POD Farm2 (like guitar plug-in). If do not take the sound quality, then the user interface is just perfect - fast and intuitive.
And my idea is difficult to implement, but not because exaggerated problems with the wireless. And because of too many functions and lack of understanding, as the user will see in the end.

Now about virtual reality. This place can be a monitor, a tablet and so on.
This is an example of a clean desktop - without monitors. How much space do they occupy? In Oculus Rift third-party applications are already being used to implement my idea. But while this is not realizable. Not for the reasons you indicated. Because of the resolution of the display - it's too small and too close to the eyes, so you picture will seem blurry.

 

[lqdsnddist]

Is the OP trying to sell us something ?

I can’t quite follow exactly what it is he’s suggesting or why I need it. My guitar is already wireless. I consider myself pretty well set.

Seems like he’s putting a lot of time and effort into some long posts, so what’s the angle ?