Change two blocks at once without scene?

There is an obvious way to separate AMP from FX on an FC-6 or FC-12. Just assign a switch to EFFECT > CHANNEL INC/DEC > AMP. This lets you switch through the channels of the AMP block. Caveats:
  • This isn't linked to the CAB block, so you're stuck on a single cab, which may or may not be a problem. Requests for linking have been submitted.
  • It requires multiple presses to go from A to C or D (= time / gaps / sound). The GT has solved this by presenting a channel menu.
the problem being it doesnt change the cab channel at the same time. That might be important (is for me).

f I have say a Deluxe reverb for the clean and break up, then plex'y for crunch and lead in one amp block... well I need 2 cab channels as well. a 1x12 for the DR and a 4x12 for the Plexi. you need to change them as a pair - and thats ONLY possible either in scenes (when your FX will change as well which you may not want) OR using a Control switch, a midi link cable, and one control switch/button used for each channel.

Honestly its a PITA.....
 
Not true. RJM, Voes, and FAMC all support these functions with bi-directional MIDI.
Your missing the point.... I think, unless Ive mis-understood somewhere. Those products absolutely support bi-directional MIDI But the AFX3 doesnt..... only via the FC. It doesnt send info back to the controller - so they dont get the information they need. Thats why the MFC101 no longer shows patch names, tuner info or changes LEDs.

I may have mis-understood. Maybe it does but only over Midi cables (rather than FASLINK or Ethernet the 2 did). if so then Im DEFINATELY staying with the MFC101 and the FC12 will go back.... I dont get my 3 set up till late next week so dont have it to test yet. Just going over all the information available out there. Its possible Ive mis-understood this of course. If I have great .... actually. Saves me £700 for the FC12.
 
Your missing the point.... I think, unless Ive mis-understood somewhere. Those products absolutely support bi-directional MIDI But the AFX3 doesnt..... only via the FC. It doesnt send info back to the controller - so they dont get the information they need. Thats why the MFC101 no longer shows patch names, tuner info or changes LEDs.

Look here:
Axe-Fx III MIDI for Third-Party Devices

There's a specific protocol that allows 3rd party MIDI controllers like my RJM to receive data.
 
I've seen this question enough times that I begin to wonder whether the options "AMP1+CAB1" "AMP2+CAB2" might not be well-appreciated amongst the Effect Channel Functions list that can be assigned via the FCs.
ABSOLUTELY.......assuming you mean channels not blocks. you could use 2 amp blocks and 2 cab blocks and link their bypass states using a control switch. Id like to see amp1 ch1 + cab1 ch1, amp1 ch2 + cab1 Ch2, Amp1 Ch3+Cab1 ch3, Amp1 ch4+cab1 Ch4. That may be what you mean of course.

I did send an EMail suggesting a "link" option. Where you could freely assign say 4 blocks to link together. The first being the master and the others slaves (say up to 4) and whatever you do to the master (be that enable, bypass, channel change) is reflected on the slaves. Having 4 to 6 sets of links, with up to 4 blocks per link would be very flexible (in a present rather than global perspective).

But honestly... having Amp+Cab channel chaning as an option for channel changes would solve my personal issues in one go.

Would be nice to have the option to link volume blocks as well (or filters) so clean boosts (for leads for instance) can be applied to multiple outputs. So If Im driving and am/cab from OP2 and sending FRFR to a desk on OP1 - I can volume lift both with one switch. Thats easier than channel changing at present as it can be done just with a control switch - but saving one and adding a link if you can do that with amp/cabs would be a nice addition as well.
 
Last edited:
@yek - thats great info. Id not seen that. Still means the MFC101 wont do it I guess - but Ill look into the others as an alternative to the FC12.
 
I did send an EMail suggesting a "link" option. Where you could freely assign say 4 blocks to link together. The first being the master and the others slaves (say up to 4) and whatever you do to the master (be that enable, bypass, channel change) is reflected on the slaves. Having 4 to 6 sets of links, with up to 4 blocks per link would be very flexible (in a present rather than global perspective).

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/linked-amp-and-cabinet-channels.148497/

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/option-to-link-amp-and-cab-channels.151059/

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/block-links-for-simultaneous-channel-switching.161615
 
I've seen this question enough times that I begin to wonder whether the options "AMP1+CAB1" "AMP2+CAB2" might not be well-appreciated amongst the Effect Channel Functions list that can be assigned via the FCs.

That would be a great and clean solution (for FC users).
 
I was thinking more a freely assignable link.

So you could have say 4 blocks linked - and 4 sets of links.

So you could assign amp1 and cab 1 BUT you could also assign say drive and filter - or delay and compression and reverb. Yes you can do this with control switches for bypass (though we have limited CSs and this would save some) BUT you could link channels as well. So if you link compressor and delay youcould change delay times and compressor settings using channels that are linked to a single switch.
 
Baby steps …

A total linking system would be very difficult to implement and a support nightmare. You’d be at a point where Scenes would be the better alternative.
 
Baby steps …

A total linking system would be very difficult to implement and a support nightmare. You’d be at a point where Scenes would be the better alternative.
possibly.... though ive never got on with scenes as I like a freeform approach. Until we can assign blocks to ignore scene changes I cant use them. I would need to change scenes but say have my delay stay on... or stay off regardless.

I WOULD be able to permanently link a drive block and filter (as I tend top put the drive in front of an amp and the filter after to level and total volume changes).

Blocks being able to be assigned outside scenes solves the problems as well (and gives more flexibility). you could use scenes to do the channel changing and keep the FX from changing at the same time. I made the suggestion as it MAY (or may not) be easier to set up links in a pre-set than having the whole ignore scene thing. It was more an alternative suggestion if that was too hard...whichever is easier really.
 
Your missing the point.... I think, unless Ive mis-understood somewhere. Those products absolutely support bi-directional MIDI But the AFX3 doesnt..... only via the FC.
This is not correct. The AFX sends all of this via SysEx messages - preset names, scene names, and tuner info - and those three MIDI boards all support it.

My MIDI board shows the tuner display, gets the Scene names from whatever Preset I load, and updates Preset names in real-time, as well.
 
This is not correct. The AFX sends all of this via SysEx messages - preset names, scene names, and tuner info - and those three MIDI boards all support it.
Yek pointed me to the info. Shame the MFC doesnt..... Means Id need a new controller either way. DEFINALTY looking into those others though. At present they seem a better solution than the FC..
 
IMO an FC is the best option to go with an Axe-Fx III, without a doubt, UNLESS you have specific needs.
I'm going to disagree. The lack of ability to program multiple control steps for a button press is a big shortcoming compared to even mid-tier MIDI controllers. This is pretty basic.
 
I'm going to disagree. The lack of ability to program multiple control steps for a button press is a big shortcoming compared to even mid-tier MIDI controllers. This is pretty basic.

That counts as "specific needs".:cool:

I'm pretty sure that 9 out of 10 users would never program multiple commands per switch if that option would exist. Even though I would be that one person, so I'm all for it.
 
I think it TOTALLY depends how you use it. If you use scenes - if you play rigid "songs" and "sets" then absolutely.

HOWEVER, if you dont. if you want to freeform, if you play ad hoc. if you need extra control (my band made controls lighting rigs with his MFC) then absolutely there are better options I can see.

Thing is - as has been discussed - there seems several options that would fix most for the FC12/AFX3 problems - you could even implement midi messaging from the FC (might need hardware change admittedly) to allow that control outside the AFX system (yes I know you can now BUT its limited to on scene changes or CSs - both of which are limiting).

As many know (and yak will) Ive been around the fractal world a long time. It appears that the viewpoint, and the workflows have pretty much coalesced around using scenes now - and only to the AFX/controller system. Those not using scenes (either through choice or necessity) or other aspects a midi controller does effortlessly seem to have been forgotten somewhat.

I can see why - I can see why an idea is being perused and other things have been forgotten, neglected, or even discarded through choice. Personally, I think its the first mistake fractal has made ... pretty much ever. But IMO is it a mistake.
 
That counts as "specific needs".:cool:
Really?? for me its something that should be a given. Its far from specific -- its a necessity.

I can say I know of 2 AFX2 users who wont go to the 3 because of these limitations. I know of a few who tried the AFX3 and sent it back because the limitations were too bit to make it useable. Then theres me and the problems Im having getting it sorted. thats 6 of the 7 AFX potential users or existing AFX2 users I am personally aware of where these limitations are off-putting at best - or make the AFX3/FC not an option for them.
 
That counts as "specific needs".:cool:

I'm pretty sure that 9 out of 10 users would never program multiple commands per switch if that option would exist. Even though I would be that one person, so I'm all for it.
Here's the issue:

The REAL underlying workflow limitation is forcing the amp channel and cabinet blocks to act just like the rest of the grid. In the "real world" of amps, the amp and cabinet have a separate switcher from the rest of the FX system. When you select a different amp channel, the FX don't change, and vice versa. This isn't "special" or "specific" - it's the way every single regular tube amp user operates. ALL of them.

The point about multiple steps per press is really a work-around for the lack of ability to separate the Amp/Cabinet blocks from the rest of the FX.
 
Back
Top Bottom