Wish More Channels?

G

Gizmo

Inspired
Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere, but I didn't find it when searching. So I'm setting up some new patches using Axe-Edit and the Channel selector lists A B C D. When you click the drop down arrow, it also lists Channels E and F. You can't access these (grayed out) nor can you select them from the front panel. Does this mean we are going to be getting two more channels in each block in an upcoming firmware update? That would awesome if true!
 
More Channels, would mean, more amps/cabs/effects standing by in "ready" mode. Thereby decreasing the number of blocks a person could use to make a preset that works for them.

I'd be in favor of the opposite - Make blocks with 2 channels also, so I could load more effect blocks onto the grid.

The controllers/modifiers offer so much on-the-fly flexibility, you don't need all those channels.
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
More Channels, would mean, more amps/cabs/effects standing by in "ready" mode. Thereby decreasing the number of blocks a person could use to make a preset that works for them.

I'd be in favor of the opposite - Make blocks with 2 channels also, so I could load more effect blocks onto the grid.
Click to expand...

I don't think it works like that. A block uses the CPU% required by the current settings (channel).
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
More Channels, would mean, more amps/cabs/effects standing by in "ready" mode. Thereby decreasing the number of blocks a person could use to make a preset that works for them.

I'd be in favor of the opposite - Make blocks with 2 channels also, so I could load more effect blocks onto the grid.

The controllers/modifiers offer so much on-the-fly flexibility, you don't need all those channels.
Click to expand...
Channels are no different than X/Y on the previous units. Only the active channel uses CPU...
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
More Channels, would mean, more amps/cabs/effects standing by in "ready" mode. Thereby decreasing the number of blocks a person could use to make a preset that works for them.
Click to expand...
as mentioned, only the Active channel uses CPU.

more channels would take up storage memory though, allowing less features in the future. i personally think 4 channels for most blocks is a lot!
 
Maybe if number of channels was assignable... Like, I may only need 1 channel for my Cab block; but 13 for my Drive (or, more reasonably, 6 or 8). I only really ever use 2 for my reverb block... It'd be cool if you could have, say, an overall number of channels available and each block could have an "add channel" function or something to that effect. Hell, most of might even find that they don't need to add more channels across the board if we're not even using the ones we already have, but with the ability to have more channels on the ones we need it for.
 
decreebass said:
Maybe if number of channels was assignable... Like, I may only need 1 channel for my Cab block; but 13 for my Drive (or, more reasonably, 6 or 8). I only really ever use 2 for my reverb block... It'd be cool if you could have, say, an overall number of channels available and each block could have an "add channel" function or something to that effect. Hell, most of might even find that they don't need to add more channels across the board if we're not even using the ones we already have, but with the ability to have more channels on the ones we need it for.
Click to expand...
This idea comes up often for block instances, and now channels.

For programming and control consideration, the number of channels needs to be known. We can’t suddenly have “Channel K” and have our midi controller know how to access it.
 
chris said:
We can’t suddenly have “Channel K” and have our midi controller know how to access it.
Click to expand...
I see. Maybe this idea could be combined with the idea that allowed all the values of CCs to be freely assignable rather than just the CCs being utilized. I think though, if each block maybe defaulted to two channels but had the ability to add an additional 6 more, that wouldn't be too hard to plan for when we set up MIDI controllers; after all, when we choose a scene with MIDI, we go CC#34, Value 0-7; why couldn't the same be easily managed with channels.

Just a thought. As it stands, it's something I don't NEED, but I could see how a variable (within limits) amount of channels could be useful to some people and also still be conservative of CPU at the same time :)
 
decreebass said:
Maybe if number of channels was assignable... Like, I may only need 1 channel for my Cab block; but 13 for my Drive (or, more reasonably, 6 or 8). I only really ever use 2 for my reverb block... It'd be cool if you could have, say, an overall number of channels available and each block could have an "add channel" function or something to that effect. Hell, most of might even find that they don't need to add more channels across the board if we're not even using the ones we already have, but with the ability to have more channels on the ones we need it for.
Click to expand...

If the channels don't have to be readily available, just use Global Blocks.
 
I have too many times

1) dialed in a wonderful tone in a scene where I modified some channels to make the various blocks interact in a way I like.
2) saved the preset.
3) switched to another scene and found out I ruined the sound because I messed with a channel that was in common with another scene ... and now, I need to try to remake the original channel in a new channel, and somehow I often get the feeling it isn't quite as good as the old one.

It may be because I've only had the AXE FX3 for 9 months and it is surely because I'm used to not affecting other presets when editing a particular sound, and in my brain a scene is a preset in a preset.

I know this is user error, but I would still love it if there was an option to make every scene start up with its own channels - even when copying another scene as a template. This would take 8 channels per preset. If the option "start new scenes with new channels" was selected, it should still be possible to manually change channels as usual and thus modify the scenes in parallel the usual way. It should of course be an option not to mess up the work flow for people who prefer it the current way.
 
I think the limitation is that all channels used in a preset are actually loaded and initialized when you load the preset. More channels would increase loading time and CPU usage.

I think.

Other than that I have the same wish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom