What would the new-gen even have that the current gen doesn’t?

User Renamable amp models
with "reset current amp model name to default" and "reset all amp model names to default" options

I'd also like to talk about Global Blocks.
Ever since Scenes were implemented, Global Blocks have been kind of useless. Locking four channels worth of sounds together in a patch just doesn't make sense in the context of how the Axe-Fx is used now. Instead of Global Blocks, we should have Global Channels, and we should be able to name them, because it's impossible to remember which one is which when you're scrolling through them. Also, ten global channels per effect isn't enough. If there's enough room to store 10 global blocks per effect block type, there should be enough room to store 40 Global Channels, since a channel is only 25% as large as a whole block.
 
Last edited:
My Wish: Dramatically improved hands-on ergonomics and intuitive sound-design workflow.

For me, the biggest limitation of the current unit is not sound quality or DSP power, but how difficult and unintuitive it is to program sounds directly on the hardware.

Compared to real amps and physical pedals, the Axe-Fx requires too much menu navigation, page-switching, and memorization of UI logic (when to press Exit, when to press Home, which page a parameter lives on, etc.). The editing experience feels abstract and indirect, especially when I want to create sounds quickly in a studio environment.

In practice, this is why I often reach for real amps and pedals when recording:
all the controls are laid out in front of me, immediately visible and adjustable, with no cognitive overhead. Turning a knob instantly tells me what I’m changing and why. That immediacy is largely missing here.
I would strongly wish for a next-generation approach that is more “what you see is what you shape”:
  • More dedicated, context-aware physical controls (knobs, encoders, or sections) that map clearly to tone-shaping parameters
  • Far fewer menu layers and less dependence on remembering UI rules
  • A workflow that encourages fast, exploratory sound creation rather than technical navigation

In short, I’m not asking for more features — I’m asking for a more intuitive, hands-on, amp- and pedal-like editing experience, so that creating sounds feels as immediate and inspiring as it does on real hardware.

This would make a bigger real-world difference for me than additional DSP power or new effects.
 
BobXX said:
I use Global Blocks with caution for very particular uses but IMO they are absolutely useful.
In FM9 I "simulate" something similar with crazy workarounds... :)
Click to expand...
Possum said:
+++

Global blocks are a huge game changer in quite some scenarios...
Click to expand...

I agree they can be useful in certain scenarios, but I think Global Channels would completely change the entire workflow of the Axe-Fx, and for the better.

Imagine having a solid library of your favorite 15-20 amp block channels dialed in and always ready to go, which you could name yourself, and when you build a new patch, just call up the most appropriate group of four and assign them to each channel in the amp block. Done. Now apply that same thinking to every effect.

It would basically work like the Library channel saving feature already in Axe Edit, but it would be more directly integrated into the Axe-Fx itself so you wouldn't have to rely on separate software for it to work. Also, the Library function in Axe Edit doesn't link changes to blocks across multiple patches, so it would give you more functionality.
 
Last edited:
GreatGreen said:
I agree they can be useful in certain scenarios, but I think Global Channels would completely change the entire workflow of the Axe-Fx, and for the better.

Imagine having a solid library of your favorite 15-20 amp block channels dialed in and always ready to go, which you could name yourself, and when you build a new patch, just call up the most appropriate group of four and assign them to each channel in the amp block. Done. Now apply that same thinking to every effect.

It would basically work like the Library channel saving feature already in Axe Edit, but it would be more directly integrated into the Axe-Fx itself so you wouldn't have to rely on separate software for it to work. Also, the Library function in Axe Edit doesn't link changes to blocks across multiple patches, so it would give you more functionality.
Click to expand...
I made a wish for it a couple years ago but didn't get nuch interest... Maybe there are other similar wishes?

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/global-channels.201703/#post-2520995
 
Better UI so easier to adjust without a computer (The new AM4 is is alot easier than the other models), more DSP so we could use the Pitch Block along with other stuff like Plex Delay, and nam captures.
 
edwinstar said:
My Wish: Dramatically improved hands-on ergonomics and intuitive sound-design workflow.

For me, the biggest limitation of the current unit is not sound quality or DSP power, but how difficult and unintuitive it is to program sounds directly on the hardware.

Compared to real amps and physical pedals, the Axe-Fx requires too much menu navigation, page-switching, and memorization of UI logic (when to press Exit, when to press Home, which page a parameter lives on, etc.). The editing experience feels abstract and indirect, especially when I want to create sounds quickly in a studio environment.

In practice, this is why I often reach for real amps and pedals when recording:
all the controls are laid out in front of me, immediately visible and adjustable, with no cognitive overhead. Turning a knob instantly tells me what I’m changing and why. That immediacy is largely missing here.
I would strongly wish for a next-generation approach that is more “what you see is what you shape”:
  • More dedicated, context-aware physical controls (knobs, encoders, or sections) that map clearly to tone-shaping parameters
  • Far fewer menu layers and less dependence on remembering UI rules
  • A workflow that encourages fast, exploratory sound creation rather than technical navigation

In short, I’m not asking for more features — I’m asking for a more intuitive, hands-on, amp- and pedal-like editing experience, so that creating sounds feels as immediate and inspiring as it does on real hardware.

This would make a bigger real-world difference for me than additional DSP power or new effects.
Click to expand...
I get your wish. It’s shared by many. Sometimes I have that wish myself. But such simplification comes at a price.

The Axe-Fx has menus because of all it can do. You have so much power and control at your fingertips that you can’t assign a permanent knob to everything — even if you eliminate the screen and make the whole front panel nothing but knobs. If you want to simplify the interface, you have to start eliminating capabilities. The Axe-Fx is the most capable modeler there is. By design. So it’s not the best place to start eliminating capabilities.

If you took an Axe-Fx and simplified it, removing capabilities in favor of simplicity, you’d have... an AM4. :) And there are still plenty of wishes for the AM4 that would add complexity to include the wisher’s favorite feature.

If you get a chance to play through an AM4, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the UI and its suitability.
 
Rex said:
I get your wish. It’s shared by many. Sometimes I have that wish myself. But such simplification comes at a price.

The Axe-Fx has menus because of all it can do. You have so much power and control at your fingertips that you can’t assign a permanent knob to everything — even if you eliminate the screen and make the whole front panel nothing but knobs. If you want to simplify the interface, you have to start eliminating capabilities. The Axe-Fx is the most capable modeler there is. By design. So it’s not the best place to start eliminating capabilities.

If you took an Axe-Fx and simplified it, removing capabilities in favor of simplicity, you’d have... an AM4. :) And there are still plenty of wishes for the AM4 that would add complexity to include the wisher’s favorite feature.

If you get a chance to play through an AM4, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the UI and its suitability.
Click to expand...

I still stand by what I said here four years ago:
You wanna go to the next state? Or do you wanna go to f##king space?
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rex
my one wish is a longshot but it would let me set aside the last outboard pedal i use regularly: pre ADC compressor to optimize input dynamics before conversion. not picky about circuit type just anything flexible enough to sound good from 4:1 to peak limiting use cases

edit: crucial (apparently) to clarify that this would be easily switched out/bypassed by default for those who would not use it
and also that i do not consider the absence of this in current gen to be a reflection of lackluster conversion performance
 
Last edited:
I immediately get super skeptical any time somebody treats "converters" as problematc in the year of our lord two thousand and twenty five six. Modern converters just aren't problematic compared to the analog gear you feed into them. And the AxeFX converters are top-notch.
 
can someone show me where i called the converter problematic
dude i just said it would be cool to have a switchable in line pre converter compression stage what is getting me flayed alive here
if you're gonna have a next gen wish list thread you presumably are allowed to have next gen wishes without getting treated like you're the new marvel movie no one asked for
 
oh i get it. it was "optimize" wasn't it. the imagined insinuation that i am calling the converter suboptimal.

let's try this again.

i, personally, appreciate the idea of a flexible compression stage that can be fully defeated ahead of the converter. it would be cool to see that for fine tuning near 0 dBFS performance.

if this is impractical for any reason i will continue using my outboard compression as i currently do and all will be just as well.

have a great new year yall
 
komorebi_dayo said:
dynamics handling near 0 dBFS, not total dynamic range/noise floor
Click to expand...
I still don’t get it, though. With the best converters and the quietest design, anything you can do with an outboard analog compressor, you can do as well or better with the Axe’s built-in compression algorithms, with no need for additional analog circuitry.
 
Rex said:
What would that get you? The ADCs in the Ax-Fx already have way more dynamic range than your guitar has, and their noise floor is way lower than your guitar’s noise floor.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what the source of this misconception is, it gets repeated over and over.

I even posted some recording samples here some years ago.

No, guitars don't/shouldn't produce a lot of noise. They may pick up EMI and such if they're not shielded properly (most aren't), and of course they produce sound when played/touched etc. But even when they do, it's a very different kind of noise from that generated by input circuitry. And if you amplify that input noise with compression and gain, it produces a ton of unwanted stuff.

And no, Fractal ADCs aren't the best, there are much quieter ones. Fractal devices on their main instrument inputs have some noise shaping happening though (which they call "secret sauce") which makes the analog/converter noise less perceptible, I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom