New Community Tool/Resource

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regarding the thread and the new website created by @Spartan1158:

I would like that @Spartan1158 "sends" his website design, his brain and his energy to the current wiki.

If the goal is to improve and keep things updated, I think the best option is to use the current wiki that already exists.

In other words: instead of looking for people to join to your new website, you could join to the current website where there is already people working.

So, my suggestion; talk to @yek, to FAS team, all you joined can do something great all together.
At the risk of coming across the wrong way, I have no interest in updating the contents of a wiki. My goal is push the community forward and help create something that wouldn't be possible with a wiki and forums. If people prefer to get their info from a wiki and all that, totally fine.

It's my hope that I can communicate my ideas effectively so enough people understand what I'm trying to accomplish and would like to see that happen. If that's not the case, and people just don't think it would useful, fair enough. That's the way these things work and I'm cool with that.
 
I honestly love the whole layout you've come up with and would definitely like to see it continue. I feel as though the negativity displayed through a few other's backhanded comments/compliments is unnecessary and laughable seeing as you clearly gave credit where it was due. I don't understand how people can bash other's for trying to contribute and then ask why someone doesn't contribute all in the same train of thought. Good luck my friend.
 
"I'm not mad, just disappointed", my parents used to say and that would hit me harder than being punished.
Just kidding. :)

@Spartan1158:
I have no reason to doubt that your intention was and is to contribute something to the community.

Contacting me on forehand would surely have been the better way to approach this, because your site leans so heavily on the content I've put together painstakingly with lots of research. While I don't pretend to have written very original stuff, intellectual property still applies. BTW, you would not have been the first to ask though, I've received several of those request in the past, which I turned down at the time, simply these were efforts to monetize it.

Now think ahead ... it's your domain and site, not Fractal Audio's domain (like the wiki is). Let's assume the site would take off in a successful way. People from the Quad Cortex and Helix crowd would ask you: can you extend the site to those products too? And you would do that. That would put things (including the re-use of information ) in a totally different perspective.

To get to the point: I'm not asking you to remove all current content from your site. Do as you like, with proper credits.

To be completely honest, I have doubts about the added value and longevity. Not to put you or your work down, but I've seen multiple efforts of this sort and none has been really successful. There's not much room left next to the forum, wiki, social media and guides. Also, what's the unique selling point in your view? Because besides the guide, the forum already provides a way for members to add bring in their own expertise, views, tips and opinions. But that is entirely your call.

I'm planning on updating the AMP Guide in the next year or so. That will be a personal undertaking, no collaborations. So people who re-use / copy my stuff, would have to update theirs too.

Finally, it's true that I maintain the wiki's content almost solely and dialy. The content is fully up-to-date and is of a "canonical" nature, as @iaresee puts it so eloquently. :) That last aspect is what keeps me going. In any way, new contributors are very welcome! :)
 
What does your website offer that isn't possible with a wiki and/or a forum? I don't see any features in the site that aren't covered by the wiki now.
  • The ability to nominate AxeChange presets involving a certain amp could help those looking for a certain tone/amp, and I don't see a feature equivalent in the wiki.
  • The ability to "rank" amps could possibly be done with polls in the forums, but isn't consolidated, and hasn't been done widely/at all before.
  • The ability to share recommended amp settings as a starting point can be found in some certain amps in Yek's guide, but is by no means extensive.
  • The ability to discuss a certain amp could possibly be done on the forums, but creating a specific place for talk about one amp could help those just wanting help dialing in one amp without creating a whole new thread for it.
These are just a few I see right off the bat, and the site is in beta. There is a lot of potential for this style of site, if cabs were implemented and the sample size of data increased it could be very very useful for newcomers. Sure the wiki is great and very extensive if you want to nerd out about everything (which I certainly do), you have to admit not everyone has the ability, time, or will to go through that. A simple, well-designed site with suggested settings could help the most common complaint of the AxeFX- how to use it.
 
What does your website offer that isn't possible with a wiki and/or a forum? I don't see any features in the site that aren't covered by the wiki now.
So you didn't read my lengthy post (kinda can't blame you) or actually browse the site? Not saying all of these things couldn't exist in some form in a wiki or forum or are huge features, but here's a bulleted rundown for ease of digestion.

  • Automated amp of the day recommendation to help expose people to models they may otherwise skip over or not take the time to look at. Neat, but def a weaker feature.
  • Player's Choice recommendation - an area to highlight models with the highest overall user rating (criteria not fully fleshed out yet). Useful for identifying 'cream of the crop' models that lots of people like, but this rating data could also prove useful in other ways. Perhaps letting FAS know which models to focus on first when making updates, etc.
  • A better/easier interface for finding information. This is subjective, of course, but a filterable/searchable interface organized by physical amp makes a lot of sense to me. The wiki has the amp name, yes, and you can ctrl+f to search that massive page, but IMO it's not as nice nor as user friendly.
  • Kind of similar to the last, but a dedicated page(s) for each amp and the associated models. Again, subjective, but I believe FractalPedia presents this information in a better and more user friendly way. The wiki is a literal info dump with a link to a forum thread. I'm sure there are people who prefer that format and that's fine, FractalPedia is not for them.
  • Slightly tighter control of 'core' information. This will be polarizing, but I personally like a clear line between official/concrete information and opinion/user content. I prefer this distinction and like the fact that a smaller moderator team would be controlling certain bits of information, leaving other (more community focused) bits to registered users. As it stands, the wiki is wide open. Not everyone will agree here, that's cool.
Need to break up that list, so, regarding the actual amp models information..

  • A user rating system that allows registered users to rate models on a scale from 1-5 and the ability to pin/favorite amp models
  • A preference system would be created that would allow registered users to control when they are notified of certain things relating to models they have pinned/favorited. Current ideas are new tone tips, hall of fame entries, Cliffisms, etc. Yes, you can follow a forum thread but this is an entirely different ball game.
  • A more succinct and easier to navigate interface for viewing all of this information. Again, my opinion, but I think my initial design is nicer and could obviously evolve.
  • AxeChange HoF - this one is dicey and bit half-baked, but I thought it would be neat to integrate that somehow. Sure, you can go and easily browse for as long as you see fit, but wouldn't it be cool if there was a curated list of presets hand-picked by members of the community? No searching, no sorting, just check the hall of fame and give them a try.
  • Discussion area specific to each model. My mockups don't completely convey my intent and a forum thread is similar, but the main draw is the ability to up/down vote so the 'hidden gems' aren't hidden anymore. No need to sift through pages or posts or search the forums to find that one golden comment from Cliff or someone else - it's all right there. Relies on the community, of course, but I still think it's better.
There are some other ideas relating to IRs and such but this is more than enough for now.. Hopefully this communicates my vision a little better and people can decide whether or not it interests them. The overall theme, if it isn't apparent, is user experience - how can I make it easier for people to find what they want and get the information they need. Additionally, how can I increase engagement and grow the community even more? I personally think I have some good ideas and I bet other folks have even better ones!
 
  • The ability to nominate AxeChange presets involving a certain amp could help those looking for a certain tone/amp, and I don't see a feature equivalent in the wiki.
  • The ability to "rank" amps could possibly be done with polls in the forums, but isn't consolidated, and hasn't been done widely/at all before.
  • The ability to share recommended amp settings as a starting point can be found in some certain amps in Yek's guide, but is by no means extensive.
  • The ability to discuss a certain amp could possibly be done on the forums, but creating a specific place for talk about one amp could help those just wanting help dialing in one amp without creating a whole new thread for it.
These are just a few I see right off the bat, and the site is in beta. There is a lot of potential for this style of site, if cabs were implemented and the sample size of data increased it could be very very useful for newcomers. Sure the wiki is great and very extensive if you want to nerd out about everything (which I certainly do), you have to admit not everyone has the ability, time, or will to go through that. A simple, well-designed site with suggested settings could help the most common complaint of the AxeFX- how to use it.

That's the thing: there are millions of opinions. You won't want a wiki populated by contributions like:

"I've created the MOST BRUTAL tone evah, by adding ... and turning down ... and turning ..Hz to ... etc.".

"Try Bass at 4, Mid, 5.5, and Treble between 3 and 8".

etc.

That stuff has the longevity of a burp. Recommendations and ratings too. Hey, but if that's your thing, go for it.

Sharing amp settings is so subjective, that's why I left them out the guide unless they reached a certain status like the "Magic 6" settings on Fenders, or "everything on 10" (EVH Plexi), etc.

IMHO, the best way to approach the amp-specific need for information, is to create a separate AMP MODELS section on the forum, and start a separate thread for each model. Like I originally did which then became the Amp Guide. I would have no problem migrating the contents of my PDF Guide back to threads.
 
Finally, I recommend changing the name of the domain. It's wise nor tasty to use (part of) the name of the company (which you're not affiliated with), and to create the illusion that the site is some kind of a wikipedia, which it isn't and what you want to steer away from. Legal issues aside.
 
"I'm not mad, just disappointed", my parents used to say and that would hit me harder than being punished.
Just kidding. :)

@Spartan1158:
I have no reason to doubt that your intention was and is to contribute something to the community.

Contacting me on forehand would surely have been the better way to approach this, because your site leans so heavily on the content I've put together painstakingly with lots of research. While I don't pretend to have written very original stuff, intellectual property still applies. BTW, you would not have been the first to ask though, I've received several of those request in the past, which I turned down at the time, simply these were efforts to monetize it.

Now think ahead ... it's your domain and site, not Fractal Audio's domain (like the wiki is). Let's assume the site would take off in a successful way. People from the Quad Cortex and Helix crowd would ask you: can you extend the site to those products too? And you would do that. That would put things (including the re-use of information ) in a totally different perspective.

To get to the point: I'm not asking you to remove all current content from your site. Do as you like, with proper credits.

To be completely honest, I have doubts about the added value and longevity. Not to put you or your work down, but I've seen multiple efforts of this sort and none has been really successful. There's not much room left next to the forum, wiki, social media and guides. Also, what's the unique selling point in your view? Because besides the guide, the forum already provides a way for members to add bring in their own expertise, views, tips and opinions. But that is entirely your call.

I'm planning on updating the AMP Guide in the next year or so. That will be a personal undertaking, no collaborations. So people who re-use / copy my stuff, would have to update theirs too.

Finally, it's true that I maintain the wiki's content almost solely and dialy. The content is fully up-to-date and is of a "canonical" nature, as @iaresee puts it so eloquently. :) That last aspect is what keeps me going. In any way, new contributors are very welcome! :)
The Legend himself! I appreciate the response and I'm not surprised many people approached you with the intent to monetize what you created. I admit the best course of action I could've taken would have been reaching out to you two first, but I didn't simply because of what it was and what I was doing. I was using a community resource to create another resource for the same community with absolutely zero monetization at all. I knew you'd see it when I made the announcement, and if you didn't I would contact you. That was my line of thinking, and now that I've directly responded to you I won't speak on it again.

Regarding the further use of your content, if this thing doesn't take off then nobody has anything to worry about. If it does, and you don't want to be a part of it, then I feel like the right thing to do is wipe any content I used and disassociate. Would you agree? My intent isn't to put the whole thing on you and say 'if you don't participate the site will not exist' but you're a huge part of this community, have done some great things, and it would be great to jumpstart the site leveraging your work. However, if you have no interest, I feel it should be pulled.

Hopefully you'll read my ideas above and change your mind about the value and longevity. I understand this a completely new thing and isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea. However, regarding there not being much room left aside from the things you mentioned, I respectfully disagree. There's a ton of room for improvement! Again, not everyone will prefer 'my' format, but I think a lot of people will.

I'm not sure why you think I'd integrate QC and Helix content into the site - what gave you that idea? It would exist solely for fractal products, nothing else. It's called FractalPedia, after all :D
 
That's the thing: there are millions of opinions. You won't want a wiki populated by contributions like:

"I've created the MOST BRUTAL tone evah, by adding ... and turning down ... and turning ..Hz to ... etc.".

"Try Bass at 4, Mid, 5.5, and Treble between 3 and 8".

etc.

That stuff has the longevity of a burp. Recommendations and ratings too. Hey, but if that's your thing, go for it.

Sharing amp settings is so subjective, that's why I left them out the guide unless they reached a certain status like the "Magic 6" settings on Fenders, or "everything on 10" (EVH Plexi), etc.

IMHO, the best way to approach the amp-specific need for information, is to create a separate AMP MODELS section on the forum, and start a separate thread for each model. Like I originally did which then became the Amp Guide. I would have no problem migrating the contents of my PDF Guide back to threads.
Which is precisely one of the reasons why I don't think wikis are an appropriate format for certain things. This is also why I prefer a clear distinction between factual and opinionated content.

In my opinion, what you're describing at the end there is exactly what I've tried to create, only in a better way. Separate threads in a forum would be a step in the right direction but it's still crude in my opinion. Forums and wikis, like everything else, have limitations. We can do better!
 
Last edited:
Each one of those is in the wiki.
That was a specific example, but regardless, different format and not as easy to find in my opinion.

Finally, I recommend changing the name of the domain. It's wise nor tasty to use (part of) the name of the company (which you're not affiliated with), and to create the illusion that the site is some kind of a wikipedia, which it isn't and what you want to steer away from. Legal issues aside.
I appreciate the insight but I purposefully chose the name. It makes the most sense, considering I'm trying to make something tightly coupled to this community. Obviously if FAS disapproves in any way I will promptly take it down, simple as that.

Looking ahead and considering all relevant (even future) factors is part of my daily job.
Sure, but that has nothing to do with the site, its intention, and what I would do with it? Respectfully, being aware of things coming down the pike and making premature assumptions/accusations is not the same thing. Opinions are opinions and all that, but I don't think it's fair for you to make those kind of claims in that context.
 
Sure, but that has nothing to do with the site, its intention, and what I would do with it? Respectfully, being aware of things coming down the pike and making premature assumptions/accusations is not the same thing. Opinions are opinions and all that, but I don't think it's fair for you to make those kind of claims in that context.

I'm not accusing you of anything or making claims. I'm just openly contemplating and discussing possible, even unforeseen, scenarios. Which is absolutely relevant because it involves the use of my material.

Not looking forward to continuing this discussion in this way, so I'm outta here.
 
The ability to nominate AxeChange presets involving a certain amp could help those looking for a certain tone/amp, and I don't see a feature equivalent in the wiki.
You can add a list of presets to the wiki for an amp. Here, done:

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/...00W_Marshall_Super_Lead_Plexi_1959_reissue.29

That took literal seconds to add. Wiki is freeform and can be anything we, the community, need it to be in that regard.

The ability to share recommended amp settings as a starting point can be found in some certain amps in Yek's guide, but is by no means extensive
So, again, just edit the wiki page for the amp in question and do that. Here you go:

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/...00W_Marshall_Super_Lead_Plexi_1959_reissue.29

I even added an IR suggestion section.

The ability to discuss a certain amp could possibly be done on the forums, but creating a specific place for talk about one amp could help those just wanting help dialing in one amp without creating a whole new thread for it.
It's done on the forum now. There's nothing saying we can't break each amp model into it's own page on the wiki and allow comments and questions to be left on the pages. This is fairly easy to do, technology-wise, it just requires an investment from the community to help move the content around into structured pages.
The ability to "rank" amps could possibly be done with polls in the forums, but isn't consolidated, and hasn't been done widely/at all before
I have no idea what ranking amps provides -- amps aren't a popularity contest.
 
So you didn't read my lengthy post (kinda can't blame you) or actually browse the site?
I did both. Even made an account.

Automated amp of the day recommendation to help expose people to models they may otherwise skip over or not take the time to look at. Neat, but def a weaker feature.
We can do an "article of the day" on the wiki that pulls from the amp pages.

A better/easier interface for finding information. This is subjective, of course, but a filterable/searchable interface organized by physical amp makes a lot of sense to me. The wiki has the amp name, yes, and you can ctrl+f to search that massive page, but IMO it's not as nice nor as user friendly.
Super subjective. The search works very well on the wiki right now and you can Cmd-F the content easily there because it's all in one place and not spread out behind multiple sub-page views like it is on your site.

I like your table-based layout for presenting the information. That's a style that can easily be adopted for amp pages on the wiki though.
Kind of similar to the last, but a dedicated page(s) for each amp and the associated models. Again, subjective, but I believe FractalPedia presents this information in a better and more user friendly way. The wiki is a literal info dump with a link to a forum thread. I'm sure there are people who prefer that format and that's fine, FractalPedia is not for them.
Dedicating a page per-amp on the wiki is just a matter of effort. The community could chip in here.

Slightly tighter control of 'core' information. This will be polarizing, but I personally like a clear line between official/concrete information and opinion/user content. I prefer this distinction and like the fact that a smaller moderator team would be controlling certain bits of information, leaving other (more community focused) bits to registered users. As it stands, the wiki is wide open. Not everyone will agree here, that's cool.
Yea, polarizing for sure. Your view of the world isn't necessarily the most correct view of the world. It's also locked behind you to control changing it. At least with the wiki if you dont like the way information is presented you can propose a change with an edit. It truly is community-driven in that regard.

A user rating system that allows registered users to rate models on a scale from 1-5 and the ability to pin/favorite amp models
As I said above, what do ratings do? Amps aren't a popularity contest. Seems a useless feature.
A preference system would be created that would allow registered users to control when they are notified of certain things relating to models they have pinned/favorited. Current ideas are new tone tips, hall of fame entries, Cliffisms, etc. Yes, you can follow a forum thread but this is an entirely different ball game.
Wiki has this already. You can subscribe to get change notifications in myriad ways (per-page, per-edit-by-a-user, for the entire site, etc.).

A more succinct and easier to navigate interface for viewing all of this information. Again, my opinion, but I think my initial design is nicer and could obviously evolve.
I have to click many times to see the information on your layout because it's all hidden behind sub-pages. I can't see it all in one place. That's net negative in my books. You could apply your creative energy to improving content layout in the wiki?

AxeChange HoF - this one is dicey and bit half-baked, but I thought it would be neat to integrate that somehow. Sure, you can go and easily browse for as long as you see fit, but wouldn't it be cool if there was a curated list of presets hand-picked by members of the community? No searching, no sorting, just check the hall of fame and give them a try.
I added a list of presets to an amp model view in literal seconds. Suggested IRs as well. And "starter settings".

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/...00W_Marshall_Super_Lead_Plexi_1959_reissue.29

You could be the change you want to see in the world in the wiki here.

Discussion area specific to each model. My mockups don't completely convey my intent and a forum thread is similar, but the main draw is the ability to up/down vote so the 'hidden gems' aren't hidden anymore. No need to sift through pages or posts or search the forums to find that one golden comment from Cliff or someone else - it's all right there. Relies on the community, of course, but I still think it's better.
Every amp model links to the discussion thread on the forum right now where this can happen. Where there's an already established community to discuss the amp model with too.

Honestly, the more you explain your reasoning for how and why you're doing this, the more this just feels to me like you want to have intense control over information that others have produced. Rather than collaborating where the information already exists, you're putting it in your walled garden and trying to call it a community when it isn't.
 
I've downloaded all the presets from Axechange and have ported them all to fraxechange.com. I hope everyone can contribute!
Quality post right here. You clearly don't get it, but that's fine. I must say it is rather unfortunate to have experienced and well-respected community members (moderators, even) engaging and encouraging this kind of behavior. Keep it up, this will do wonders to encourage new folks to jump and try to be a part of the community. /s

I did both. Even made an account.


We can do an "article of the day" on the wiki that pulls from the amp pages.


Super subjective. The search works very well on the wiki right now and you can Cmd-F the content easily there because it's all in one place and not spread out behind multiple sub-page views like it is on your site.

I like your table-based layout for presenting the information. That's a style that can easily be adopted for amp pages on the wiki though.

Dedicating a page per-amp on the wiki is just a matter of effort. The community could chip in here.


Yea, polarizing for sure. Your view of the world isn't necessarily the most correct view of the world. It's also locked behind you to control changing it. At least with the wiki if you dont like the way information is presented you can propose a change with an edit. It truly is community-driven in that regard.


As I said above, what do ratings do? Amps aren't a popularity contest. Seems a useless feature.

Wiki has this already. You can subscribe to get change notifications in myriad ways (per-page, per-edit-by-a-user, for the entire site, etc.).


I have to click many times to see the information on your layout because it's all hidden behind sub-pages. I can't see it all in one place. That's net negative in my books. You could apply your creative energy to improving content layout in the wiki?


I added a list of presets to an amp model view in literal seconds. Suggested IRs as well. And "starter settings".

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/...00W_Marshall_Super_Lead_Plexi_1959_reissue.29

You could be the change you want to see in the world in the wiki here.


Every amp model links to the discussion thread on the forum right now where this can happen. Where there's an already established community to discuss the amp model with too.

Honestly, the more you explain your reasoning for how and why you're doing this, the more this just feels to me like you want to have intense control over information that others have produced. Rather than collaborating where the information already exists, you're putting it in your walled garden and trying to call it a community when it isn't.
I appreciate the detailed response. Wiki, wiki, wiki. Wiki? One tool for every job - a wiki. Though I disagree with a lot of your thoughts and opinions, you have some valid points in there. And yeah, a lot of this is subjective but you're running way too far in the wrong direction.. I mean, seriously. Yep, you guys got me! I want to spend hours and hours of my time and invest my money into my "walled garden" where I have complete control over all the content I stole and.. wait, what am I doing with it again? Haha, get real.. It's unfortunate that a few 'bad apples' that have completely misinterpreted what I've done have ruined what could have been an awesome thing for everyone..

I really appreciate everyone who took the time to read, comment, or send me a DM. I'm also rather disappointed with the interaction and behavior of a few key folks, but it is what it is. At this point in time, I have absolutely zero desire to put any further effort or energy into the project. It will be taken down shortly and that will be the end of it. It's simply not worth it.

Cheers 🍻
 
At the risk of coming across the wrong way, I have no interest in updating the contents of a wiki. My goal is push the community forward and help create something that wouldn't be possible with a wiki and forums. If people prefer to get their info from a wiki and all that, totally fine.

It's my hope that I can communicate my ideas effectively so enough people understand what I'm trying to accomplish and would like to see that happen. If that's not the case, and people just don't think it would useful, fair enough. That's the way these things work and I'm cool with that.

If you find that wiki and forums are not the right tools, and you want to create something totally fresh and new, there is no problem, no limitation.

Just do it!!

Now you know the reply from the main people involved, and also you get answers from several forum users (some of them are very very positive, they like your idea).

So,...
If you decide to go ahead with the new website, I wish you the best luck. :)
In the case you decide to abandon it, I hope you can consider to join and collaborate with the current tools (forum, wiki, ....) :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom