Any hope of Preset compatability between Ultra & II?

[bkrumme]

Even if you do it, matching parameters 1:1 across the range (where you can, they have different parameter sets) you will then need to spend considerable tweaking time to rework them.

It just doesn't work; and I originally shared the same initial apprehension - I had my Ultra dialed *in*. I had no need, so I thought, to rework those tones. Little did I know.

Trust me on this - do it for one preset and you'll understand it takes longer to attempt a 1:1 copy than to just dial up the essentially same thing in the 2 from scratch and you'll end up with better results - based on my experience - just reworking from scratch.

You are trying to make a dish with different ingredients. The recipe will not be the same. The soup will be better in the end if you just start from scratch. Honest. IMHO, YMMV.

+ Eleventy-Million

My favorite Ultra patches just DID NOT translate to the Axe-Fx II. I find I'm getting much better results treating the II as if I'd never used an Axe-Fx before.

 

[wake911]

Gosh, just by removing delay and verb from most of the presets in the first 50 gave workable tones for me. Then adjusting cabs to more my flavor, and increase/decreasing gain is all i've done and i have about 15 good tones with only a few hours of easy work. The presets are designed with a pedalboard mentality. EVERYTHING is available (but bypassed) in the patches. Verb, Delay, Wah, Comp, Phaser, Flanger) And the ease of copying effects, especially with the global effects, makes transferring super easy.

I had some good patches on my ultra, but being a poor tweaker, it took me about 2 months to get 5 kickass patches. Now I have upwards of 15-20 go-to patches and i've only put in about 20 hours. And most of that has just been jamming, not tweaking.

If you have patches with specific delay times, i'd right those down. That won't change. OTher than that, starting from scratch, or from presets has been fantastic for me.

 

[s0c9]

That's how I'm getting the screenshots. Not sure whether I can open 2 instances of AxeEdit simultaneously with different configs.

Did you not read my reply that was directly above the one I quoted here ?

 

[steadystate]

How so?

Your setup can't be SO complicated that if you'd have properly documented it, then replicating it in the space of 2 minutes should not be an issue. Half of the battle is learning what you're DOING, the rest is a detail. (I come from a background of Enterprise level Server Engineering, and NOTHING is platform specific...once you figure out what you want to do, crack a book for 10 minutes and figure out how this particular platform does that.)

I agree with the argument that doing a 'preset translator' is a waste of time for Fractal. If someone else on the board wants to put one together, great. But in the end, there will be MANY parameters that are based off of 'what you think and hear as default'. Which in the new algorithm, has changed slightly. A conversion program will come out, and the inevitable cacophony will be 'it doesn't sound the same' or 'as good'. There CAN NOT BE a one to one comparison between 'old' presets and the new box. The new one is designed to be better, so time is better spent reworking those perfect presets to the new platform.

IMO.

Ron

If you are spending all of two minutes per patch rebuilding your basic preset structures, then I get why you don't understand my (or the OP's) position. Some of my presets ARE "so complicated". Just inserting all of the blocks, connecting them, selecting the types for each effect, adding the modifiers (I use a lot), scaling them, getting the parameters in the *rough* ballpark, etc., is going to take way more than two minutes per patch. Then add the required time for fine-tuning. The two minute estimate is bordering on hyperbole. Even re-tweaking the Ultra after a firmware update takes longer than that. I understand the previous posts describing why some people think it's best to start from scratch. Amp-cab-eq-verb for a few core presets. No problem. Not everyone works this way, which is why I also understand the OP's position that for others, this is simply not practical.

I don't expect a 1:1 correspondence between parameters. The two units are different and, if adjusted as identically as possible, are not going to sound the same. The II is a new and unique product. The II is not the Ultra. I get it. That's not the point. The point of this thread is that some people don't have the time to start all of their presets (up to 384) over from scratch, and would benefit from a utililty to help with the basic preset setup. Unfortunately, I happen to be one of them. If and when I have time in my life to devote to redoing all I have already done from the ground up, I will get the II. If a translator of some type is possible and released, that time will come earlier than if not. I'm sure Fractal is aware of both views, and can decide if it is a "waste of time" for them. Considering the strong sales of the II, you are probably correct.