Anyone want Improvements in Axe-Fx User Interface?

M

mkbigmoz

New Member
I was watching a few videos for Amplitube V and I'm blown away by their UI. So clean and beautiful. The setup of just drag and drop any amp/box/etc wherever you want is awesome. I think that element is really missing from the Axe. I love my AxeFx but the UI of Axe-Edit is really meh. I know you will have purists who say "Who cares about what it looks like blah blah" but UI can really be inspiring for arts. Am I alone?

 
I like the grid builder in AxeEdit, and it's easy to focus on each unit. While I think that Aplitude interface looks pretty nice, imagine doing things in a PC based tool like that, and then trying to edit that on your AxeFx on site somewhere without a laptop. Right now, one mimics the other. It's just a bonus that I like working with the grid and zooming in to each block as needed.

I'm not one of the people that says that everything about Fractal is perfect, but there is a good reason AxeEdit is the way it is. My biggest complaint about it is managing presets and cabs, but that is a whole other thing.
 
spagthorpe said:
I like the grid builder in AxeEdit, and it's easy to focus on each unit. While I think that Aplitude interface looks pretty nice, imagine doing things in a PC based tool like that, and then trying to edit that on your AxeFx on site somewhere without a laptop. Right now, one mimics the other. It's just a bonus that I like working with the grid and zooming in to each block as needed.
Click to expand...

I think there's pretty significant usability gains to be had without changing one bit of the grid paradigm.
 
Plugin UIs (Amplitube) are a different deal than are hardware modeller UIs - not to say that the eye candy graphics seen in plugin UIs can't be done in hardware modeller UIs but I don't see it as much - actually I think the Axefx Editor UI is one of the better ones - ie, compared to Helix with all those "adjuster lines" - yuk!
 
Sure, that's a very slick looking interface, but you're talking about putting lipstick on a pig, pretty much.

I'm going to say that functionality is far more important to me than pictures of pedals and rigs and so on and so forth, not that the Amplitube 5 lacks in that department! I'll give credit where credit is due but, I think that those types of graphics would probably just slow the whole process down dramatically and eat system resources. Do I like what it looks like? Absolutely! Do I see it in the Axe Edit software? No, I don't think it would work, unless one spent an enormous amount of time energy and money to build that UI, and at that, I'm not sure that it would be a speedy process, working within Axe Edit, such as it is today.

If I could have that interface working as well as the current Axe Edit interface, with no compromise, I'd say, sure go for it!
 
sprint said:
Plugin UIs (Amplitube) are a different deal than are hardware modeller UIs - not to say that the eye candy graphics seen in plugin UIs can't be done in hardware modeller UIs but I don't see it as much - actually I think the Axefx Editor UI is one of the better ones - ie, compared to Helix with all those "adjuster lines" - yuk!
Click to expand...

Granted, I'm not a software developer but why would you say that this is the case? You are mapping skins to functions. There is no reason why a mic can't be moved around a cabinet in a 3d manner, as opposed to clicking an up/down button to get closer/further. The Quick Build is the exact same thing as the drag and drop from Amplitube. It's just ugly. There is no reason why drive pedals all have the same functions, but can't have a graphical interface.
 
mkbigmoz said:
Granted, I'm not a software developer but why would you say that this is the case? You are mapping skins to functions. There is no reason why a mic can't be moved around a cabinet in a 3d manner, as opposed to clicking an up/down button to get closer/further. The Quick Build is the exact same thing as the drag and drop from Amplitube. It's just ugly. There is no reason why drive pedals all have the same functions, but can't have a graphical interface.
Click to expand...
If you read my post I said: "not to say that the eye candy graphics seen in plugin UIs can't be done in hardware modeller UIs but I don't see it as much"

sure it can be done - my point is that the hardware modellers I've used (axefx, helix, pod, BossGT, Moore) don't have it in their editors, and, as stated above, it's great to have, but I won't trade efficiency, quality, or most other features for it.

On the specific case of using a graphical UI for choosing cab IRs / mic positions I am with you 100% and have expressed this in other threads - picking specific IRs by scrolling around a big list of files is for the birds.
 
Last edited:
One further point about Amplitibe, the main reason the graphics in their UI look great to me is because they have licensed partnerships with many amp builders so when you pull up a Soldano, a MB MkIV, or an Orange Rockerverb, and many others, you are looking at an exact replica graphic UI of the actual amp including the branding - that is cool - I'm not so keen on the idea of seeing a "lookingkindoflike a Hiwatt" graphic with "Hipower" branding - not so cool.
 
sprint said:
One further point about Amplitibe, the main reason the graphics in their UI look great to me is because they have licensed partnerships with many amp builders so when you pull up a Soldano, a MB MkIV, or an Orange Rockerverb, and many others, you are looking at an exact replica graphic UI of the actual amp including the branding - that is cool - I'm not so keen on the idea of seeing a "lookingkindoflike a Hiwatt" graphic with "Hipower" branding - not so cool.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Im not sure if they don't want to "knock off" the design, or if licensing would even make sense. But when I'm adjusting an amp, I want it to look like an amp. Same thing with mics, cabinets, pedals, etc. Certainly, if it slowed things down a lot, it wouldn't be worth it. But when you look at any VST, from Waves, to other plugins, the GUI looks highly polished and functions as such.
 
Some shots fired in here today! Let's holster.

I always find it amusing when people say "As a software designer, I think Cliff should do..." It makes me chuckle.

But if you will permit me an akshully moment - as a software developer (and a web developer) I will not pick on anyone's software (or website) because building software is haaaaaaard and it's always a matter of priorities and trade-offs. Some of those plugins probably only have one screen, so they can afford to really customise the layout to suit a limited number of options. In Axe Edit we have a vast array of parameters to tweak, so it makes sense to me that they built it the way they have, with a standardised interface for every block. Sure you could create a special interface 'skin' for each block so that it looks like the actual device layout, but my brain hurts even thinking about it. I actually (akshully?) think it would be confusing to have, say, pedal controls laid out in one fashion, amp controls laid out in another. I prefer seeing all the options laid out in the same format, no matter which block I am editing.
 
I have owned (too) much gear I had to programme. Think triaxis, tube fex and tc’s G force. Then a few boss floor multi-effect units, a vox, etc. So yes, none of the more advanced digital stuff like amplitude. My most advanced software was cubase a year or 2 ago and I just do not get it. I have never(seriously) been able to get satisfying sounds from these machines. Programming was very hard.
The axe fx took almost no time to understand. The ease of use for the average and more basic user is fantastic. I do not move microphones or dive deep in effects. I use stuff like a pedal on a board. I think the percentage of users like me is quite high. More complicated settings I either bought or did while watching a youtube vid.
of course I have wishes like being able to copy more than one effect from one preset to an other in one go. Amazing that you can’t! Or naming the saved effects settings in your library other than delay 1,2. And so a few more. ButI do not think there exists a piece of software that leaves nothing to be desired. Apple works hard on that and still sometimes you find yourself googling “ how to”. I do not need fancy logos unless it clarifies thins for me. Hipower or Hiwatt? I couldn’t care less. We all know what we are talking about.

Harm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom