Apparent UI Complaints

[vangrieg]

Well, as someone who owns both an AFX and a KPA, I can say that your assessment doesn't ring true.

It's not so much my assessment as that of users who chose KPA over AFX after trying both. So there's not much sense arguing with me about it. I personally don't like KPA that much, I find it too limited both in terms of effects quality and ability to make adjustments even as simple as gain, without losing authenticity.

Your claim that getting a good sound from the KPA is a simple matter of finding a profile that one likes is correct, of course. But exactly how does one find that particular profile?

Well, how does one find a preset in AFX? I'd argue that the process is easier with KPA - there are commercial profiles, many of which are very good. This could have been possible with AFX using preset-cab bundles, but there are very few of those, and then many depend on third party IRs, which you have to find and obtain separately. And then those IRs are sold in packs with dozens of files which you have to dig through to find what you need. And then there's the problem of not really being able to preview anything before purchasing, pirating aside.

I think that many of these problems could go away if AxeChange worked rather differently. IMO, it would be useful if:

1) it had both free and commercial sections where one could sell/buy patches, like some app store. Right now there's no incentive in uploading anything there, and even loyal FAS experts who share presets don't use it. Heck, even FAS themselves don't use it.
2) it had many more bundles, not just presets;
3) those bundles could include commercial IRs, for a separate charge;
4) it would be integrated into Axe-Edit, with auto auditioning;
5) users actually cared to rank presets they used;
6) it would rank presets using some smart algorithm that would take into account user ranking, downloads, installs and auditions (presets that a lot of people listen to but never I stall would go below those that are installed by most after listening);
7) seamless integration with Edit and a Store could at least partially solve the problem of AxeChange being full of prehistoric presets that don't work properly or don't even load at all. This can't be solved fully because firmware updates change the sound of many presets quite dramatically, but at least it would be something.

Now, I doubt all of this will ever happen because there's a lot of work in developing and maintaining such a system, and it involves copyright deals and such, but it kind of shows that the very approach to sound Is different in AFX, which does make things somewhat more difficult. Don't get me wrong, I like this approach, but I can easily understand the frustration some new users can go through.

 

[bdrepko]

The Helix user interface is absolutely beautiful. It's 100% intuitive and easy as I've ever seen the face of a digital product. Designated Tonestack knobs and super easy parameter control. The kemper is also laid out in a seemingly easier format. The is obviously why fractal copied Kempers designated knob.
The axefx is different in so many ways. It is designed to allow the user to reach EVERY SINGLE FACET of your sound. After going through pages and pages of options it just makes other UIs seem lazy.. For many, this is a rabbit hole that takes a long time to fully comprehend, much less utilize. It can be hard at first to dive in and use the axefx as it should be as soon as you would a Helix. That's a promise.
All that being said I wouldn't trade my AxefxII for all the tea in China...Unless there was an AxefxII+ in that tea stash..!
Btw I own both. The helix is easier for me for my sit-in pedalboard and what I would se if someone wanted to use my fly rig live. I've been able to fully make presets onstage at the gig with helix. No can do with the fractal. Do I need to? No, Because I've spent weeks upon weeks dialing in my AxefxII.

Anyone who wants to diss the obvious usability of the Helix is just a hater. It's a great unit. Period. Axefx is in a whole other ballpark tho... Life changer.

Do you like the sound of the Helix? I have heard good and bad demos. Unfortunately, there are no music stores where I am to listen in person, and I don't want to buy it and then have to return it. I guess I will just wait.

 

[scorch]

Axe-edit for the win. The little green screen is a bit rough for my 64 year old eyes. I will when I have to but admit to being an Axe-Edit junkie.

It's just so easy. The layout of both is completely intuitive.

Although I have bitched about some of the parameters having their names changed and I can't find them anymore.

 

[TieDyedDevil]

It's not so much my assessment as that of users who chose KPA over AFX after trying both. So there's not much sense arguing with me about it. I personally don't like KPA that much, I find it too limited both in terms of effects quality and ability to make adjustments even as simple as gain, without losing authenticity.

Sorry. I figured that was what you meant. I apologize for my poor choice of words.

Well, how does one find a preset in AFX? I'd argue that the process is easier with KPA - there are commercial profiles, many of which are very good. This could have been possible with AFX using preset-cab bundles, but there are very few of those, and then many depend on third party IRs, which you have to find and obtain separately. And then those IRs are sold in packs with dozens of files which you have to dig through to find what you need. And then there's the problem of not really being able to preview anything before purchasing, pirating aside.

I think that many of these problems could go away if AxeChange worked rather differently. IMO, it would be useful if:

1) it had both free and commercial sections where one could sell/buy patches, like some app store. Right now there's no incentive in uploading anything there, and even loyal FAS experts who share presets don't use it. Heck, even FAS themselves don't use it.
2) it had many more bundles, not just presets;
3) those bundles could include commercial IRs, for a separate charge;
4) it would be integrated into Axe-Edit, with auto auditioning;
5) users actually cared to rank presets they used;
6) it would rank presets using some smart algorithm that would take into account user ranking, downloads, installs and auditions (presets that a lot of people listen to but never I stall would go below those that are installed by most after listening);
7) seamless integration with Edit and a Store could at least partially solve the problem of AxeChange being full of prehistoric presets that don't work properly or don't even load at all. This can't be solved fully because firmware updates change the sound of many presets quite dramatically, but at least it would be something.

Now, I doubt all of this will ever happen because there's a lot of work in developing and maintaining such a system, and it involves copyright deals and such, but it kind of shows that the very approach to sound Is different in AFX, which does make things somewhat more difficult. Don't get me wrong, I like this approach, but I can easily understand the frustration some new users can go through.

That may well be. I'm not a fan of other people's presets. I'd rather start from scratch and create something that works for my touch, my guitar and my sonic preference.

There's a fundamental difference between the AFX and the KPA is in how one designs a sound:

On the Axe FX, creating a sound is straightforward: I build a rig using virtual blocks that work pretty much the same way as the physical device that they model. That's easy for me because I know what I want to hear and which blocks to choose and adjust based upon my familiarity with their physical counterparts. There's no search involved apart from correlating the AFX names to the real device names.

Not so on the KPA: the amp sound is absolutely dependent upon finding a good profile of the amp I want to use. There are no built-in models, so I'm dependent upon others' aesthetic judgements, which includes mic technique and control settings. Alternatively, I have to shoot my own profiles. I've done that: it's easy to to create a profile, but more difficult to create a really good profile. Regrettably, I hadn't found that buying commercial profiles solves the problem for me.

 

[Shask]

I have never understood it either. Must be the same people who cannot figure out how to use a TV remote.

I grew up on 90's Digitech single space units. THOSE were a bitch to program. The Axe-FX II is easy compared to that. I use the UI more than Axe-Edit also. Most of the time I use Axe-Edit, it is when I am going to do some series building of multiple blocks.

 

[Variable]

I find the front panel so intuitive and fast that I rarely ever use Axe-Edit. The only times I do use Axe-Edit are when I'm managing my IRs.

The front panel doesn't have the USB/midi lag, either, which is a plus in my book.

 

[StickMan]

After having had to maintain a Meridian "Option 11" system (corporate PBX (phone system)) for a few years, I would never, never, never complain about the user interface of any other piece of hardware.

It had "easy to remember mnemonics" for commands; like "*MJ" to change the number of rings for going to voicemail (I made that up, I don't remember any real ones, but they were that unrelated). We used to joke, "Did you forget the easy to remember mnemonic for that?", all the time.

 

[Larry Largen]

I'd go nuts without Axe Edit. Hardly spent anytime with the UI. I'm sure I could get a handle on it if I did spend time on it but I don't wanna.

 

[Black Bitch]

when they say that KPA is easier isn't so much about the UI itself, it's more about the ease of getting a usable tone.

A friend has an KPA and we tried to get some useable sounds - it was not posible for us and we found the handling for tweaking absolut complicated and gave up.

 

[RafterRattler]

Wow! My useless thread has turned into quite a conversation! The discussion has taken several turns, but I thought I'd clarify what I meant by UI. I was talking about FAS's UI 'concept' at a very high level - ie: the multi-row grid, the kinds of things it allows you to do, the wiring freedom it provides, and ultimately how those things were implemented in both Axe-Edit and the front panel. I was not specifically talking about the front panel OR Axe-Edit. For me, using either interface, whenever I find myself saying 'hmmm...it seems I should be able to do THIS'....sure enough I can, and the controls are exactly where I would expect them to be. I seemed to always be fighting with Line6's iOS app for Amplifi and Firehawk, and even Digitech xEdit to do things that should have been simple. For example - editing and saving vs overwriting patches was never as clear as it should have been on the L6 iOS app. I also always have to relearn how to program switches and controllers with my GSP. It's just not intuitive. The same was true with all my prior Boss GT 6/8/10 boxes...geez, talk about relearning every time. Nothing intuitive about those things. FAS and I seem to be on the same mental wavelength with the Axe.

I'm not sure if I'd like the Helix interface. If their effort to make it intuitive meant I was always feeling like I SHOULD be able to do something but CAN'T figure out where or how (like the iOS app), then I would hate it. I've already seen lots of comments about people saying they have to jump through hoops to manage parallel & series paths. In my experience, L6 has a habit of making UIs that are 'deceptively shallow'. They're so pretty that you THINK you should have all the control in the world, but then you find out it's only a pretty face.

On the Kemper - and I guess more of a tangential comment - I keep wondering if I should try one, but every comment leads me to believe that the whole experience would be like searching for a perfect cab IR....download a crapload of profiles to find one close, fight with it for a while, give up and try another one. It's exactly the reason I rarely download or use other peoples patches or IRs. Download, try, hate, download, try, hate....waste of time when I should be playing.

Just more random thoughts... Thanks for the feedback guys!
RR

 

[6stringscott]

Lots of folks defending AxeFx here (for good reason)... my thoughts:
1) AxeFx has a mind-blowing number of features and flexibility, and Fractal has done a very admirable job of making all of that accessible. Things can be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. Every firmware gets closer to great sounds with less tweaking. And the features you are most likely to tweak are generally the easiest to get to. Good job!
2. There is always room for improvement and keeping an open mind. Cliff consistently shows he has an open mind to user feedback and fixing stuff. That is very rare in the world, the heart and soul of this product and company's greatness.


That said- I still find a few things annoying in AxeEdit- all of my concerns are minor UI/widget manipulation issues that should have no dependencies on hardware, but some people on this forum have defended that it can't be made better. I suspect it's just lower on Cliff's priority list because there are very reasonable work-arounds and tone issues are more important than shaving off fractions of a second for users to change a value while editing a patch.

I'm guessing at some point when tone-related engineering tapers down, there will be renewed consideration for UI, presets for effects, and presets for patches. Then again, there is already a framework for the community to exchange effect presets and patch presets, so maybe this won't need to be driven by the company?

 

[rrogers]

I have no problem with the UI on the Axe, but like many here I cut my editing teeth on units made during the late 80's/early 90's.

That being said I do have a cheap laptop I take with me to edit run Axe edit.

 

[Tailstop]

Do you like the sound of the Helix? I have heard good and bad demos. Unfortunately, there are no music stores where I am to listen in person, and I don't want to buy it and then have to return it. I guess I will just wait.

Yea, it screams. I thought for a minute that maybe I expected it to sound like shite and when it didn't, I was biased.. Not so. It has a truly great representation of amps in it. The fx are all very usable, and again, I couldn't be more pleased with its layout. It doesn't have nearly the amount of cabs and amps that the axefx does but so what. I personally pride myself on finding a usable tone in just about any amp situation, and the Helix offers more than enough options to dial in properly. Guaranteed.

One more thought. I play acoustic gigs about twice as much as electric gigs. My band Fiasco is an all-acoustic hard rock/soul band and I use my guitar unlike most use their acoustics... WAY unlike most! I've been trying to dial in "my" acoustic tone on the axefx since November 2014 and I STILL haven't found Valhalla with it yet, and believe me, I try. It took about 3hours to dial in my acoustic tone with the Helix. This speaks very much to the intuitiveness and overall ease of its layout.
I dialed in an amazing hard rock tone on my a helix that I very much enjoy. Strong as hell, but it doesn't compare to my AxefxII setup. I couldn't be more pleased with my current Fractal rig and I will always be a fractal cat. But Helix showed up strong. It's a very usable and fun board with tons of options and a few more assets that fractal hasn't done yet. But it simply doesn't have the horsepower to take the place of the AxefxII in the studio or onstage with those "extremely picky" guitar Jedi.

 

[gtrnstuff]

Like another poster said, the real crunch is editing on the fly. Some of us play gigs that you can't totally pre-program.
There is where the AxeII's little green screen and many keystrokes in the dark becomes a tough situation.
Big bright screen and easy one or two touch access to a block make the Helix more friendly in those conditions.

Keeping both for now.

 

[Tailstop]

Like another poster said, the real crunch is editing on the fly. Some of us play gigs that you can't totally pre-program.
There is where the AxeII's little green screen and many keystrokes in the dark becomes a tough situation.
Big bright screen and easy one or two touch access to a block make the Helix more friendly in those conditions.

Keeping both for now.

Agreed. I have no complaints about the AxefxII whatsoever. The amount of options you have to create unworldly sounds and the sheer mass of amp and cab combos is infinite. No one can debate this. But live, I don't need every single option known to man. I need some quick fix options, which is why those badasses developed the Rac12 unit, Right?
My heavy band has a setlist that we adhere to for live performances. The AxefxII thrives here for sure and any tweaking I need to do is mildly directional or a matter of signal distribution. For my other gigs, the performance area settings vary so greatly that I need to have several presets at the ready so I can dial them in easier. Fortunately for me, this is mostly EQing and reverb negotiation.
It seems so obvious to me that the AxefxII has had such a profound influence upon the musical community that other companies have no choice but to look for "weaknesses" or aspects Fractal hasn't capitalized upon (yet), and make those aspects their huge selling point. Line6 killed it with Helix. They did a great job. For me, I've grown accustomed to the green screen and can maneuver as I see fit well enough... It ain't perfect but wtf is? Also I think Fractal has answered the needs of their community extremely well with constant updates, releasing bolder versions of the AxefxII, FX8, and now AX8.