Would a fourth way be exporting your patches then importing them back in? Would that reset the amp block and preserve the settings or no?
Great question, and I think no, although some of this is speculation I'll tell you why I think this.
(I'll just say it like I picture it cuz I dunno for sure)
IMHO the presets are just sets of values, and when they get imported they remain so. Cliff would not let a user effect the actual intricate functioning of the software - or we users would do the equivalent of putting the pop tart into the microwave, and the soda can in the toaster oven. So until we choose to do one of the resets, we still benefit from the new algorithm with our potentially less-than-algorithm-friendly settings, but with new algorithms comes new defaults that can be dialed from. Resetting gives you those new defaults (which wrecks loses the individuality you worked hard for in your preset
). But to the Firmware there exists no reasonable exact translation of your original adjusted settings of your original preset, to new appropriate values. So you either keep your old settings, or reset and dial in again.
What makes this especially intricate to understand is this:
2) The changes to the amp-modeling-algorithm that the Firmware introduces can sometimes re-interpret a setting or two, like when a knob or value disappears from the modeling approach - because that value is replaced by a different value in the new amp-modeling-algorithm. I believe in that case Cliff decides how the amp-modeling-algorithm will make that a painless situation - (unless he turns Rodney K on us) with the amp-modeling-algorithm re-interpreting the data as appropriately as possible - or defaulting and ruining its credit.
3) After many significant amp-modeling-algorithm changes, unless every setting, minus the basic EQ ones and such, was left at the default, its like taking a train from Florida to Cuba, you can only imagine it. You don't know how to do it. Neither can Cliff be expected to know how.
1) Sometimes there is no single correct order in living systems, and in the case of an amp modeling algorithm this is also true. If it was just a matter of A effects B effects C (in order) then the new algorithm would have a similar flow to the last one, and so on. It might be possible then for Cliff to totally re-model the user preset along with Firmware updates, and the "fourth way" mentioned implied such a scenario. But that would be boring for users. Trust me. And in cases of significant FW change, although it would be great for Cliff to process the values we have into a new approximation of those values in the new firmware, it is very conceivable that subtleties in our tone just will not predictably translate between Firmwares. Cliff might be able to get 30% or 60% there or something if he spent months coming up with something on each major advance, but it would never be flawless, and we would just complain and write long posts like this one. I noticed certain amp models that had huge changes with a setting of 4 or 5 on the Spkr Comp knob, and other amp models that weren't heavily affected (higher MV settings causing it? or also the specifics of the particular amp type? )
I just can't imagine how tough the job is that Cliff does.
