• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Axe-Fx III Firmware Version 11.00 Public Beta

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jason Scott

Fractal Fanatic
Multiply that by a dozen or a hundred presets, and do you see the problem, especially when a little extra storage of settings would be trivial and make it an opt-in event instead of something less friendly?

I could be wrong, but I think the values for older curves are currently stored in the preset, so as long as you have the preset, you're good. I mean, I don't necessarily care about adding more slots for the legacy curves, but I don't want my presets changing unless it's simply unavoidable, as has been the case with previous updates.
 
Last edited:

getlostinsound

Inspired
It's far more tedious to write down and enter values than it is for someone to update their presets to the new curves.
I hear you. Maybe that’s how it should be though. Updates bring new features, new possibilities, more realism, and sometimes we have to give a little to get there. If Cliff’s long game is to get everyone using the new impedance models (assuming this since FAS has stated that they strive first for accuracy in modeling), then leaving presets as they are just muddies the waters. Should all presets created in firmware 9 sound identical when loading them in firmware 10? Should version 1.0 presets sound the same in v11? If another game-changing breakthrough in amp modeling occurs and comes in the form of a firmware update, should no one enjoy it unless they create all-new presets?
 

Jason Scott

Fractal Fanatic
I hear you. Maybe that’s how it should be though. Updates bring new features, new possibilities, more realism, and sometimes we have to give a little to get there.

Sure, sometimes you have to accept that your presets are going to change because there's simply no choice in the matter. That's often the price you pay for updated algorithms. However, we're talking about the sound of presets being altered intentionally, as a matter of choice, without necessity.

If Cliff’s long game is to get everyone using the new impedance models (assuming this since FAS has stated that they strive first for accuracy in modeling), then leaving presets as they are just muddies the waters. Should all presets created in firmware 9 sound identical when loading them in firmware 10? Should version 1.0 presets sound the same in v11? If another game-changing breakthrough in amp modeling occurs and comes in the form of a firmware update, should no one enjoy it unless they create all-new presets?

Well, as an end-user, you and I can create presets that may be completely inaccurate. How we design presets is obviously up to us. Want to tweak the default Bias, Impedance Curve or Sag? Go ahead.

I fully support FAS in their pursuit of accuracy, and leave it in their capable hands to decide which impedance curves should be paired with which amps by default. But if at all possible, leave the decision to change the sound of my presets up to me.
 
Last edited:

Joe Bfstplk

Fractal Fanatic
I could be wrong, but I think the values for older curves are currently stored in the preset, so as long as you have the preset, you're good. I mean, I don't necessarily care about adding more slots for the legacy curves, but I don't want my presets changing unless it's simply unavoidable, as has been the case with previous updates.
There is talk of rewriting the presets automatically, though. Not a friendly move, especially when it's a matter of leaving a little bit of space to store existing settings and make everyone less crabby.

I've done web programming for at least 16 years, and my experience tells me it's better to inconvenience the customer as little as possible when updating stuff. People get bent when their bookmarks stop working, even thouugh updating them is fairly trivial.

It truly doesn't matter to me personally, but I can see a pro on tour wanting the newer feature to be an 'opt-in' rather than a 'surprise'....
 

Jason Scott

Fractal Fanatic
It truly doesn't matter to me personally, but I can see a pro on tour wanting the newer feature to be an 'opt-in' rather than a 'surprise'....

I'm not on tour, but I often have several recording projects I'm in the middle of working on at any given point, so sonic continuity can be important.
 

Joe Bfstplk

Fractal Fanatic
Maybe FAS can post a doc in the wiki with the resonance values of the old curves so those who want to reference them can look up the previous defaults?
Still a lot of work to reset your stuff when it is trivial to store the original settings and let the end user choose to change the impedance curve when it is convenient to do so, or to leave the existing setting in the preset for backwards-compatibility with previously recorded stuff to be able to be re-done if needed without a change of tone....
 

Rinkleton

Member
I would like to see the version number describe if it causes forced tonal or configuration/routing changes. For example, upgrading from 10.1 to 10.2 or 10.1 to 10.99 means you can always be confident that it will sound the same and things like scene switching and controllers will function identically. All upgrades would ideally be this type. If a tonal/functional change must be made, it would be a new major version change. For example 10.1 to 11.0. Ideally this would happen very infrequently.

On a different note, regarding how to handle interactions between amp and cab blocks... It would be cool if the settings were located in the cab block. Then on the amp block there is a page for that "linked" group of settings. The first option is which cab block to pull values from. Any time the cab block is updated, it looks for referencing amp blocks and updates the amp blocks internals. To take it a step further, the tab on the amp block would have an option to not be linked to any cab block and just use it's own custom values. In that case, the tab would be an exact duplicate of what the tab on the cab block looks like.

The question then would be how to handle an amp block that is routed to multiple cabs. If the values can be averaged or some other simple formula, that is ideal. If they can't, then just force it to be linked to a single cab. This is no different than how it is now and similar to how things are IRL.

I think that would improve user understanding of how things match up with real gear and make auditioning amps and cabs a more fluid and realistic process.
 

Morphine

Inspired
Agree with the "leave existing presets as is" sentiment. Let people choose which of their existing presets they wish to change and which they are happy with as is.
 

Heavyplayer

Experienced
So Cliff, no rush but any idea when the final release may be? Are you waiting to test the Friedman, and soldano cab before sending the final out?
 

Hellbat

Fractal Fanatic
If there is a way to leave it as is but also give an option to update all presets for people willing to go with the new defaults then do it that way.

If there isn't a way to do that or it's too difficult to implement then drag them kicking and screaming into the new world. Sometimes I feel there's a little too much entitlement and disillusion around "I want all the new stuff, but I also want no changes."
 

200man

Power User
Just spent another few hours on the double verb silver face and 2x12 fender cab.
My goodness...I used to fight the axe 2, wasn’t completely sold when the 3 came out.
I give up...I played a twin for years and years and this version finally did it for me.
Clif has spoken for years how important the cab was to the sound and this version proves it in spades.
And the amazing thing is how easy it is to dial in.
 

zenaxe

Fractal Fanatic
The more I think about this the more I think existing presets should get automatically updated to use an appropriate impedance model. Yes, existing presets will change but probably for the better.

Anyone disagree?
FWIW, I have some presets where I have tuned the impedance to be similar to my IRL cab. Other users may have consciously changed them for this or other reasons. I have always considered getting the Low resonance close to your cab important for it to sound/feel right when going Axe->SS Power Amp->Guitar cab.

For this kind of rig, changing the curve against the user's will is definitely the wrong thing to do. IMHO. Not everyone is an FRFR only user.

I would prefer it to auto-change only after I have touched/reset the amp model, personally.
 
Last edited:

Morphine

Inspired
People keep forgetting they don't have to upgrade firmware if they are happy with the way their presets sound.

Just because I don't want old presets I am 100% happy with changed, doesn't mean I don't want to create new ones around the new options as they're made available.

Also, when firmware updates contain bug fixes, for some users experiencing the problem it's not really an option whether or not to upgrade.
 

Joe Bfstplk

Fractal Fanatic
Just because I don't want old presets I am 100% happy with changed, doesn't mean I don't want to create new ones around the new options as they're made available.
This ^^^ is the heart of the issue and the perfect description of the reason for 'opt-in' being the better choice for existing presets.

Several good and non-trivial reasons have been presented and discussed for why it would be good not to be forced to accept alteration of customer preset data in order to be able to use the new features. One size does not fit all, even with lube....
 

Jason Scott

Fractal Fanatic
People keep forgetting they don't have to upgrade firmware if they are happy with the way their presets sound.

Anyone who's perfectly happy with how everything sounds using a previous firmware can certainly stick with that. Not everyone falls into the all or nothing camp, though. Personally, I like the way many of the new and previous impedance curves make my presets sound.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom