AxeFx II XL Presets into AxeFx II Mk2 - WTF???

PacoCasanovas... first of all, I will be forever grateful that you provided the community with the schematics to the ENGL Savage 120 for Cliff to model. It's my favorite high gain model in the Axe and in doing this you probably saved me $2,500 or however much it costs.

Secondly, the presets of the XL are simply a lot larger in size than the Mark II presets because each XL preset accounts for a much larger number of parameters, what with additional blocks and the like.

An XL can import a Mark II preset but a Mark II can't import an XL preset in the same way that you can pour a pint into a gallon bucket without spilling anything, but you can't pour a gallon into a pint glass without making a mess.

There simply isn't enough memory per patch in the Mark II to allow for successful importation of XL presets.
 
I guess I have a problem with the assumption that this is something that 'obviously' should be provided. We are very spoiled with this company and product, and it can be easy to fall into an 'entitled' mindset. Not pointing fingers at anyone but myself here, but I have to guard against the 'what new goodies do we get NEXT' greedyness in myself (that we don't have to pay additionally for.)

I also understand that for (a very small subset) this would be a very useful tool. For those folks, crowdsource some financing for someone to build this...I think you'll find that Developer hourly rates are not a comfortable sum to pay.
 
PacoCasanovas said:
Seriously, I'm very much dissapointed that a file conversation between a AxeFx II XL with Fw 15.07 is not possible with a AxeFx II Mk2 with Fw 15.07. I programmed a series of custom presets for a pro customer on his new XL and now I SHOULD put them on his older AxeFx II Mk2, which is part of his tour rig.......


....and this is not possible! At all.....done everything! Newest AxeEdit, newest Fractal Bot.....


Really guys.....

:evil
Click to expand...

Shouldn't this have been an issue to discuss with your client for not telling you he had two different pieces of hardware? Or was it your error knowing what he had and programming the XL first? If you had only thought ahead and set up the II before the XL it would have been simple.

I can look at everything I own and think of something else that could have been added or it needs. I'm thankful for all the awesome things that FAS gives us, they are above and beyond in this area! No other company compares!
 
FractalAudio said:
It's not lazy, it's finances. We can do it but it will cost you. If you are prepared to spend $100 for a conversion utility we will create one.

I thought so.
Click to expand...

Seeing how many of the player's that make patches I admire are now only releasing XL patches ... I'd pay $100 for this utility.

How many people at $100 would you need to do this? Perhaps if we knew this, we could get even more to commit and price/user could decrease.

But, put my name down as #1 on the list. I'd even pre-pay for this capability.

Thanks,
Brandon
 
Be sure to vote for this feature over here: http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-wish-list/88002-ability-read-xl-patches.html

Also, possibly state there (or here) if you would be willing to purchase a product to do this.

Honestly ... I've paid $26 for a Fractal t-shirt. While I would hope for a final price drop, I'd pay $100 to open up abilities to read XL patches (which will only increase in the future). That's like ordering 4 t-shirts for your family, but instead now have the capability of reading XL patches.
 
Often, in the software world, which I have some knowledge of, downward compatibility is not provided, even between smaller upgrades.

What could make sense in the longer term is to have a standardized export / import utility with a standard export format to move patches between releases, but this would likely get tricky to design so that parameters which appear in newer releases are ignored upon import to older releases. Having a process to do this well could require some significant effort, which would need to be weighed against the number of times it needs to be used in the community. I hope never to have to do it manually myself since, as stated by the op, there can be a wack of parameters to take down manually, even for a moderately complex patch.
 
BBN said:
You sound like my ex-girlfriend - "I love you"....."I hate you"......"I love you"....."I hate you".......
Click to expand...

I feel sorry for you that you had to go through that. But aren't relationships all about LOVE and HATE. I must have missed something then. Oh well.


Just to let you know, when it comes to hate, I sound more like :

d6753f000c1f222f41c0363ec0c378e0.gif
 
FractalAudio said:
It's not lazy, it's finances. We can do it but it will cost you.
Click to expand...

OK what I should have said is that, to me, it did not sound all that difficult to do. And I see a risk of a "fracture" the AXE-FX community specially on AXECHANGE. OK, so it is more difficult than was I though it was.

Sorry about using the word lazy, I know you're not and neither is your team.


FractalAudio said:
If you are prepared to spend $100 for a conversion utility we will create one.

I thought so.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are asking me are you ready to "put your money where your mouth is". I quite like that saying, it get a lot of unnecessary talk out of the way.

Well, I would be ready to pay 15$ for the feature but not a 100$.

One thing I would definitely pay for is FW updates. And time and time again. And that could certainty help in financing stuffs that you and your team should like yo do and cannot finance for now (not just this specific compatibility feature).
 
Just a thought and I'm not sure if it's already been covered but shouldn't you have done the custom presets on the Axe II (touring rig) then transferred THEM to the XL ???
 
painkiller said:
Cliff: There's no point in acting all surprised about it. The info that you can't use XL presets with a regular Axe-Fx II (Mark I and II) has been on display at your local planning office.
User: On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.
Cliff: That's the display department.
User: With a torch.
Cliff: Ah, well the lights had probably gone.
User: So had the stairs.
Cliff: But look you found the notice didn't you?.
User: Yes, yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard".

:D
Click to expand...
I see what you did there.

:lol
 
It's just progress and it's not the first time reverse compatibility was not possible. The Ultra would play Standard presets but not vice versa.
 
Here is a thought. Not sure if it would be easier to implement than a conversion tool. How about an option in Axe Edit, when exporting a preset, to write out the patch in either XL or MK2 format? So that at least there is some method to share patches.
 
GreatGreen said:
Secondly, the presets of the XL are simply a lot larger in size than the Mark II presets because each XL preset accounts for a much larger number of parameters, what with additional blocks and the like.
Click to expand...
So at its mosh basic...
Ignore all user cabs beyond X
Ignore Y state on blocks X, Y and Z
Ignore instances of block X beyond 2
Ignore parameters J,K,L,M and N

...and stull along these lines - you get the idea. It won't be perfect for every patch, but it is likely to be very useful for a good many non-XL owners. Personally I am not in any kind of hurry for it, but lets be real. It is a very do-able thing. It just takes the grunt work of someone sitting down to code it. FAS have other priorities right now; fair enough.
 
I agree Rook.
In addition as time goes on and the II is replaced with the III and so on it would be very useful and an almost essential tool for preset sharing.
 
I would be happy if you could print a text file from axe edit with the settings for the amp and cab blocks.
 
biggness said:
What a wonderful way to fragment the community.
Click to expand...
If you don't agree with the post perhaps silence is better than a thinly veiled insult. It's not fair to attack people when they present a problem or something they don't like about the Axe Fx, even though we all know it's the best invention since the wheel. :D
Happy customer here (to put it mildly) but I must agree that this is one issue that should be addressed as soon as possible imho. The II and XL are practically the same device, the XL just has more processing power (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). This reminds me of the classic "why can't I play ps2 games on my ps3/ps4?" question. It's a logical concern and I think eventually FAS will address it and find a fix like they always do.
 
Last edited:
jsl2h said:
If you don't agree with the post perhaps silence is better than a thinly veiled insult. It's not fair to attack people when they present a problem or something they don't like about the Axe Fx, even though we all know it's the best invention since the wheel. :D
Happy customer here (to put it mildly) but I must agree that this is one issue that should be addressed as soon as possible imho. The II and XL are practically the same device, the XL just has more processing power (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). This reminds me of the classic "why can't I play ps2 games on my ps3/ps4?" question. It's a logical concern and I think eventually FAS will address it and find a fix like they always do.
Click to expand...

No the XL does not have more processing power. And yes you can play II presets on the XL. Regarding addressing that the II cannot play XL presets see post #56.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom