AxeFX III: What's Missing?

I’m not sure they need to do anything with the Axe, but I would certainly benefit from Ethernet as MIDI for control doesn’t work well over long cable runs. Of course, there are midi over Ethernet solutions available anyway, but built in would be faster I guess.
Honestly, I can't think of much outside of a MIDI Patch, or a CC command that you'd need to send to an Axe-FX in a live situation. So basically, in the end, built in our not, it's going to be MIDI over wireless Ethernet. That is, if you must have a wireless situation to control you Axe-FX. Especially if the idea is automation, because whatever you use to control your Axe-FX is most likely going to be outputting MIDI. And like you said, if the MIDI source is too far, you're pretty much required to have some sort of MIDI over Ethernet solution, wireless or not.

In the end, the only real industry standard is MIDI, which the Axe-FX has covered.
 
I don't know - wifi drives me up an f'ing wall - it amazes me how far technology has come. We can make cars that drive themselves but I can't get a decent wifi signal in my house sometimes - or it drops out - or disconnects - or I have to power cycle the router every day. Which is why most things in my house have Ethernet connections.
I do find Bluetooth to be a much more reliable wireless connection between devices. It would be pretty cool to have Bluetooth control of the axe with a phone/ipad etc...

You have problems with WiFi because you have a crappy router, most probably. Which is another reason not to go for built in solutions, by the way.

Bluetooth may be robust but it’s very short range. Which is why it is robust, by the way. It’s too short range for stage use though.
 
Honestly, I can't think of much outside of a MIDI Patch, or a CC command that you'd need to send to an Axe-FX in a live situation. So basically, in the end, built in our not, it's going to be MIDI over wireless Ethernet. That is, if you must have a wireless situation to control you Axe-FX. Especially if the idea is automation, because whatever you use to control your Axe-FX is most likely going to be outputting MIDI. And like you said, if the MIDI source is too far, you're pretty much required to have some sort of MIDI over Ethernet solution, wireless or not.

In the end, the only real industry standard is MIDI, which the Axe-FX has covered.

Well yes, it would be MIDI, I’m just saying it would be better to use an Ethernet port than MIDI port. That’s for automation.

For Axe-Edit that would also be beneficial because using MIDI ports is slower, and I guess there would be a new protocol in the III, which might have some extras anyway. Axe-Edit over USB works, but for short range and in my case it requires a hub.

All of that isn’t mission critical, of course.
 
If the Faslink protocol is opened up something like this would be a real possibility. With the FC's basically being "dumb switches" and all the config is in the preset then a simple bluetooth connection into a Faslink port would be pretty easy.

I am not sure it even needs this. The AxeEdit app will likely just send commands from the desktop app to the Axe FX. I presume if you have an app (e.g. Mobile app) that can send these commands over bluetooth and the dongle simply receives these commands and passes them to the Axe FX (the Axe wouldn't know any different than if it was directed by Axe Edit), then it means FAS don't need to open up any protocols.

Of course, I have no idea how specifically Axe Edit talks to the Axe FX, so take this with a giant scoop of salt. :)
 
Well yes, it would be MIDI, I’m just saying it would be better to use an Ethernet port than MIDI port. That’s for automation.

For Axe-Edit that would also be beneficial because using MIDI ports is slower, and I guess there would be a new protocol in the III, which might have some extras anyway. Axe-Edit over USB works, but for short range and in my case it requires a hub.

All of that isn’t mission critical, of course.
It probably is faster, maybe even much faster, but in a planned automation situation, where you've tested the changes, it's something that can easily be compensated for by making your changes a bit earlier, so it's not exactly a deal breaker for that situation. As for Axe-Edit, for my needs, it's way to quirky to use in any situation outside of patch creation, and organisation.
 
I would love bluetooth or wifi too but I can see how this could add support and development issues to FAS.

Anyway a "simple" way to give user the opportunity to go wireless (and a few other features) would be a usb host port which accepts midi and bluetooth class compliant devices.
 
It probably is faster, maybe even much faster, but in a planned automation situation, where you've tested the changes, it's something that can easily be compensated for by making your changes a bit earlier, so it's not exactly a deal breaker for that situation. As for Axe-Edit, for my needs, it's way to quirky to use in any situation outside of patch creation, and organisation.

MIDI is fine for automation, especially if the III will indeed get more robust due to the new dedicated chip.

I was thinking about a different usage for Axe-Edit. Like installing it on our sound guy’s computer so he could tweak things like reverb to fit different venues better. That can be done via MIDI, but the UI gets rather laggy.
 
Is there a situation where simply using USB wouldn't be more reliable, more economical, more secure, and less interference-causing than bluetooth?
 
I think you may have missed the early 2000's, PODs were quite an annoying staple in many of the big studios in Houston, Austin, and Dallas. It was very much considered a "professional recording standard." I know, because I was there, and engineers often tried to push that crap on me.

Also, I'm not talking about mixing. Like I said, there is a practical upshot to wireless mixing, as you don't need to run a snake, which is pretty significant. The Axe-FX, on the other hand is not a mixer, it's a Plexi, with a delay pedal, into a 4x12 cab that fits conveniently into a three space rack, and doesn't even need to be mic'ed. Adding wireless doesn't seem to have any significant benefit.

You’re missing the point. Why do you think the wireless capability is built into modern mixing consoles? Because modern users of digital technology expect their stuff to run on a variety of wireless devices as opposed to being chained to single UI. Fractal seems to be stuck in a pre-2010 UX paradigm.
 
When those engineers do that, they sure don’t use the wireless built into each and every device out there, they are using a proper wireless network with devices connected via Ethernet. Which is also used for audio and control protocols in many cases.

See last reply to BrainalLeakage. It’s about creating a modern, digital user experience, not about the specifics of one technology vs another.
 
I think 2 different things are being discussed:

Having a full wireless router built-in (which probably includes Bluetooth) for full control from the unit itself

vs

Having the capability of plugging in an external router and having wireless control available.

I don’t think anyone is saying wireless control is a bad idea. Some are saying that having a full wireless protocol built in isn’t the best idea, due to experience with other products that have it.
 
so my only option to hear and edit my Axe III FoH is to get a 100 foot USB cable and probably stand next to the guy with an iPad adjusting his X32 (wirelessly). :oops:
 
You’re missing the point. Why do you think the wireless capability is built into modern mixing consoles? Because modern users of digital technology expect their stuff to run on a variety of wireless devices as opposed to being chained to single UI. Fractal seems to be stuck in a pre-2010 UX paradigm.
Are you suggesting that everyone is suddenly converting to a single protocol, so that all devices can easily be controlled at one unified point using universal commands?

That has nothing to do with wireless, or the future, it's called MIDI, and the Axe-FX is fully compliant, so are most electronic/digital musical things, since the 70's. They even already make wireless Ethernet to MIDI devices, so you can hook up all of your MIDI controllable devices that don't have built in wireless, which personally, I prefer.
 
I don’t think anyone is saying wireless control is a bad idea. Some are saying that having a full wireless protocol built in isn’t the best idea, due to experience with other products that have it.

Not just experience, it’s also the fact that building in wireless will inevitably create interference, and because it’s a rack unit with a metal faceplate it’s tricky to make it a good AP, so for any situation where it’s not the only unit to be controlled a separate router is a much better option.
 
so my only option to hear and edit my Axe III FoH is to get a 100 foot USB cable and probably stand next to the guy with an iPad adjusting his X32 (wirelessly). :oops:
Well, even if there was built in bluetooth, you'd still have to do that. I can't even go upstairs with my bluetooth headphones while leaving my phone down stairs. Bluetooth just doesn't have that kind of range.

Have you ever used a tube amp live?
 
so my only option to hear and edit my Axe III FoH is to get a 100 foot USB cable and probably stand next to the guy with an iPad adjusting his X32 (wirelessly). :oops:

If you're the kind of player who needs a 100-foot USB cable to reach your devices because the stage you're on is so huge... why not get your roadie to adjust it for you?
 
Are you suggesting that everyone is suddenly converting to a single protocol, so that all devices can easily be controlled at one unified point using universal commands?

That has nothing to do with wireless, or the future, it's called MIDI, and the Axe-FX is fully compliant, so are most electronic/digital musical things, since the 70's. They even already make wireless Ethernet to MIDI devices, so you can hook up all of your MIDI controllable devices that don't have built in wireless, which personally, I prefer.

Huh? You're really going down some rabbit trails here.

I am simply stating that the modern paradigm for UX in digital technology is wireless and device-agnostic. And I'm quite confident that we can do better than 40-year-old MIDI technology.
 
Back
Top Bottom