Better grouping for amp and cab models

[laxu]

This should be easy to add. Basically now the amp/cab models have been just shoehorned into the end of the list as new ones come up so they're a bit messy. I would like to see them ordered so that the different Plexis are after each other and so on.

Another thing that would be nice is grouping amp models based on what they're "meant for", meaning amps that are primarily for clean are together, amps for high gain are together BUT also grouping within brands so Marshalls are together and Mesas are together.

These would make it easier to pick an amp model and auditioning amp models would be easier too because you wouldn't have to skip thru several to find the next high gain model for example.

Same thing for cabs though they're not as randomly arranged.

 

[Smilzo]

Grouping amps and cabs could be useful, but it waste resource. This kind of wish could be doable with no drawbacks in the PC editor.

 

[Dutch]

Oh no, not that again... :shock: :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[laxu]

Grouping amps and cabs could be useful, but it waste resource. This kind of wish could be doable with no drawbacks in the PC editor.

I think I may not have stated this clearly enough. I don't mean that there would be actually something showing them in groups or anything, just that the order of the amp models was changed to a more intuitive one. I mean it makes no sense to have Plexi 1 at the beginning of the list and then Plexi 2 somewhere much later, right?

 

[godprobe]

The cabs were re-ordered sometime a ways back (which is why they don't appear to be as much of a jumble).
The amps have never had the same treatment.
I'm guessing part of the reason is for compatibility with older patches while keeping firmware size down:
Patches probably just reference "amp 1" in their code, and if the amps were re-ordered, amp 1 might not be amp 1 anymore.
I wouldn't be surprised if this applied to some default settings, tonestacks, and global amp references too.
So, to re-order them and have backwards compatability would probably take more code than you may have anticipated.
Fwiw, I wouldn't mind a sort of "2.0" firmware update one of these days that eschews backwards compatability in favor of leaner code and a cleaner interface, but... I imagine that if that ever happens, it's still a ways off.

 

[Dutch]

The cabs were re-ordered sometime a ways back (which is why they don't appear to be as much of a jumble).
The amps have never had the same treatment.
Patches probably just reference "amp 1" in their code, and if the amps were re-ordered, amp 1 might not be amp 1 anymore.
I wouldn't be surprised if this applied to some default settings, tonestacks, and global amp references too.
So, to re-order them and have backwards compatability would probably take more code than you may have anticipated.

Wouldn't be any different than the cabs, though. They were probably numbered cab1 onwards too. And, how should they be reordered? Brandname? Gain level? Power tube arrangement? Real life output power? Year of manufacture? And who will decide?

But I agree it might be a while. Reordering the cabs was a bit of a hassle too. People that objected, conversions not going completely as planned... And it would need to be redone every time we got new amps. Then again, that may not be so often any more. We got so many already.

 

[laxu]

Patches probably just reference "amp 1" in their code, and if the amps were re-ordered, amp 1 might not be amp 1 anymore.
I wouldn't be surprised if this applied to some default settings, tonestacks, and global amp references too.
So, to re-order them and have backwards compatability would probably take more code than you may have anticipated.

Wouldn't be any different than the cabs, though. They were probably numbered cab1 onwards too. And, how should they be reordered? Brandname? Gain level? Power tube arrangement? Real life output power? Year of manufacture? And who will decide?

But I agree it might be a while. Reordering the cabs was a bit of a hassle too. People that objected, conversions not going completely as planned... And it would need to be redone every time we got new amps. Then again, that may not be so often any more. We got so many already.

Depending on how they're setup, the list order might be completely separate from which amp is which. I think it should be done just for the sake of user friendliness. I can't believe that rearranging your patches would be that big a deal, especially if it is mentioned in the release notes. Also the Axe-Fx has the "convert patches" feature that does something that might work for this.

I think the ordering should be based on brand name AND gain level, kind of like it is now for some amp's channels. So you would have say, Marshalls from the venerable Superlead or JTM45 all the way to the JCM900 and so on.