Wish Channel Groups and Bypass Groups

When the scene ignore feature came out, I thought it was going to be implemented in a way that would have given us a barebones version of this request. Imagine if the scene-ignore feature ignored a block in that SPECIFIED SCENE ONLY. Read on for more...

What if Scene Ignore was defined for blocks at a PER-SCENE basis instead of per-block/channel. The SCENE dictates what blocks it's ignoring instead of the actual block/channel itself. In other words, what if the current block ignore setting was for both the block AND scene instead of just block/channel independent of scene. Therefore, you could create a few scenes that just toggle drive/amp/cabs only and a few others that just toggle wet/lead effects, etc.

IMO, the above is simpler to understand. The current scene-ignore design lends itself to some strange side effects where you can have one channel set to ignore and others that aren't. You can then toggle a block channel out of an ignored state. I'm not familiar with any good reasons to want a block to do that. Maybe there is, but to me it just seems to lead to confusion when pedal dancing when you thought a block that was ignored is now not ignored in a scene.

In summary, I wish if in Axe Edit the block/channel says "scene ignore", it is ignored in that SCENE ONLY. If I want it ignored in other scenes, then you select SCENE IGNORE in all the other scenes too for that block. Now, I have the barebones version of this request. Having scene-ignore work in this manner as well as its current form could both be possible.
 
Last edited:
Bumping this with another +1.

I have a number of core things that are only accomplishable with multiple blocks operating in concert. To be able to get the blocks involved to channel switch in concert as well would enable a lot more flexibility of use....
 
Joe Bfstplk said:
Bumping this with another +1.

I have a number of core things that are only accomplishable with multiple blocks operating in concert. To be able to get the blocks involved to channel switch in concert as well would enable a lot more flexibility of use....
Click to expand...

Doesn't gapless switching take care of it now, so you could use scenes to do that?
 
State of Epicicity said:
Doesn't gapless switching take care of it now, so you could use scenes to do that?
Click to expand...
Not speaking for anyone else, but most of my presets have 8 scenes already, with somewhere between 1 and 8 different amp channels. I'd like to have 1 or 2 drives for each one, some of which increase volume a lot, which I want to compensate for by also turning on a volume block after the amp.

That's my all day every day reason for wanting something like this. There are also lots of other effect combinations that require turning multiple blocks on and off at once.

You're right that gapless switching makes it possible to change presets rather than packing so much into one, which in turn lets you use scenes for multi-effect combinations more. That's not how I usually do it, so far, mostly because I don't want to have to navigate through both presets and scenes so often, and somewhat because my brain just says it wants to turn these 2 effects on together, simple.
 
Last edited:
Dave Merrill said:
Not speaking for anyone else, but most of my presets have 8 scenes already, with somewhere between 1 and 8 different amp channels. I'd like to have 1 or 2 drives for each one, some of which increase volume a lot, which I want to compensate for by also turning on a volume block after the amp.

That's my all day every day reason for wanting something like this. There are also lots of other effect combinations that require turning multiple blocks on and off at once.

You're right that gapless switching makes it possible to change presets rather than packing so much into one, which in turn lets you use scenes for multi-effect combinations more. That's not how I usually do it, so far, mostly because I don't want to have to navigate through both presets and scenes so often, and somewhat because my brain just says it wants to turn these 2 effects on together, simple.
Click to expand...

Joe Bfstplk said:
The idea is to multiply the capability of Scenes by adding some Scene-like ability to switch multiple blocks' channels as an optional switch that can be added.... :)
Click to expand...

Cool. I had thought gapless switching would make this wish obsolete, but I can see the use now.
 
Fabian Rainville said:
Three groups of scenes that are independent of each other would be nice. Like AMP/DRIVE scenes and FX scenes then normal scenes which would override the other two.
Click to expand...
This is my request as well. I just want my dry tone (groups of blocks) independent of wet effects (groups of blocks). Scenes with Scene Ignore could have answered this, but its implementation is what needs to change.

I wish it did..
biskitboy said:
if in Axe Edit the block/channel says "scene ignore", it is ignored in that SCENE ONLY. If I want it ignored in other scenes, then you select SCENE IGNORE in all the other scenes too for that block.
Click to expand...

This isn't the full ask for this request, but I think it would have a huge impact if implemented. It would allow us to split scene logic, just like you asked, into AMP/Drive and FX scenes. We now have a poor mans version of channel-grouping.
 
Last edited:
What if it was called “Smart Scenes” and it worked similar to Smart Bypass.

Imagine you are viewing a channel on a block in Axe-Edit, you go down to where scene ignore is, but it is a drop-down menu that gives you the options of “Scene Ignore, Smart Scenes A through D.

You assign this channel on this block to “Smart Scene A” for example.

Now you go to FC and select a button. Select Bypass Effect, where “smart bypass” is you now also have the option of assigning “SmartScene A-D”

Now any block and channel that is assigned to the a “Smart Scene” will be controlled by the “SmartScene” button.
 
I came across a use-case for this just last week. It would be nice to link amp+cab and control those independently with scene ignore, and use scenes for FX combos. So scenes would be like "Dry", "Short Delay", "Ambient", etc, and then you could have switches swap between channels of amp+cab simultaneously. I don't care what Fractal calls it how they implement it, I trust them to figure out the best way to do it.
 
@brainleaf I think that most people who have this wish -- like you -- want to switch Amp+Cab channels as if those two blocks were a single entity.

Of course this is already quite easy using traditional MIDI, so It's probably best to imagine this happening as an FC request. I think that adding extra parameters to the existing functions is a pretty tall order at this point, but maybe it could be handled by just adding AMP1+CAB1 and AMP2+CAB2 to the list of entries that the Bypass and Channel functions can address.
 
Admin M@ said:
@brainleaf I think that most people who have this wish -- like you -- want to switch Amp+Cab channels as if those two blocks were a single entity.

Of course this is already quite easy using traditional MIDI, so It's probably best to imagine this happening as an FC request. I think that adding extra parameters to the existing functions is a pretty tall order at this point, but maybe it could be handled by just adding AMP1+CAB1 and AMP2+CAB2 to the list of entries that the Bypass and Channel functions can address.
Click to expand...
Switching amp and cab together would be cool, but this wish can do a lot more, and is still pretty sane.

  • Switch a drive and a post amp vol or EQ block on and off together, and/or change their channels
  • Turn 4 or 5 effects on and off together
  • Etc

I hope something like this happens.
It seems achievable, from the cheap seats out here anyway.
 
Admin M@ said:
@brainleaf I think that most people who have this wish -- like you -- want to switch Amp+Cab channels as if those two blocks were a single entity.

Of course this is already quite easy using traditional MIDI, so It's probably best to imagine this happening as an FC request. I think that adding extra parameters to the existing functions is a pretty tall order at this point, but maybe it could be handled by just adding AMP1+CAB1 and AMP2+CAB2 to the list of entries that the Bypass and Channel functions can address.
Click to expand...
That would definitely cover most use cases and that's a pretty elegant solution.
 
+1

Especially useful when multiple inputs / outputs are in use, i.e. 2 musicians sharing the same device, e.g. a electric guitarist with the FM9 in front of him (in 1 => ... => amp 1 => cab 1 => .... => out 1), and an acoustic or bass player who just needs to engage a boost or drive (in 2 => drive 2 => amp2 => cab 2 => reverb => out 2) on an external FSW. The FM9 has more than enough DSP and costs plenty, so why not use that?
The way I achieve (most of) this is by setting all '2' blocks are on Scene Ignore, and setup scenes for the 'main' guitarist. Both musicians have access to 'stomp' mode using a 2 layout pages with per-preset placeholders.

Obviously 'scenes' cannot be used for the second musician, which limits the use of the external switches (or even internal switches) for the '2' path, as it would mess up the '1' path.

In our specific band case we are a bit short personelwise and perform multiple functions depeneding on the song: acoustic + acoustic guitar, electric + acoustic guitar, acoustic + bass, electric + bass. So I have to maintain and synchronize 4 presets, and if we live any on the fly tweaking needs to be repercussed across 4 presets. Also, when switching presets the correct scene for the 'first' musician needs to be reselected.

Not workable.

A better solution is to have io path '2' cater for both acoustic and bass, and be able to switch between them with one switch. This means just 2 presets: electric + acoustic/bass and acoustic + acoustic/bass.

In a sense scenes as they exists currently (without 'grouping') are in a contradiction to the use of multiple inputs/outputs by more than one musician. Allowing more than one action to be connected to a 'switch' can also be handy, but it does not replace a scene as this represents a complete 'state' of the all the non-ignore blocks ....

Maybe I am going about this the wrong way, but still think the proposed ideas by the poster are good!

Ender
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom