Has anyone seen the 30+ minute Sweetwater "deep dive" in to the QC video that came out a few days ago? It's a pretty detailed review of the IU, etc. However, I was not impressed with the tones presented. Maybe it's the reviewer; maybe it's the box; maybe it's both, but ...
I dislike the user interface.
Its the kind of thing that probably seems clever to the developers, but real world users will always be asking "how did I do that"? Touching the wrong thing, bringing up the wrong menu, then closing it.
For instance, to bring up stomp mode, there is a tiny hieroglyph in the upper right corner that you have to touch, next to a couple other hieroglyphs. What if you touch the wrong one? Better question, why is mode not footswitchable? You should be able to select if you want stomp mode with your feet. No one is going to bend over and touch a tiny hieroglyph to switch modes at a gig.
Another example of bad design... There are four rows, but you have to explicitly chain them together if you want a longer effect run. Its too fidgety. Apparently there are alot of routing "presets". What happens if you have a preset with one routing config, but want to change it to another. Do you have to start over?
And there are hidden swipe menus. I dont see any cues on screen that tell you how to swipe uncover menus. That will get old.
And the UI is largely modal. If you want to do one thing, the effect chain is off limits. Want to change an effect, you can no longer interact with the chain or other blocks. Look at the Boss GT and Helix.. they have separate sections for the chain and parameter adjustment.
Alot of the complexity, the different modes, is because there is a lack of decoders. The fact that the footswitch decoders are not aligned with the on screen values is bad design. Its clever yeah and saved them putting five rotary encoders under the screen, but this is a flagship, why would they skimp on that?
Add to that the cloud interface, and thats another layer of complexity. The people who designed this are patting themselves on the back yet don't realize how clunky it is. This design gets a D. If the touch interface is not responsive, then it would get an F.