FW15 - Backwards Compatibility Compromises Development?

Modular FW updates? Amp algorithm only and then everything else updates?

Even though I sometimes wish the sound of my presets didn't change, I defiantly love the FW upgrades far beyond the slight inconvenience.
 
No complaining at all.
Each time there's an update, I learn one more piece of the puzzle.
I'd rather time be spent where it is rather then time spent in other places.
I don't see how that is possible given what Cliff is coming up with week after week, month after month.
As others have said.
If people were really concerned, stay at the current firmware and leave the updates for when you are ready!
No one is twisting your arm to update as they come out.
Mind you, I can't imagine many would say, naw, I'll wait!

Cheers
B
 
Nope, for me I am fine with how things work, I'm just trying to say simply not updating is not the solution, nor is keeping old presets on old firmware and trying to manage going back and forth. Obviously with updates come functionality and realism improves, no one wants to not improve, so the choice is obvious.... one must update and one must fix presets.

I wish it was easier. I wish it was less time lost. That is all.
 
or just weigh the improvement with each FW release - is it really crucial? like i said before, i bet if we all thought 9 was the final release up until this point, we'd all probably be happy with the tone. we'd have all been on 9 for however long it's been.

then what if 1 year later, "10" came out - with a ton of improvements (things we actually have been getting with 10-15). would you upgrade then? would it be that big of a deal to update ones presets? or would it suddenly be ok now that there are many many things to gain from the update? it's now worth the time because it's one big one, not several smaller ones?

i think many are just stifled by the generosity of FAS and the update frequency is causing people to create a problem. or the fact that something (anything) better exists creates the problem of NEEDING to update.
 
Chris@KatsuKuriMedia said:
then what if 1 year later, "10" came out - with a ton of improvements (things we actually have been getting with 10-15). would you upgrade then? would it be that big of a deal to update ones presets? or would it suddenly be ok now that there are many many things to gain from the update? it's now worth the time because it's one big one, not several smaller ones?
Click to expand...

Not even sure if you'll see this since you threatened to block me recently, but so be it.

You really just made the point that much more obvious. There would have been an ENTIRE YEAR between 9 and 10 for people to enjoy 9. It's the frequency of having to re-tweak patches with every update that some folks are frustrated with.

The old adages:

"Absence makes the heart grow fonder".

and...

"familiarity breeds contempt"

can be applied here.

The perception of "too much, too soon" is several peoples reality. Some folks need time to be happy with what they've got and not be faced with the temptation of new features every couple of months (2 to 3 on average?), and they certainly don't need to be told "no one is forcing you to update". That's just insulting.
 
attachment.php
 
Cliff and team are between the proverbial rock and hard place.

Release new features on a semi regular basis, upset those who want more time to enjoy what they've already got (faction A)

Hold off with new releases to keep from upsetting faction A, and faction B gets upset because it's been so long between "new toys!".

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Personally I say just keep 'em coming. I'll update when it's convenient for me to do so.

YMMV
 
Through delivering an unequaled product and impressive succession of OPTIONAL, FREE updates, enhancements, and usability improvements Cliff /FAS have earned my trust and willingness to make whatever patch changes are required to reap the benefit of those improvements.

What worries me is that Cliff, understandably effected by undeserved criticism of these gifts, may finally reach a point where the aggravation outweighs his joy of creation, and FW updates cease. I pray that day never comes. I just hope Cliff knows how much his efforts are appreciated by the overwhelming majority of Axe-FX users.
 
i don't think its fair to judge those of us who are attached to presets from older firmwares-and i don't think any current/future development is hampered or encumbered by concerns of users who wish to keep their tone the same.
i think most everyone is on board w/ installing the latest updates- some just wish to keep the tone/settings they had before w/ presets they have grown accustomed to using and looking forward to new presets built on the latest FW. progress goes on and we who like the past, know what has to be done to have our cake and eat it too
 
Just wondering if someone wouldn't mine posting some ruined patches that an update caused, so we all know what the complaints are by "hearing" it and judging our selfs .. We all "hear" it a little different do we not, so unless something really is worth pissing off the one giving us free updates in the first place, are we sure we wanted to even go there? For arguments sake in that regard I say we all tippy toe back out the door we came in. And fwiw I for one think the improvements in the updates more than overshadow what may be a down grade for anyone else in tone, So prove me wrong by showing us here. Otherwise, don't stop progress over a few tweaks in otherwise wonderful sounding (for most of us) free updates.
 
Last edited:
This thread reminded me of a lengthy discussion I had with a friend who practices martial arts with me ( martial arts, known to my gf as the OTHER other woman). He argues that if you commit to a certain style you have to commit fully and respect the limitations, traditions and work ethic of that style. I tend to disagree, argueing that I have my own limitations, some of which can be overcome by using techniques and training methods found in other styles. To put it in the words of Bruce Lee: Adapt what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is specifically your own. We, of course, agreed to disagree and opened another bottle of beer.

Whenever I upgrade. I first try to understand in which way my presets have been affected. Sometimes I tweak, sometimes I don't because someway the upgraded stuff sounds better and sometimes when I run through models and effects to hear how they sound in the new upgrade I just discard an old patch for a new one that, to my ears, suits my purpose better. Adopt, adapt, improve.
Some people don't want change. Ok. Don't upgrade. Just be consequent about it and don't diss the people putting trunckloads of effort into providing said upgrades, or those who like them. Chances are you're just stuck with the feeling you're missing out on something.
 
spikey said:
Just wondering if someone wouldn't mine posting some ruined patches that an update caused, so we all know what the complaints are by "hearing" it and judging our selfs .. We all "hear" it a little different do we not, so unless something really is worth pissing off the one giving us free updates in the first place, are we sure we wanted to even go there? For arguments sake in that regard I say we all tippy toe back out the door we came in. And fwiw I for one think the improvements in the updates more than overshadow what may be a down grade for anyone else in tone, So prove me wrong by showing us here. Otherwise, don't stop progress over a few tweaks in otherwise wonderful sounding (for most of us) free updates.
Click to expand...

i had a real good example before i saw this post and the next update that affects the presets i will try to post an example. it was quite clear, the differences between my 14.02 pre and what 15 did to it after i reset the amps. not even really a subjective difference. the 14 pre was massive (Grisky Suhr_Friedman Heavy- Scene 5) but then again it was built around the 14 specs.
before updating i saved the 14.02 banks then after the update, just imported the old banks back in and for the most part, everything was back the way it was.
no doubt , tho, the new pres BUILT WITH 15 will take things to the next level. so, onward and upward!
 
Just throwing this about, but the most attractive feature of a major upgrade to me is the new amps. That is the thing that makes me upgrade because I am very happy with the sound of the modelling as is.

As for the OP, I'm not sure. I tend to view the Axe as an amp in itself, rather than a strict representation of valve amps. The biggest barrier to this, as I see it, is not the code, but the perception of what people perceive as 'good' tone. If something hasn't had a 'bedding in' process, it's unfamiliarity can be the single biggest obstacle to acceptance. Therefore, the Axe can be capable of huge things from a DSP point of view, but without the tones use in a tonally pleasing release, it wont get accepted as a good tone by the majority.

Just food for thought. :)
 
Chris@KatsuKuriMedia said:
or just weigh the improvement with each FW release - is it really crucial? like i said before, i bet if we all thought 9 was the final release up until this point, we'd all probably be happy with the tone. we'd have all been on 9 for however long it's been.

then what if 1 year later, "10" came out - with a ton of improvements (things we actually have been getting with 10-15). would you upgrade then? would it be that big of a deal to update ones presets? or would it suddenly be ok now that there are many many things to gain from the update? it's now worth the time because it's one big one, not several smaller ones?

i think many are just stifled by the generosity of FAS and the update frequency is causing people to create a problem. or the fact that something (anything) better exists creates the problem of NEEDING to update.
Click to expand...

That's exactly it. There is no real problem here. Just options. People who have wall to wall 'perfect' amp tones ATM (so good they refuse to let go) really have no reason to update every new version anyway.

In fact, all the Axe players on this thread who said they would need to have a way to be backward compatible, have found a way to be backward compatible up to this point, with a tweak or two - please correct me if i'm wrong. So the whole 'issue' of backwards compatibility is a bit of a strawman. It's already there.

I think what the OP was attempting to address is a finer issue, in questioning the value of making extra provisions (in the software) in order to have previous HW versions of patches and amps on hand with the click of a mouse (there's literally thousands, right?). I'm with the OP on this point, and i think it's pretty obvious.

Now, if those provisions were small, and didn't compromise amp model accuracy and all the other functions of the system and their limits, then great.
If not, then adapt or load an earlier FW.
So it's all good.
 
Last edited:
I've just finished reading through this thread and wanna add my thoughts.

Yes tweaking presets after fw upgrade is a pita, but if I want the new features, then I hafta decide if updating is worth it. I stayed on 6.xx until 13 came out. I didn't see anything that would benefit the 14 patches that was using until 13. It was fully my choice. My patches are very simple and not that hard to recreate. I gig on a regular basis and there are times that I can't update because of time restrictions (my problem, not FAS).

If you feel that there are things that are missing, post in the "wish list".

Updates seem to come out pretty fast and FAS listens to us when we identify bugs or want the thing we can't live without and we should be extremely grateful (some companies charge for updates).

If backward compatibility were to become a problem, I think FAS would politely apologize and stop supporting older fw. FAS has their shit together and are doing a great job supporting their customer base. Customer base abandonment is the shortest path to a "fire sale".

When the resources of the current hardware config is exhausted, a new and improved box will be released. I bought my Ultra 2 months before the II came out, yeah I had a wtf moment, but I managed to survive and updated to the II the following December. Totally my choice.

In the end nobody is forcing us to update software or hardware... totally each person choice.

Think about this.... We can't stop evolution, we can move on or curl up in a fetal position and wait for the end. Evolve or Die.

This long rant is sponsored by, Oxycodone and Flexiril (I'm recovering from shoulder surgery). :topsy_turvy:
 
Mack said:
I have observed that there are two distinct camps of Axe-Fx II users vis a vis firmware updates:

1. Those that need backwards compatibility with their existing presets, and;

2. Those that don't.

Judging from the many posts by "FractalAudio" (Cliff Chase personally, if I understand correctly), Fractal is engaged not only in an amazing ongoing development, but also in supporting (or at the very least, trying to support) backwards compatibility with existing user presets.

My concern is that if Fractal needs to ensure backwards compatibility with user presets created in previous firmware versions, this inevitably draws a significant amount of time and energy away from the otherwise unfettered process of developing the best possible results obtainable from the existing hardware. Perhaps it even imposes limitations.

I belong to the camp that does not require any backwards compatibility whatsoever. To me, the Axe is just an amp. It just happens to be the best amp in the world, and it happens to have a lot of controls. When I update firmware, I start from scratch (happily!). Like someone noted in another thread, getting new firmware is like getting a brand new amp. (Plus it's free and you get to keep your old amp!!! Some guys out there just don't seem to get this but I digress....)

I want Fractal to know that I don't need backwards compatibility. In fact, I think that the concept is counter-intuitive. The interaction of virtual components is far too complex, and you're never going to get the most out of it if you don't start from scatch and use your ears. No offense is meant to the backwards-compatible guys, but I have a hunch that the start-from-scratch guys are a much-less-vocal majority.

Anyway….those are my thoughts on the matter. My objective is simple: I (very thankfully) would like to see Fractal squeeze the absolute most out of the existing hardware, and if ignoring backwards-compatibility helps that cause, then screw backwards-compatibility. :) Remember, FW updates are optional.

Mack
Click to expand...

Wow! What a really really great outlook and perspective. Thanks for posting this thread Mack! :encouragement:
 
EJ James said:
Cliff and team are between the proverbial rock and hard place.

Release new features on a semi regular basis, upset those who want more time to enjoy what they've already got (faction A)

Hold off with new releases to keep from upsetting faction A, and faction B gets upset because it's been so long between "new toys!".

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Personally I say just keep 'em coming. I'll update when it's convenient for me to do so.

YMMV
Click to expand...

Nice save EJ! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom