Global Blocks on FM9 is so needed

I really wish they would allow the option of 1 Reverb Block and not make you stuff another in there just because. I never want 2 Reverb blocks and that gained memory could be used for things like, Global Blocks. All we ever griped about with the AX8 and FM3 was not enough room for 1 Reverb block in high fidelity(when using a lot of other blocks). But I do not know if this is area of Reverb is tappable by Cliff or not? No clue of architecture or anything technical. Just thoughts.
 
unix-guy said:
Regardless, some people do want 2 Reverb blocks.

Global Blocks would be cool. I'm not holding my breath... If it was feasible I think they would have been implemented already.
Click to expand...
It's feasible. Does Cliff want to do that though? He will have to answer that.
 
My point being is most wanted to be able to fit reverb in. But demanding that CPU be used for a 2nd reverb is kind of wild. Yes some may want 2 reverbs, but holding hostage the CPU for a superfluous block is not ideal for those that maybe want a drive block instead of a 2nd reverb. This is main reason I am using my Axe FX III live again. I get that FM9 is not a Axe Fx III, but I do wish it had some similarities in this manner. Global Blocks are insanely useful.
 
My 2 cents...

IIRC, many firmware bugs "through history" have been related to Global Blocks. IOW, it may not be as easy to implement as we think, and it would be for different CPUs... It also sucks for preset sharing.

I would certainly welcome it, but seems there are three or more potential "alternatives"...
  • batch changing blocks via Axe-Edit
  • copy/paste via Axe-Edit
  • a wish thread from yek for a similar system that might be easier to implement?
Don't make 500 presets for one gig. If you do, use the Axe III.

Re. CPU, it's cool that the reverb seems to do some of the pitch shifting effects that in the past could sometimes need a second Pitch block we don't have, so I wouldn't call it "wasted CPU" too much (even though I'm not into crystals). I wouldn't think Global Blocks require meaningful CPU anyway...?

My guess is that we don't have it cos it's no fun to implement and/or keep working seamlessly.
 
@Tremonti : I don't get what the DSP core for reverb (which is performing calculations in a preset) has to do with global blocks (which are a memory problem). Freeing a core wouldn't increase memory and/or implementation effort.

(I would also like to have global blocks, but yeah)
 
unix-guy said:
Regardless, some people do want 2 Reverb blocks.

Global Blocks would be cool. I'm not holding my breath... If it was feasible I think they would have been implemented already.
Click to expand...

moerker said:
@Tremonti : I don't get what the DSP core for reverb (which is performing calculations in a preset) has to do with global blocks (which are a memory problem). Freeing a core wouldn't increase memory and/or implementation effort.

(I would also like to have global blocks, but yeah)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I am not a programmer and probably misused words there. My bad.
 
Implementing the ability to copy a block or a channel from one preset to another on the hardware would also help some. On the hardware the only way for now is to make every tweak by hand in every preset. A really surprising gap in the UI, since it's a footboard unit. (Not that I did'nt also want that function in the III, but that's another story).
 
666was999 said:
Implementing the ability to copy a block or a channel from one preset to another on the hardware would also help some. On the hardware the only way for now is to make every tweak by hand in every preset. A really surprising gap in the UI, since it's a footboard unit. (Not that I did'nt also want that function in the III, but that's another story).
Click to expand...
Agreed, I wonder if Cliff or whoever is working on the Firmware is going to start improving the UI with those quality of life changes?
 
unix-guy said:
Do you have some knowledge on why it has not been implemented?
Click to expand...
Yes I do, if Cliff thinks I'm wrong he can post and say so, my feelings wouldn't be hurt, notice he has not done that. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it will be, look at Cab Lab, still no FM9 support or ETA but it can be done, that is the fractal way, maybe it will be done "soon" maybe not, maybe global blocks will make it to FM9, maybe not. If you want specifics you will have to ask those on the development team, good luck with that.
 
I might be in the minority here, but I think this is simply a business play. Global blocks are a really cheap way to get people to push for the Axe III instead of the FM9. I mean hell, I was in that camp for almost a year before I pulled the trigger. Global blocks was the absolutely only thing holding me back on going FM9. As amazing as the company is, throwing us free updates for like 10 years now, great service, etc, they still need to have some businessy thing in the back pocket to help them make money.

I'm probably wrong though :)
 
tfodor said:
I might be in the minority here, but I think this is simply a business play. Global blocks are a really cheap way to get people to push for the Axe III instead of the FM9. I mean hell, I was in that camp for almost a year before I pulled the trigger. Global blocks was the absolutely only thing holding me back on going FM9. As amazing as the company is, throwing us free updates for like 10 years now, great service, etc, they still need to have some businessy thing in the back pocket to help them make money.

I'm probably wrong though :)
Click to expand...

I always thought it was a business decision and not really a technical debate but who knows ...
 
tfodor said:
I might be in the minority here, but I think this is simply a business play. Global blocks are a really cheap way to get people to push for the Axe III instead of the FM9. I mean hell, I was in that camp for almost a year before I pulled the trigger. Global blocks was the absolutely only thing holding me back on going FM9. As amazing as the company is, throwing us free updates for like 10 years now, great service, etc, they still need to have some businessy thing in the back pocket to help them make money.

I'm probably wrong though :)
Click to expand...
It does make sense from a business perspective to have a clear difference in features and performance between units at different pricing levels.
 
Tremonti said:
I really wish they would allow the option of 1 Reverb Block and not make you stuff another in there just because. I never want 2 Reverb blocks and that gained memory could be used for things like, Global Blocks. All we ever griped about with the AX8 and FM3 was not enough room for 1 Reverb block in high fidelity(when using a lot of other blocks). But I do not know if this is area of Reverb is tappable by Cliff or not? No clue of architecture or anything technical. Just thoughts.
Click to expand...
I use two reverb blocks on FM9 (one for guitar, one for vox), and don’t use the global block function on my AxeFX, so prefer to have two reverbs on the FM9.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom