I noticed, in people's Rig Photos... (footcontroller diversity)

[funny_polymath]

I noticed, in people's Rig Photos, that there weren't a lot of MFC-101s in them.

I was kinda surprised by that. Sometimes a Ground Control, sometimes an All Access, sometimes something else.

Any particular reason? The MFC has all the right specs from what I can tell. Is it just because Footcontroller X is one you already had, and it made more sense to keep it rather than sell it and buy the MFC? Or some other reason?

Would you prefer the MFC over other controllers, if there wasn't a monetary issue?

(In case you're wondering why I posted this here, it's because (a.) the Rig Photos were in this part of the Forum, and (b.) I wasn't sure whether this question properly belonged under the MFC-101 section, or the "Other Footcontrollers" section.)

I MUCH prefer the LF12+ over the MFC.

Reasons:

1) I think it's more powerful, more programmable, more controllable, and, I think its sync was implemented before the MFC's was!
2) This is HUGE: NO STOMP LABELS! The 12+ has an individual LCD display for EACH button. These IA 'labels' are totally DYNAMIC - so as you change patches, the effect 'label' changes. Perfect for me. I do NOT have enough physical buttons (and therefore physical labels) for all the FX I use in different patches. With these dynamic 'labels', this is no longer a problem.
3) An example of programmability: each IA can support at least 2 functions (sometimes even more) so, for example, I could use a button to control both a phase and a flange etc.
4) I don't know about the MFC, but the LF12+ also supports multiple pages, so if I had a crazy-complex,effects-laden patch with 15 fx on it, I can hit the page up function (which actually shares a button with my bank up function) and the effects that didn't fit on the first page would display dynamically on the 2nd. Even if the MFC DOES have this feature, you're still stuck with no labels, or physical labels...
5) Tech support is great. It's a small company, and Jeff's very busy, but he's also fast - FW upgrades and editor upgrades (YES, there is a FULL Featured editor (PC and MAC) for ALL of the LF products.
6) The 12+ has a smaller form factor. I used the LF Pro before, which is large, probably similar in form factor to the MFC, and it was kind of a pain dancing around it. The paging functions and dual-use buttons obviate the need (for me) to have a larger unit. And if the 12+ isn't big enough... the Pro+ is coming very soon now.

P.S. I am not affiliated with Liquid Foot in any way. Just a satisfied user.

 

[funny_polymath]

If there was a mini-MFC with a mini exp pedal built in, I'd pay whatever for that

The Liquid Foot LF+ Junior is close. And I think it has FOUR pedal inputs like my 12+

 

[funny_polymath]

I noticed, in people's Rig Photos, that there weren't a lot of MFC-101s in them.

I was kinda surprised by that. Sometimes a Ground Control, sometimes an All Access, sometimes something else.

Any particular reason? The MFC has all the right specs from what I can tell. Is it just because Footcontroller X is one you already had, and it made more sense to keep it rather than sell it and buy the MFC? Or some other reason?

Would you prefer the MFC over other controllers, if there wasn't a monetary issue?

(In case you're wondering why I posted this here, it's because (a.) the Rig Photos were in this part of the Forum, and (b.) I wasn't sure whether this question properly belonged under the MFC-101 section, or the "Other Footcontrollers" section.)

Another issue was the definite lag. A lot of us started with Standards and Ultras. I LOVED my Ultra so much I WANTED to buy the Fractal controller, but it just took too long. In the mean time, I found the Liquid Foot, and saw people like Adrian Belew using it, and went with that instead. Others went Gordious, Ground Control etc. for the exact same reason.

 

[aleclee]

Took me a second to realize that was my MFC. My first reaction was "Those look a lot like the labels I made!"

 

[DNW]

I MUCH prefer the LF12+ over the MFC...

Damn... that LF+ 12+ sounds good. Something you didn't mention is that the LF+ units are able to be combined to expand your controller set up, which sounds pretty cool to me. Expensive, but cool that the option is there.

I also like that it's a fair bit smaller than the MFC. For me on my pedal board, I find I have too much MFC, and not enough space for exp pedals. I could stand to lose some IA switches a lot of the time, but often find myself wishing I had more exp pedals to play with.

And the LCD on each switch is just too cool.


Damn it, you're making me want one.

 

[Admin M@]

I had the Gordius (did work for them, actually) and the Liquid Foot (came this close to working for/with them --><--)
Fractal employee hat off... Musician hat on: I choose the MFC-101 for my own rig because it has the perfect balance of simplicity and flexibility.
I've never encountered a pedalboard that's this powerful and yet still so easy to set up and use. (And I go all the way back to the PMC-10).

 

[GreenTea]

M@;665990]......Musici[/email]an hat on: I choose the MFC-101 for my own rig because it has the perfect balance of simplicity and flexibility.
I've never encountered a pedalboard that's this powerful and yet still so easy to set up and use. (And I go all the way back to the PMC-10).

I concur, Doctor. I've gigged the MFC-101 for about three months and I LOVE it. I had the LFJr for a few years (and the Rocktron MIDIMate before that). The LFJr and the ULTRA were perfect for each other. The synchronization, structural integrity and ease of MFC-101 setup for me are super. Love it!