Is there a plan to add global preset blocks to FM9 (turbo or otherwise)?

[unix-guy]

What if you could change a block in your block's library using the editor and then issue a command from the editor which would update all the presets using that library block with the current settings?

I was told before this would be very difficult. But would it really?

Here is the problem as things are today - maybe it could be worked around, maybe not:

The block library is just a saved block or channel the can be loaded into the hardware via the editor.

Once it is loaded, the connection between the 2 parties is done.

The hardware doesn't know this block is "block X" from the editor and the editor doesn't know which blocks from the library were loaded at some point into the hardware (or even which hardware, if you have multiple devices).

Another problem: this requires and editor AND updating every affected preset.

While the approach could address some use cases and would help some people, it's probably not practical in a live situation.

If you haven't used Global blocks, you may not know that their settings are not actually stored in the preset, but rather in system settings. The preset simply has a "pointer" to the global block... So any changes to one are immediately available to all presets where that global block is used.

 

[Rex Rox]

Here is the problem as things are today - maybe it could be worked around, maybe not:

The block library is just a saved block or channel the can be loaded into the hardware via the editor.

Once it is loaded, the connection between the 2 parties is done.

The hardware doesn't know this block is "block X" from the editor and the editor doesn't know which blocks from the library were loaded at some point into the hardware (or even which hardware, if you have multiple devices).

Another problem: this requires and editor AND updating every affected preset.

While the approach could address some use cases and would help some people, it's probably not practical in a live situation.

If you haven't used Global blocks, you may not know that their settings are not actually stored in the preset, but rather in system settings. The preset simply has a "pointer" to the global block... So any changes to one are immediately available to all presets where that global block is used.

I was never suggesting this in a live context. And as I previously posted one more selection screen for the presets you want updated from the blocks library would solve the other concern. No?

 

[unix-guy]

I was never suggesting this in a live context. And as I previously posted one more selection screen for the presets you want updated from the blocks library would solve the other concern. No?

As I said, it might solve some cases... But as @mThomasDutch pointed out above, his use case is live.

The selection process might work, but what about the case where you have multiple instances of that block type? How does it know which instance to update?

Also, you need to know which presets you need to update. This is another nice thing about global blocks. No accidentally forgetting to select some presets.

Again, I'm not saying your idea is bad but it's not really a replacement for Global blocks (in my opinion, as a heavy user of them in the Axe Fx II days).

Batch updating blocks or channels would be a very useful feature, no doubt.

 

[Rex Rox]

As I said, it might solve some cases... But as @mThomasDutch pointed out above, his use case is live.

From the inception I never suggested it was a replacement for global blocks. Only that in a sense it could accomplish a much easier way (development & user wise) to propagate changes to shared blocks across multiple presets.

No one should argue if it is doable that it is a much less painful way for end users than currently implemented.

The selection process might work, but what about the case where you have multiple instances of that block type? How does it know which instance to update?

That is up to the user with a warning - "All selected presets will be updated with this library block's current settings". "Select OK to proceed or Cancel to abort."

Again, I'm not saying your idea is bad but it's not really a replacement for Global blocks (in my opinion, as a heavy user of them in the Axe Fx II days).

Batch updating blocks or channels would be a very useful feature, no doubt.

As far as I can conceive this would work across the entire FAS hardware line. FM3 and FM9 users would get something that would make propagating changes across multiple presets much easier (granted only from the editor) - and it would work for Axe3 users too separate from global blocks (in the editor).

Dismissing this out of hand (as I have experienced twice now from both @Greg Ferguson and @JoKeR III) is the epitome of hubris as exhibited by the slights thrown at me from the aforementioned.

You on the other hand have been much more thoughtful and carefully reflective on this subject. I respect that and so should everyone else. So Kudos to @unix-guy. @Greg Ferguson is a cherished member of this community - by myself included. He has provided so much insight into this hardware for me personally which is why I came to his defense when someone threw him under the bus without cause,

Does that make him above bias for those who have called him out for things that don't seem to make sense? I only know of 1 case - this one. I would say without hesitation - NO.

I'll finish by thanking Greg for his tireless support and dedication to the community. But if he doesn't have thin skin when called out on what is likely a valid point, then he should reconsider his position on this one.

It wouldn't be a stretch to think he clicked the ignore button on me a while back. Oh well he is entitled to do so. But if so then he is not in a very good position to defend his posts. It doesn't matter to me. I still consider him and you 2 of the best resources on this forum.

 

[chris]

ahh the rating, review and comparison of helpful forum members. you know you've made it when that happens.

 

[Albion]

FAS is a great company.
Global block are a great feature.
Great companies implement great features!
Please!

 

[axifist]

I'd love to switch to a smaller rig with just an FM3 and one or two pedals on a floor board, leaving the amplifier stuff at the rehearsal room. But the lack of global blocks really keeps me from it … The Gen1 Fractals had it just for the amp blocks. Even that would be ok, since most or even all other effects I adjust individually per preset. But I want to be able to adjust the amp on a global level. Pity!

I have the preset per song approach and won't go away from this, it's perfect for me.

So if it's not possible to implement it broadly in every effects block like with the II and the III, ok, but if it's possible to implement it just for the amp block(s), that would still be really great!

 

[Rick]

No such plan has been announced and at present it isn't something we're working on.

Thanks for all you do, Matt. We appreciate your time and effort. I’m sure you’ll let us know when/if this feature gets on the to-do list. Clear answers from FAS insiders, whether positive or negative, are very helpful to the user community.

 

[lscottk]

Agreed, that did sound pretty cynical - maybe a small tone tweak would help that one to go down easier.

That said, I think there's good and bad to the free updates model. Yeah, the constant updates are nice, but the other side of the coin is that if a company isn't getting paid for the improvements it makes to its products then the only revenue coming in is from the sale of new products. So, a company like Fractal has much more incentive to keep making new hardware and selling it. Eventually the updates to the old hardware stop and you can either live with the last update forevermore or upgrade the hardware to continue getting the updates. So, in reality you do pay for the updates eventually, it is just delayed a while.

So, I'd be ok with paying something for a major update or optional feature set if it incentivized Fractal to embrace a model more like Kemper's, which doesn't seem to require recycling hardware every three to four years to keep the features coming.

I'd gladly pay one of those $99 upgrade fees right now to have global blocks and maybe another premium feature or two (maybe independent tempo settings for songs) added to my FM9. As responsive as Fractal is, it would always be easier to justify responding to customer requests when they're standing there saying "Take my money!".

As to the updates being more frequent than they used to be I think that is a result of the adoption of agile project management methodologies across the tech landscape.

FWIW, I understand that high end guitar modelling is a niche market and probably saturates pretty easily compared to automotive or other sectors. I want companies like Fractal to remain profitable so they can continue to provide excellent products, so I find paying the smaller occasional upgrade fee to keep Fractal interested in updating my existing hardware preferable to having to recycle my FM 9, 3, or Axe III in a couple of years to keep getting new features.

I just saw your post tonight. Thank you for taking a civil tone in expressing your opinion. I appreciate this very much.

The post that I wrote which you quoted was written because, over the years, every now and then, someone pops on this forum and starts making accusations about Fractal Audio's motives and/or business practices. I speak up because what Fractal offers is precious to me. I'm 62 years old and I've been buying music gear since the mid 1970s. In all of my years, I have never been associated with a company that is more innovative, generous to customers and that has acted with greater integrity, especially when it comes to customer service.

I want to be clear, this is just my opinion. As they say on the interwebs, Your mileage may vary. When people come on to the forum that Fractal pays for and start implying that there is some secret plan to not put something like global blocks in the product because then he can't sell future products, I just find that offensive. Generosity and building customer loyalty, it seems to me, is foundational to Fractal Audio's business plan. And I am grateful because the hardware and software they sell keeps getting better and better, and the mad scientist behind it all gives away his hard work and innovations when he could be charging us.

In my opinion, implying that there is planned obsolescence in order to sell people more stuff, misses the whole point. When the AxeFX3 came out with new algorithms that improved the tone, Cliff initially tried to incorporate the new algorthms into AX2 firmware. He did so even though it increased support overhead, and only stopped when the old hardware could not support the new innovations. Someone with greedy motives wouldn't do this. They would do what so many other companies do, "tough luck, bud. Buy the new stuff if you want the new technology".

Someday Cliff will retire, or just sell the company, and those of us who have been here for a while will remember the good old days. Hopefully, even though we don't always get exactly the features that we wish were in the box, we can still appreciate what we have today, and ask for features or make suggestions with an attitude of gratitude rather than suspicion or cynicism. Maybe that's too much to ask for. But, I guess I don't think so.