My general thoughts on Axe Edit and the Fractal Approach.

chucma said:
To be fair I doubt there are a lot of knobs like this, and Cliff does model the log curves of the pots on the amps so most scenarios are probably covered in a one-to-one basis
Click to expand...

Well, ENGLs have, if I remember correctly, contour, some mid boost (contour is also a mid boost of sorts), bright, ultra bright, M.L.P., vintage/classic, something else I don't remember.

Rectifiers have a bunch of controls on the back panel, those are important as well.

Orange amps have weird controls, I think also like contour, but not quite the same contour as ENGLs, and those are knobs, not buttons.

If you omit all this stuff and just leave BMT and Gain, I doubt it'll be easier for anyone to dial in a good sound.
 
I don't understand the resistance to suggestions to add anything new to the axe. There are so many old threads on the forum where people naysay every suggestion for things the axe does not yet do. Once introduced, they all go quiet.
Scenes was one such example where everyone defended the gap in changing presets saying it was not a problem when it actually was.
The result, Scenes. One of the best things about the axefx. Very elegant solution. Never was using a single preset so functional and useful.
I don't understand anyone who thinks a Phase 90 page should have anything but one knob to set the effect. My car has one steering wheel to do one job. Somethings need to be simple. For me anyway lol.
This thing can be daunting, even coming from complex Bradshaw switching systems or Matt would never have to spend time with artists helping them dial in their sounds from the gear they are moving from ;-)
The 'use your ears' example is thrown out far too often to mask things that could be done better. Taper on the knobs, use your ears. Different controls, use your ears..... Things could be better. Nothing wrong with suggestions.
Never stops me getting my sounds but if there is a better and quicker way, I am all up for that.
The improvements on my AX8 for ease of use are a nice step forward from my AxeFX XL and MFC Mk3.

Anyway, still great pieces of equipment (my AxeFX and AX8). I feel bad making suggestions or criticisms as the AxeFX has made my touring life so much easier and it's a truly an amazing piece of gear that was beyond anything I could have imagined in the late 80's and early 90's. It has meant I can take exactly the sounds with me when we fly and my gigs are the same every night. No more rental amps. Bliss.
 
@vinnyburns I agree.

There seems to be some forum resistance against new approaches or discussions.

Having simple real world interfaces for software that simulates hardware works for a lot of consumers. If that's not your thing, that's fine too. But I can't see why a discussion of it generates heat / angst?

From a practical standpoint, everything costs money. But we are not FAS and the decision to take a product in a direction is not our responsibility :)
 
I don't have any issue with the ideas being represented, I would welcome any and all new additions to the AFXII/Axe Edit software. But coming from an IT industry perspective, I also understand that programming interfaces is not an easy task and it would probably take a lot of time to do what is being requested. So much time that I'm not sure that FAS will want to invest said time since there is no guarantee that it will create enough value addition to raise their profit margin.
 
admgloval said:
I don't have any issue with the ideas being represented, I would welcome any and all new additions to the AFXII/Axe Edit software. But coming from an IT industry perspective, I also understand that programming interfaces is not an easy task and it would probably take a lot of time to do what is being requested. So much time that I'm not sure that FAS will want to invest said time since there is no guarantee that it will create enough value addition to raise their profit margin.
Click to expand...

Well maybe not on what we have now but it can't hurt to have it in thought for future products? The one template for everything might work from an engineering point of view but from an artists point of view, it seems to have everything in the interface painted into an overly complex corner.
I have touring mates in the industry who won't touch the Axe because they say the interface is overblown. Granted, these are the same people who also stayed away from the Bradshaw systems I was so fond of in the 80 and 90's but as touring becomes harder every year and we are all expected to rent backline, (no truck traveling to meet us at the gigs anymore) these guys will eventually cave in any buy 'something' so they have their gear they can fly with and have a consistent sound every night.
 
barhrecords said:
@vinnyburns I agree.

There seems to be some forum resistance against new approaches or discussions.

Having simple real world interfaces for software that simulates hardware works for a lot of consumers. If that's not your thing, that's fine too. But I can't see why a discussion of it generates heat / angst?

From a practical standpoint, everything costs money. But we are not FAS and the decision to take a product in a direction is not our responsibility :)
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I believe some of us see this as a monumental task, where as many make it seem like a walk in the park. I mean, it just is not as simple as some make it sound. I tried to explain just one aspect in a post here early on, perhaps not the clearest post but I think the point should be in this discussion. But it's not, it's like lets just do it. And if we have reservations we are resisting. Why the hell would any of us not want the axe to advance. Of course we do.
 
Stratman68 said:
I don't think so. I believe some of us see this as a monumental task, where as many make it seem like a walk in the park. I mean, it just is not as simple as some make it sound. I tried to explain just one aspect in a post here early on, perhaps not the clearest post but I think the point should be in this discussion. But it's not, it's like lets just do it. And if we have reservations we are resisting. Why the hell would any of us not want the axe to advance. Of course we do.
Click to expand...

I can't judge the amount of effort it would take to implement. And that is my day job; planning, estimating and developing software.

I am a consultant, 30 yrs. experience, specializing in usability and interface development for a niche but large software vendor.

In your view, is the monumental nature of it technical challenges specific to AxeEdit and the Fractal firmware?
 
barhrecords said:
I can't judge the amount of effort it would take to implement. And that is my day job; planning, estimating and developing software.

I am a consultant, 30 yrs. experience, specializing in usability and interface development for a niche but large software vendor.

In your view, is the monumental nature of it technical challenges specific to AxeEdit and the Fractal firmware?
Click to expand...

Well if your a software designer, you should know that it isn't an easy task and would require quite a bit of man hours and money to accomplish. The question is whether Fractal considers the project worth investing in. How many more buyers could they possibly get vs the cost to re-design the interface. Even if the change was only reflected in Axe-Edit, then you now have a disparity between what you see on the unit itself versus what you see in Axe-Edit which could be confusing to users as well. It's a never-ending rabbit hole really...
 
admgloval said:
Well if your a software designer, you should know that it isn't an easy task and would require quite a bit of man hours and money to accomplish. The question is whether Fractal considers the project worth investing in. How many more buyers could they possibly get vs the cost to re-design the interface. Even if the change was only reflected in Axe-Edit, then you now have a disparity between what you see on the unit itself versus what you see in Axe-Edit which could be confusing to users as well. It's a never-ending rabbit hole really...
Click to expand...

Having never developed for the Fractal platform and having zero insight into the business in regards to development capacity and development cost, I can honestly say I have no idea of the effort or cost. If you are going to get a realistic estimate, you need more information, right?

I posted a wish a long time ago, when I wished for the Fractal Bot, that there was a simple FPE, front panel editor, that looked exactly the same as the front panel. With some conveniences for use with a mouse and computer. Basically just projecting the front panel interface on the big screen :)
 
I agree that a GUI which adapts to whatever device is being modeled would be a fine idea.

For those who object, please explain why it's a good idea to show a bright cap control for the Plexi 50W Hi1 amp model when that control is non-functional for that amp?
 
Malvolio said:
I agree that a GUI which adapts to whatever device is being modeled would be a fine idea.

For those who object, please explain why it's a good idea to show a bright cap control for the Plexi 50W Hi1 amp model when that control is non-functional for that amp?
Click to expand...

Whether you like it or you don't, the interface was designed a certain way from the get go. I am not a software designer/coder but I do know folks who are and to completely redesign something that was designed that way from the beginning is a monumental task. Yes, it would be great if the amp controls actually looked like the amp they were modeled after but that is not the way the interface was designed. No one objects to any changes to the interface that would make it easier, but you also have to understand that what you are asking for may not be worth the FAS software designers valuable time to implement. They created the interface as a common template that is used for all amp models and for better or worse, that is what we have to get used to. Maybe for the Axe-FX III(whenever that comes out) they will design an interface that is more to everyone's liking.
 
Malvolio said:
With all due respect, I don't know whether this would be worthwhile for FAS to implement and neither do you. So, let's leave those judgments to Cliff. It's our job to supply him with feedback and ideas. It's his job to consider those ideas and implement the ones he thinks are worthwhile.
Click to expand...

I am in line with this.

I try to stay in check and not armchair CEO. :)
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
i'm sure most people are always expressing their opinion, and not stating how things actually are with certainty. :) this forum tends to forget that a lot. ;)
Click to expand...

There tends to be a lot armchair CEO'ing I think.

The intentions are usually not bad though. Anytime this many nerds start talking, there are going to be a lot of "solutions" and polarized opinions. :)
 
fonziejumpsshark3sl.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom