New Fractal product coming!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
rog said:
Minor point, I know, but to me, this is a plus. While I appreciated the capacitive footswitches on the Helix, and think the twisty footswitchs on the Fender thing and the QC is a cool idea, I don't feel any need to touch the screen. And I've never seen an implementation of JPEG's of amp models and pedals that didn't lower the overall aesthetic; to me, that makes it look very Headrush (all due respect), cheap and tacky.

I thought the Helix had a really nice looking layout on the screen, the QC as well. Is the Fractal layout (the one showing the signal path) a little less pretty? Maybe. A little less intuitive? Maybe slightly, but I think that's a function of it's flexibility, and I'd rather have the flexibility than a pretty screen. Plus, I leave it on the screen that shows the names of the snapshots under the patch, anyways - that's useful, to me, and a pretty effects chain really isn't.

My tastes do run a little utilitarian, if that's not clear.
Click to expand...
I actually jumped on the Sheeran looper X at beginning of the year. I like it but I suck at looping, maybe it will drive me to get better overall. All that said the touch screen is a strange choice on a foot pedal! It can be hard to interact with at the start but at least once set up you can run without touching it. I would much rather have a rack unit with an fc 12 foot pedal approach. Something up high I can use my hands on and a foot pedal to play with. I like Fractals approach much better.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rog
Bertotti said:
I actually jumped on the Sheeran looper X beginning of the year. I like it I suck at looping but maybe it will drive me to get better overall. All that said the touch screen is the o Conway to interact with it. On a foot pedal! It can be in ancient at the start but at least once set up you can run without touching it. I would have much rather had a rack into with an f 12 kind of approach. Something up high I can use my hands on and a foot pedal to play with. I like Fractals approach much better.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I'm dumb. What did you mean in the parts I highlighted?
 
Dave Merrill said:
Sorry, I'm dumb. What did you mean in the parts I highlighted?
Click to expand...
Stinking auto correct. Sorry. I’ll go back and fix it. Ina nut shell a touch screen in a foot operated pedal is not ideal. I would rather have an editor or desk top/rack unit and a separate foot pedal. I like Fractals approach to editing. Better than the Sheeran looper x

Man I have to pay closer attention to auto correct I could make sense of some of what I wrote either! Apologies for that!

I’m thinking a touch screen on a foot pedal is either a gimmick or a way to avoid writing an editor. From what I’ve seen so far and as much as I like it it has had no real support after the release one update to fix a problem and nothing else. I suspect the org will abandon it as soon as they feel they can sell the next latest and greatest. Fractal is the best at support quality and functionality and much more I like their way.
 
Last edited:
Fro68 said:
My guess is a reverb pedal.
Click to expand...
I actually think that would be great. The fractal reverbs are as good as or better than any other reverbs that I've heard or played. If there was only one effect I could take with me (esp if it was all the models under the umbrella of that one effect) if I was to buy an amp, the reverb would be it.
 
rog said:
Minor point, I know, but to me, this is a plus. While I appreciated the capacitive footswitches on the Helix, and think the twisty footswitchs on the Fender thing and the QC is a cool idea, I don't feel any need to touch the screen. And I've never seen an implementation of JPEG's of amp models and pedals that didn't lower the overall aesthetic; to me, that makes it look very Headrush (all due respect), cheap and tacky.

I thought the Helix had a really nice looking layout on the screen, the QC as well. Is the Fractal layout (the one showing the signal path) a little less pretty? Maybe. A little less intuitive? Maybe slightly, but I think that's a function of it's flexibility, and I'd rather have the flexibility than a pretty screen. Plus, I leave it on the screen that shows the names of the snapshots under the patch, anyways - that's useful, to me, and a pretty effects chain really isn't.

My tastes do run a little utilitarian, if that's not clear.
Click to expand...

Same!

John Nathan Cordy said something interesting about Fractal gear that I agree with: I don't get bored with it. I feel inspired by it.

I understand the desire to make something so dirt simple that anyone can use it. But I don't think Fractal is trying to corner the "dirt simple" market.

I think Axe-Edit is intuitive and usable. The Axe-FX III hardware has a utilitarian menu system with knobs and buttons. It's about as intuitive as it can be for the allotted screen space. But the unit really shines with Axe-Edit. I can't imagine making or editing presets/scenes without Axe-Edit.

So, I think I get why folks love the newer Fender floorboard and the QC. It's great gear. But maybe a slightly different audience than the Fractal-heads. At least so far!
 
LanceZ said:
Same!

John Nathan Cordy said something interesting about Fractal gear that I agree with: I don't get bored with it. I feel inspired by it.

I understand the desire to make something so dirt simple that anyone can use it. But I don't think Fractal is trying to corner the "dirt simple" market.

I think Axe-Edit is intuitive and usable. The Axe-FX III hardware has a utilitarian menu system with knobs and buttons. It's about as intuitive as it can be for the allotted screen space. But the unit really shines with Axe-Edit. I can't imagine making or editing presets/scenes without Axe-Edit.

So, I think I get why folks love the newer Fender floorboard and the QC. It's great gear. But maybe a slightly different audience than the Fractal-heads. At least so far!
Click to expand...
What’s very nice is it can be as simple or as deep as the user wants it to be.
 
GreatGreen said:
Yep. Even the concept of a modular grid within which you can manually place and route effects, which exists in some form or another in basically every modeler today, was a Fractal innovation. Before that, modelers had one signal path hard-coded by the developer.
Click to expand...
Huh?
Unless I misunderstand you, the GSP-2101 had this (possibly first, or to this degree), and also the TC G-Force, IIRC.
 
Yvanbloomberg said:
Many thanks for the clarification :)
Many things I didn’t know, learned a lot.
And about what I said about aliasing and NAM?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
You said that aliasing differences is a “fantasy” of Cliff’s mind. You said there’s examples of where people can’t tell the difference but you didn’t share them. What’s the point in responding to that if the information is all over this forum?
 
Rogerthat said:
You said that aliasing differences is a “fantasy” of Cliff’s mind. You said there’s examples of where people can’t tell the difference but you didn’t share them. What’s the point in responding to that if the information is all over this forum?
Click to expand...
In fact I don’t really mind aliasing as it’s very difficult to ear objectively, BUT FAS stated that ML for amp capturing was introducing a lot of aliasing (not much as FM3 with same high gain drive+amp setting in my experience) so THAT was the reason they won’t offer that option (ML capture block) despite FM line DSP can easily read and train them, and NAM is completely open source, as well as the tech used (mainly meta and Google open source assets)
That was just a question, no more. Of course I would love to ditch ToneX and NAM to have everything backed in a new product from FAS because they are the best on the market.
But I’m a also a guy who ask Apple why they won’t offer MacOS boot option on M4 iPad Pros…
 
Rex said:
A touch screen is a recipe for disaster in a live situation. There are things that can happen — sweaty hands or a spilled drink, for instance — that can render a touch screen temporarily useless. Then what are you going to do?
Click to expand...
Respectfully, that’s been a total non-factor for us so far. My buddy is using a Fender TMP and we’ve played everything from bars to outdoor fairs to school fund raisers. A little rain, sweat, or drink drippage hasn’t stalled the show. A full on pour-the-beer-into-my-pedal might facilitate a stop/wipe down/restart, yes, but I’d do the same for my FM9T.

The interface on the TMP is next level. If it were incorporated into the FM series, I’d swap to it in a heartbeat. Seems a “touch screen defeat” switch would be possible if it proved an issue. Can’t say it never would, but in my real-world experience so far, it’s been roadworthy.
 
Admin M@ said:
Fractal Audio also invented Scenes, which in one form or another are standard on many products today.
Click to expand...
Matt you are the last guy I'd ever want to debate with.... But I'm not sure I'd agree with this.

Rocktron had their MIDI switching system back in the 80s that did this (I can't remember the name of the product), but my Bass player used it.
You had a rack where you would plug in like 8 pedals, and then use their midi pedal to set up presets that determined the state of each pedal (for each preset) - I mean, that's exactly what Scenes is doing in the Fractal. They may have called them Presets in the Rocktron, but it was doing what Scenes does. I believe you could also include an amp channel switch in your Preset/Scene on the Rocktron.
Pick a Preset - it turns on/off the pedals that you programmed for that Preset.
 
Rick said:
Respectfully, that’s been a total non-factor for us so far. My buddy is using a Fender TMP and we’ve played everything from bars to outdoor fairs to school fund raisers. A little rain, sweat, or drink drippage hasn’t stalled the show. A full on pour-the-beer-into-my-pedal might facilitate a stop/wipe down/restart, yes, but I’d do the same for my FM9T.

The interface on the TMP is next level. If it were incorporated into the FM series, I’d swap to it in a heartbeat. Seems a “touch screen defeat” switch would be possible if it proved an issue. Can’t say it never would, but in my real-world experience so far, it’s been roadworthy.
Click to expand...
The capability to be next level is there. The outdated visuals and implementation is gross though. Take up a whole screen for a 3 knob amp, zoom back out, take up the whole screen for a 3 knob pedal, back out. Only thing I would steal design wise from the TMP and QC would be the rotary encoder switches.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom