Really dont get it ! why the downsize when there is more options.

With a unit with X amount of capabilities you may need tons of Buttons\switches. But unit that can perform many multitasking operations within one button, maybe you do not need so many stinkin buttons.....Just sayin :)

I've been holding my thoughts about the new FC's until more information is released. But honestly my first impression was why are there so few buttons? Having "layers" doesn't thrill me (used them with other controllers). But the ability to hold a switch to change it's function may be a game changer for me. To have one of - if not the most versatile pieces of gear on the planet and then be limited by it's remote control ability makes no sense. But again, I don't have all of the details yet so I'll wait to see how things work.

At any rate, I won't be buying a new Axe III or FC anytime soon as I upgraded to the XL+ and MFC MKIII during Christmas. It may be another year or more for me. A lot can and will change in a year. \m/
 
I just can't get worked up about this topic. I will probably just continue to use the FCB1010 with the III, the same as I have with the II, unless I can get the FC12 for roughly the same price as a Helix Control (which doesn't sound like it will happen). The MFC 101 was just to much for me, not only in terms of price, but because I don't want to lug some giant thing around that I will only use half of.
 
I agree that they should have stuck with a similar design to the MFC. I do like that everything is assignable through the Axe FX and and the button layouts can change per preset, the the fact is, if you want to set up a preset so that the first 4 or 5 buttons work like channels on an amp and then have the rest of the buttons set up like stompboxes, you will have to do more tap dancing to get the same functionality as the MFC. I love fractal and they have really changed the game. They made a mistake with this button layout though. If people wanted something smaller, they should have made a pedal comparable in size to the MFC and made a second smaller version if there was some demand for that. I dont want to have to pay for 2 separate units to get the same functionality of 1 or have to carry around 2 separate untis. It will be unneccesary and expensive, guaranteed.
 
I just can't get worked up about this topic. I will probably just continue to use the FCB1010 with the III, the same as I have with the II, unless I can get the FC12 for roughly the same price as a Helix Control (which doesn't sound like it will happen). The MFC 101 was just to much for me, not only in terms of price, but because I don't want to lug some giant thing around that I will only use half of.

Me Too, but a LF+jr+. It's all overkill for me but, hey, thats part of being here Right :) I used my LF+jr+ with all my axefx's. One point used a midimate. Always got the job done for me.
But, of course, it would be so cool to have one of the FC's. We'll see....................
 
My sincere apologies to those who those who find fault with the FC-6 and FC-12: Because they were clearly designed with ME in mind. And I suspect I'm not the only one.

My suggestion to those can't live with the configurable flexibliity of the FC-6, FC-12 or multiples thereof: Is to design and build your own - perhaps an Arduino platform would be convenient?
 
I'm planning on something like this...

FC-12:
Lower Row: 6 Scenes Per preset
Upper Row: Tap Tempo, "Swell Toggle," and some other FX toggles that vary per preset
External FS 1 & 2: Preset Up/Down
External FS 3 & 4: "Freeze" (momentary, while pressed) and maybe a "Ricochet" Whammy Effect (also momentary)

My "Swell Toggle" is something I do on a lot of programs where my volume pedal works two different ways, depending on the "Swell Toggle" state. Normally my volume pedal goes between a "Rhythm Version" and a "Lead Version" of whatever Scene (amp channel) I happen to be on. But when I turn "Swell Toggle" on, another Volume Block and a thick pre-amp Reverb block are activated. The upshot is that when "Swell Toggle" is on, my Rhythm-to-Lead volume pedal turns into a spacey Volume Swell pedal instead.

I may not need anything else for controlling the Axe-FX III.

I am contemplating some experiments with looping using Ableton Live, allowing different time-synched loops for Verses, Choruses, and Bridges. If that starts happening I'll want to add buttons for various Live-esque Loop Functions...
- Start the Verse Loop on the next down-beat
- Start the Chorus Loop on the next down-beat
- Start the Bridge Loop on the next down-beat
- Immediately stop current loop
- Stop playing current loop when finished / Play current loop continuously

...but I'm not sure it makes sense to do any of that through an FC-6. I might use some other 3rd-party footcontroller, since the advantage of the FC-series (easy integration with Axe-FX III) wouldn't be relevant when controlling Ableton Live.

(But if anybody can think of some advantage to using the FC-6 for that, I'll consider it.)
 
Im going to buy the Axe3, but why are FAS only making a fc 6 and fc12 we have Mfc17 (+ 4 Function) now
and if they are suggesting just getting a fc12 and fc6 should they not make one without the Led no need to pay for 2 with LED Panel (which are very expensive)
unfortunately RMJ Mastermind gt22 are not really an option here in Denmark when you calculate shipping and import tax it comes to around $2600

I paid that much for my RJM GT/16 and there is simply no looking back. It smokes everything else and took no time at all to get up and running. It's the best $2400 I've ever spent. Absolute zero regrets. Yes it was a lot of money and i was very tentative about spending that much but I am so glad I did.
 
My sincere apologies to those who those who find fault with the FC-6 and FC-12: Because they were clearly designed with ME in mind. And I suspect I'm not the only one.

My suggestion to those can't live with the configurable flexibliity of the FC-6, FC-12 or multiples thereof: Is to design and build your own - perhaps an Arduino platform would be convenient?


Who was this designed for then? There has to be some "me" out there that this was made specifically for. There is also no way that this functions better for MORE people than the MFC did. By nature of having almost HALF the buttons, it cant; even if you can change the layout which is a function that uses up precious button space just to do. It will also probably be as expensive, if not more than the MFC was. My guess is that Fractal wanted to stay competative with the Helix in terms of visually how the controller works and the functionality in terms of having digital read outs for each switch, and they sacrificed in size to save on the price tag. All of this so people will percieve it as a better switch than the Helix, when it will ultimately be inferior to the MFC.
 
Who was this designed for then? There has to be some "me" out there that this was made specifically for. There is also no way that this functions better for MORE people than the MFC did. By nature of having almost HALF the buttons, it cant; even if you can change the layout which is a function that uses up precious button space just to do. It will also probably be as expensive, if not more than the MFC was. My guess is that Fractal wanted to stay competative with the Helix in terms of visually how the controller works and the functionality in terms of having digital read outs for each switch, and they sacrificed in size to save on the price tag. All of this so people will percieve it as a better switch than the Helix, when it will ultimately be inferior to the MFC.

For anyone who doesn’t need all the MFC buttons (my guess would be most people), a smaller controller would be beneficial. For many people using scenes as opposed to emulating boards with stomp boxes, extra buttons are just a waste. Apart from the visual stuff, the new controllers can be functionally way superior as well.
 
Who was this designed for then? There has to be some "me" out there that this was made specifically for. There is also no way that this functions better for MORE people than the MFC did. By nature of having almost HALF the buttons, it cant; even if you can change the layout which is a function that uses up precious button space just to do. It will also probably be as expensive, if not more than the MFC was. My guess is that Fractal wanted to stay competative with the Helix in terms of visually how the controller works and the functionality in terms of having digital read outs for each switch, and they sacrificed in size to save on the price tag. All of this so people will percieve it as a better switch than the Helix, when it will ultimately be inferior to the MFC.

Dude, with all due respect, you're getting yourself worked up into a lather about something you've not seen, touched, or used. And adding conjecture about pricing doesn't help your argument, either.
 
Dude, with all due respect, you're getting yourself worked up into a lather about something you've not seen, touched, or used. And adding conjecture about pricing doesn't help your argument, either.

Oh Im not getting worked up at all, just being realistic. I dont need to use it, theyve already explained how it works and we can visually see how many buttons there are. There are no mysteries with these foot controllers.
 
Oh Im not getting worked up at all, just being realistic. I dont need to use it, theyve already explained how it works and we can visually see how many buttons there are. There are no mysteries with these foot controllers.

I’ve read everything they’ve said about these controllers so far and yet I have no idea about how they work.
 
Oh Im not getting worked up at all, just being realistic. I dont need to use it, theyve already explained how it works and we can visually see how many buttons there are. There are no mysteries with these foot controllers.
You do understand that each button can have multiple functions, right?

You can change Layout with NO extra buttons. If you consider only that every button can have (at least) two functions, then the FC12 has 24 without changing layout. That's already better than the MFC.

Because all the brains are in the Axe Fx III, I expect a lot of advanced capability will be included as well. Those features could potentially replace other "dedicated button" settings from the MFC.

I'd suggest reserving judgment until they are actually released.
 
I wonder, tap, double tap, hold 3ms, hold 6ms. All 4 could be a function on each button x6 or x12 or...
No limit.
 
You do understand that each button can have multiple functions, right?

You can change Layout with NO extra buttons. If you consider only that every button can have (at least) two functions, then the FC12 has 24 without changing layout. That's already better than the MFC.

Because all the brains are in the Axe Fx III, I expect a lot of advanced capability will be included as well. Those features could potentially replace other "dedicated button" settings from the MFC.

I'd suggest reserving judgment until they are actually released.
Yeah, we have press and hold buttons on the mfc like hold for tuner or hold for looper and its obnoxious and not good for live use. I, and many others, would much prefer dedicated buttons like the mfc far more than the new switching. I feel like some people genuinely like the new idea, but A LOT of people are such fanboys that they refuse to be critical of any decision that fractal makes. I have talked to A LOT of people that are unhappy with the decision for a much smaller pedal and thats also apparent on this message board. They should have kept one that was the same size and then a smaller one, not a smaller one and then an even smaller one than that. It makes no sense.
 
Im going to buy the Axe3, but why are FAS only making a fc 6 and fc12 we have Mfc17 (+ 4 Function) now
and if they are suggesting just getting a fc12 and fc6 should they not make one without the Led no need to pay for 2 with LED Panel (which are very expensive)
unfortunately RMJ Mastermind gt22 are not really an option here in Denmark when you calculate shipping and import tax it comes to around $2600

Because they DO more with less. That’s why. Don’t think of it as downsizing...think of it as being more efficient.
 
Back
Top Bottom