• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Scaling?

nznat

Inspired
Trying the new axe edit, and yet its the same as the last one, i.e. it does not scale at all. Or at least not that i can get it too. It stays as a square in the middle of the screen. I cant find a setting to make it scale as promised to any size or resolution screen. I have a 1440P 16.9 screen 27 inch, and yet this axe edit still is identical as the axe fx 2 version, it sits in the middle as a square and will not go 16.9 wide.

am i missing a setting?
 

Brock

Experienced
On the original Axe Edit, you just need to grab the lower right corner and you can scale it to any size you want. Is this design aspect not preserved?
 

nznat

Inspired
On the original Axe Edit, you just need to grab the lower right corner and you can scale it to any size you want. Is this design aspect not preserved?

yeah you can grab both versions and pull them out, but it will only pull out or go "so-called" full screen mode, only out into a square (that is not full screen - so you cannot see any more desktop). 99% of all screens these days are wide screen 16.9 scale or close, and yet this axe edit like that last one only went out to a box in the middle of the current screens. So its not scaling any different than the last one. Many people want full screen so they can see no desktop at all.
 

lqdsnddist

Axe-Master
I don't see how they'd figure out what extra knobs etc to add if you stretched it out wider. I can see the need to scale it while keeping the size ratio, but if you have the ability to scale without keeping the same ratio what would be the point if you couldn't display more actual content ?

I don't see whats so bad about seeing some desktop.....

Do you just want it to have some "filler" space on the sides if you make it fill a 16:9 ratio ?
 

nznat

Inspired
I don't see how they'd figure out what extra knobs etc to add if you stretched it out wider. I can see the need to scale it while keeping the size ratio, but if you have the ability to scale without keeping the same ratio what would be the point if you couldn't display more actual content ?

I don't see whats so bad about seeing some desktop.....

Do you just want it to have some "filler" space on the sides if you make it fill a 16:9 ratio ?

good point, but pointing this out, as maybe there could be a lot more on screen controls for the current preset if we could use all the screen instead of being stuck in that little square as it is now. We would be able to adjust a lot of things without going to different tabs to get to other controls, from which we all do constantly to get to those controls.
 

Pwrmac7600

Power User
good point, but pointing this out, as maybe there could be a lot more on screen controls for the current preset if we could use all the screen instead of being stuck in that little square as it is now. We would be able to adjust a lot of things without going to different tabs to get to other controls, from which we all do constantly to get to those controls.
The knobs on each tab aren't laid out based on what fits on the screen. They are laid out and organized by what functions they serve, so each tab is organized by function. Stretching the screen and adding more knobs to the tabs would take away from that organization and probably start to cause confusion as the where things are.
 

yek

Legend!
Trying the new axe edit, and yet its the same as the last one, i.e. it does not scale at all.

Yes, it does scale. But you may have interpreted that in another way.

The old Axe-Edit used bitmapped graphics, which looked awful when enlarged on hi-res screens.

The new AE III is scalable, meaning that all its graphic elements adhere to the resolution of the display, which gives it a very smooth appearance on hi-res screens.

For an app as Axe-Edit it's important that it has a fixed layout. A fully modular design would be nice for some but very confusing for many others.
 

lqdsnddist

Axe-Master
It would be nice to have more parameters on a large wide screen, but it also seems confusing if different controls would be in different page tabs based on the size of someone’s aspect ratio, scaling etc

Like spring reverb controls for example. They have their own tab, but if someone stretches their screen wider and they’d show up on another tabs settings it would be kind of confusing telling people what to adjust and where to find it.

Seems like tough to implement and also would make support issues tougher if end users all had different controls in different places

I guess they could maybe make a dedicated wide screen interface with less page tabs, but it would again complicate things a bit

As is the graphics at least look good at any size, and with the same aspect ratio for all, we all have the same control pages and layout
 

Kamil Kisiel

Power User
Writing documentation / showing screenshots of a program with dynamic layout of controls would be an absolute nightmare.
 

Tahoebrian5

Fractal Fanatic
It's not a bad idea. Much of the software I use has fully customizable tool bars. Instead of tabs, when stretched it could be blocks of tools. I'm not really pushing for one way or the other but it is pretty common on software
 

JustinAiken

Inspired
I have a 34" ultrawide hooked up to my Mac - yeah, it may not take up my whole screen, but it looks nice scaled up to max vertical resolution. I'm happy with the scaling
 

bradlake

Axe-Master
more importantly to this discussion, as I discovered yesterday, the AXE EDIT III beta seems to be very picky about which monitor it is running on in a multi-monitor Mac setup (at least with my iMac Pro), many of the UI functions fail if run in a secondary screen.
 

Rick

Fractal Fanatic
Scales just fine (and looks damn good, to boot) on my iMac 27. Not full screen, but about half, and crystal clear. Appearance is crisp in all sizes here.
 

cobbler

Fractal Fanatic
more importantly to this discussion, as I discovered yesterday, the AXE EDIT III beta seems to be very picky about which monitor it is running on in a multi-monitor Mac setup (at least with my iMac Pro), many of the UI functions fail if run in a secondary screen.

I have a Mac Pro with 3 monitors and am not seeing this behavior. Do you have a specific set of steps to reproduce so I can double check?
 

Jono Bacon

Inspired
To be clear, I have no issue with Axe Edit III - it looks great on my machines, but I take small issue with:

For an app as Axe-Edit it's important that it has a fixed layout. A fully modular design would be nice for some but very confusing for many others.

This isn't really true.

Many, many applications have been built that can effectively scale and reorder different parts of the window based on the size of the viewport. The web increasingly works like this in a responsive design context to reorder and resize components for different screens (e.g. desktops, tablets, phones).

I don't see anything particularly special about Axe Edit III in this regard. As one such example, on super hi res screens you could arguably display multiple pages of controls which could make tweaking patches even easier.

This is more of a question of resourcing for FAS. Axe Edit is one component in a broader set of efforts (the hardware, other products etc), so even if it is possible to have a much broader implementation of Axe Edit that can more intelligently scale and reorder, is this the best use of FAS's time? I am not sure it is.
 
Top Bottom