Wish Session-approach (global channels, maybe?)

[Smilzo]

Note: this is a wish for Fractal III, FM9 & FM3, an IV...

I wish we could save, mod, recall all the setting in "sessions".

• the channels are "global" for a session (Instead of 8+8+8+8+ (8x384)... they are stored as needed: 2,3,4,10,....up to 256? 128?) with user name (no needs for global anymore)
• the preset contain more scenes (16? 32?)
• the stored system parameter (ie, the out eq, songs) is useful for different venues/studios/take/...
• a session data include a title, a date and user notes
• there is only one active session, data can be imported/exported to/from another session (say I need a Klon drive tweaked, a song, a preset...)

What do you think? Useful, silly, doable? The main reason is to "tailor" the resources to our needs. Sometimes we use a preset and a few scenes, sometimes we need two preset for a single song. If we could save only what we use, the load will be faster. If we need more than 8 channel or scenes, there we are. If we need more than 384 presets, we can save multiple sessions. If we use only a part of the preset for a recording, we can save them in a session (with data, song list, notes,...) and recall them when needed.

 

[chris]

Where is all this memory coming from?

 

[GlennO]

That would obviously be a better way to make more efficient use of limited resources. In other words, allocation of those limited resources would be more efficient if fixed limits could be more flexible and if the available resources could be viewed as a pool to draw from. There are a lot of challenges with a design like that though. Things like addressing enumerated objects via midi becomes more complex.

Even if the limits were kept as fixed, there is a need for better support of archiving just what you need for a particular gig. You can use backup archives in the meantime, but the idea that you keep everything you'll ever need on the device at all times is getting unwieldy.

 

[Smilzo]

Where is all this memory coming from?

Hi Chris, I Hope these helps to save memory. As of now, we have thousands of channels using memory. I play... let's say... 10? 12? of them, in 3 presets... (I copy some amp channels in all preset, as I like consistent tone... in FM3 there's no global amps... but global amps use memory...). It's up to the user to have one big session (like now) or use clever sessions, with few presets, the use way less memory than now.
If we think about IV or future FM, hopefully ther will be plenty of storage memory.

Like GlennO I think keeping all of our hystory in a Fractal device is a waste. There could be a smarter way (be it usb storage, a PC, so on)!

Maybe the session could store the firmware version, and when we load one we could choose to reinstall even firmware. Just as a option. With the huge number of firmware, this could be useful to same users...

 

[Smilzo]

That would obviously be a better way to make more efficient use of limited resources. In other words, allocation of those limited resources would be more efficient if fixed limits could be more flexible and if the available resources could be viewed as a pool to draw from.

I trust Cliff. It's a tradeoff between flexibility and efficiency.

 

[yek]

Too complicated and too many hurdles. How do you switch between 32 scenes? Preset size grows out of control. Presets from a session are not compatible when imported by another user. Etc.

 

[GlennO]

I trust Cliff. It's a tradeoff between flexibility and efficiency.

Just to be clear, I trust Cliff too . What you're proposing can be done. But, as I mentioned above, that would pose some challenges. Whether it's a worthwhile effort to take on the challenge to do it is all a matter of how valuable you view the the limited resources, e.g. memory.

 

[Dave Merrill]

The Axe III has enough preset storage that having everything you need on board doesn't seem at all unrealistic to me, even if you're playing a bunch of different Broadway shows this week.

Having all that plus the factory presets and a good collection of various authors' commercial offerings does. The factory stuff and purchased packs seem like they should be treated as a library, and kept on disk only, at least once you hit the point where you need to economize.

This is where set lists come in, letting you easily organize multiple different shows out of all the presets you have on board.

 

[unix-guy]

As of now, we have thousands of channels using memory.

Channels use storage when saved as part of a block within a preset.

Channels use memory only when active.

 

[Smilzo]

Channels use storage when saved as part of a block within a preset.

I may be wrong, but 8 slot of memory are reserved each preset, so that address can be computed in easy way.

Channels use storage when saved as part of a block within a preset.

Channels use memory only when active.

Channels use CPU only when active, but they use memory to exist...

 

[Smilzo]

How do you switch between 32 scenes?

32 scenes... in linear? With 3 button function (up, down, go)? With a 16 switch pedalboard with dual layout? I use 6 scene. But many players use more.

Presets from a session are not compatible when imported by another user. Etc.

... why? I don't get it. It's the same as now: global channel, user IR.... A preset should be "placement" of device. If you want all block setting, there could be import "preset+channels". Or preset + channel + scenes. But why the hell do you want a session, without loading a session?

 

[laxu]

Aside from having tons of scenes, a lot of this stuff could be handled on the Axe-Edit end where memory is not a problem as your computer has plenty. Then those settings just need to be installed on the Axe-Fx as you open up a "session". Not sure how long it would take to apply e.g a different set of global settings but as long as it's not something you try to switch on a fly some delay applying them would be acceptable.

 

[Smilzo]

Just to be clear, I trust Cliff too . What you're proposing can be done. But, as I mentioned above, that would pose some challenges. Whether it's a worthwhile effort to take on the challenge to do it is all a matter of how valuable you view the the limited resources, e.g. memory.

Yep, I'm totally with you. I remember the first time I wish some way to engage multiple block in Axefx. Many user wrote "this is silly, undoable, a waste, use your pedalboard". Some user commented "clever, doable, precious, should be done in axefx". Then Cliff, many posts and some years later, come up with "scenes". It was worthwhile! Now we have III, FM3... different needs and ideas than 12 years ago, when recalling "real device" session was a nightmare. Virtual sessions recall could be a breeze. I think, weighting many aspects, it is worthwhile and profitable from Fractal and users!

 

[Greg Ferguson]

We’re not privy to the internals of how the modelers move between presets, but I doubt it does it in a way that is typical of a general-purpose computer loading files. We have hints about what is going on by looking at the size of the .syx files stored on the disk after an export or backup. Even an empty preset is the same number of bytes as a populated preset with one scene or eight, with one block or ten. It’s a fixed-size chunk of data.

The use of fixed numbers of four channels/block, eight scenes/preset allows the system to make rapid switches by moving a known chunk size of memory forward or back, to the next or previous preset. It’s not having to look up or compute the size of the chunk when it’s moving to the next or previous preset, nor is it having do that repeatedly when moving through a bank in n-sized increments. Changes between presets or jumping to preset n that is 10 away is a very simple multiply operation, instead of a read of each preset and parsing of some metadata that describes that particular preset, then jumping to the next. Even if the entire user bank was a pre-computed double-linked list it’d still be slower because it would have to walk the list of links between presets instead of a simple multiply.

I suspect that changing the presets to more allow arbitrary numbers of channels would seriously slow a number of operations on the system and would start a howling from the user base.

 

[Smilzo]

We’re not privy to the internals of how the modelers move between presets, but I doubt it does it in a way that is typical of a general-purpose computer loading files. We have hints about what is going on by looking at the size of the .syx files stored on the disk after an export or backup. Even an empty preset is the same number of bytes as a populated preset with one scene or eight, with one block or ten. It’s a fixed-size chunk of data.

The use of fixed numbers of four channels/block, eight scenes/preset allows the system to make rapid switches by moving a known chunk size of memory forward or back, to the next or previous preset. It’s not having to look up or compute the size of the chunk when it’s moving to the next or previous preset, nor is it having do that repeatedly when moving through a bank in n-sized increments. Changes between presets or jumping to preset n that is 10 away is a very simple multiply operation, instead of a read of each preset and parsing of some metadata that describes that particular preset, then jumping to the next. Even if the entire user bank was a pre-computed double-linked list it’d still be slower because it would have to walk the list of links between presets instead of a simple multiply.

I suspect that changing the presets to more allow arbitrary numbers of channels would seriously slow a number of operations on the system and would start a howling from the user base.

Tnx Greg, I do think preset is fixed length too, thus the problem with "n>>4" channels: kbytes of wasted space for never used channel!
To clarify, the preset will not contain an "arbitrary" number of channel. The channel will be stored in fixed lenght in the "session". So reading and writing them will be similar as now (say 128, or 256, but once in a session). The preset contain scenes, each one contain, within the block, the channel number. No need for variable length or huge preset. When changing scene, the address data start from session and not preset. Simpler than now, simpler than global block, simpler to implement.
The actual function of the Fractal family will be the same: patch, songs, CS, scenes, channel. They will be "embedded" in a clever structure, that none of us think before!
Now we have 384 preset and 4 channels a block: say up to 1536 "unique" channels. I doubt anyone will play all AT ONCE (plus global blocks...), even 128 channels, to me, sounds like silly high!
I wish a smarter-user-friendly way to store and organize data and axefx memory and resource for 1536 channels.

The user experience will be better when the model is similar to reality. You will not "buy" one pedalboards/amp just to save settings... with Fractal we have the opportunity to save preset, like "buying" entire rig. It is useful only if we use them: the session could be a simple way to store and recall only what is needed,

Oh, session could lead to another useful "function": if we could load channels from another (user) session, we could test them in our preset without changing preset at all. It could be single channels or and interval of channels. Interesting idea!

 

[Steffen Bernd]

Hi Chris, I Hope these helps to save memory. As of now, we have thousands of channels using memory. I play... let's say... 10? 12? of them, in 3 presets... (I copy some amp channels in all preset, as I like consistent tone... in FM3 there's no global amps... but global amps use memory...). It's up to the user to have one big session (like now) or use clever sessions, with few presets, the use way less memory than now.
If we think about IV or future FM, hopefully ther will be plenty of storage memory.

Like GlennO I think keeping all of our hystory in a Fractal device is a waste. There could be a smarter way (be it usb storage, a PC, so on)!

Maybe the session could store the firmware version, and when we load one we could choose to reinstall even firmware. Just as a option. With the huge number of firmware, this could be useful to same users...

in my opinion a Tool like AXE FX EDIT should be able to handle this and partition your memory.
I dont need 1000 or more presets .. why .. this could be only in AXE edit (backup - or set load) ..
For me like 100 are enough and suddenly there would be lots of memory ..
If you say not possible. It is definitly. Its just programming.

 

[yek]

There’s no single giant memory pool. The unit uses different types of memory hardware. We can’t tell what’s possible to program and what’s not.