Sounds like you have not understood all the feedback the guys have been giving you in your thread. To put it very bluntly, if you have taken the decision to upgrade 4 major releases (FW16 - Quantum) then you also need to have made the decision that you will need to rebuild some presets. If you do not want to redo any of your presets then please do not update. I updated to Quantum and found that it was a lot faster to dial in amazing tones for my presets, and the results were so much better so I was happy to review my presets and decide whether to update them or not (funnily most of mine did not need updating - I use mostly the AC30).
Basically, if you have left it for this long and you are not interested in doing any manual work to your presets then please do not update and subsequently post angry threads when it is you who does not want to put the effort in. I'm not having a go at you, I'm just saying the facts to hopefully help you to make a decision.
Wow. So let me get this straight, the release notes say, 'If you upgrade multiple firmware versions, you must rebuild your presets."?
Oh and if you're reluctant to do it, the forum will all pile on and make you feel like shit.
This attitude is precisely why some players are down on this forum and down on firmware upgrades that 'require' you to start over.
I would rather have a root canal than rebuild my patches entirely from scratch.
Maybe some of you guys are can dial up 4 to 5 patches that cover every nuance from scratch in an afternoon and go play 4-5 gigs in a row and have it all just be perfect...good for you!!
I can't.
No piece of software that I use professionally requires me to remix a song because of a new version, or re-edit the audio, or re-edit a picture.
I'm busy booking shows and learning material, traveling to gigs, running sound, dealing with clubs, hell, performing! I don't need or want a ground zero reboot every time a new upgrade comes out. And throngs of fanboys on this board are never going to get me to agree that it is simply standard operating procedure that I have to start fresh every time I want bug fixes or new features. I bought the unit for it's stability and upgradability. They are not mutually exclusive to one another. No where in the marketing material or manuals does it say this is consistent requirement. The whole, 'no one is putting a gun to your head to upgrade' is such a bullshit cop out too. Who doesn't want quality to improve? Who doesn't want better stability? Bug fixes? It is not a requirement in the software industry that upgrading requires one to change their workflow or to start over. It just isn't. I could site countless examples from the pieces of software I use to make a living that are meticulous about their upgrades that don't hose you simply cause you want a new rev that fixes bugs or adds some new shit. It's like Adobe saying, download the latest Lightroom, but BTW, you'll have to re-edit every photo you've ever edited and start over. They'd get crucified. Sure, occasionally, a leap has to be made to get to the next level. (different system requirements, RAM etc) But it shouldn't be expected and taken as the norm. It absolutely should not. It should be considered very carefully.
I love my AXE-FX, I had 3 of them at one point. I've spend a lot of hard earned money on them, and I've gigged a shit ton on them. But as someone who's had to deal with shit on stage go wrong quite a number of times from upgrades, it sucks. But the argument of, ' if you don't want issues, then don't upgrade." is simply wrong.
If it was right, then we'd still all be on vers 1.01, wouldn't we???