DLC86
Roadie
- Messages
- 394
It's still a dynamount but they made their custom control software for it
Axe III dyna-cabs VS Helix VS NeuralDSP
- Thread starter Orvillain
- Start date
MirrorProfiles
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,231
IK did something similar for AT5:
Kudos to them for (as they claim) capturing all speakers within a cab, and all around the speaker rather than just half of a diameter across the middle. Their software (as usual) is way more convoluted than it needs to be though.
STL also using a dynamount with custom software (presumably because it’s much easier to automate than capture sweeps+moving the mic manually). that’s at least been the case since Tonality Lasse Lammert (& Josh Middleton) and Amphub.
Definitely plenty of other companies who’ve done similar over the years too.
Kudos to them for (as they claim) capturing all speakers within a cab, and all around the speaker rather than just half of a diameter across the middle. Their software (as usual) is way more convoluted than it needs to be though.
STL also using a dynamount with custom software (presumably because it’s much easier to automate than capture sweeps+moving the mic manually). that’s at least been the case since Tonality Lasse Lammert (& Josh Middleton) and Amphub.
Definitely plenty of other companies who’ve done similar over the years too.
Jarick
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,350
For me I don’t want multiple speakers per cab and 360 degrees of captures. It’s too much to deal with. Much happier just to be able to sweep across one good sounding speaker from center to edge.
Nice for some people to have the option I guess, but I’d be curious if the juice is worth the squeeze? Even for pro studio work, I’d think if you’re doing digital you’ll probably get ballpark tone and use EQ to fit into the mix as needed right?
Nice for some people to have the option I guess, but I’d be curious if the juice is worth the squeeze? Even for pro studio work, I’d think if you’re doing digital you’ll probably get ballpark tone and use EQ to fit into the mix as needed right?
MirrorProfiles
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,231
I get why some people are happy with less, but with a good interface it doesn’t really complicate things any more. With more speakers/mics/positions to choose from you don’t have to settle for “nearly there+EQ”, you can do it just like you would in the studio.
I really don’t gel with the whole “mix ready” IR approach, it’s so context dependent and I’d rather have a clean slate that’s as close to a studio experience as possible. It’s so frustrating when you can hear something is nearly there but you don’t quite have the options on hand.
Things are definitely moving in the right direction in this regard, albeit each company has its own compromises in approach.
the swede
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,180
Everything and nothing is good and bad for everyone and no one…
I’m one of those few that isn’t helped by more options. Preferably as little as possible and also told what to do. Which is kinda hard when one wants to use a modeler. It’s easy for people that doesn’t have my brain to say: “dude, just get a preset, just use this and that block and play your damn guitar”
Doesn’t work like that. If there’s an option, I will 100% tweak that to death.
Tuning the guitar is probably the most creative process I can pull off…
Of course I am exaggerating this… but it’s kinda true.
I tried once to use an Iridium for amp/cab tones only just to end up tweaking the fuck out of it for three months resulting in the realization that no matter what i use I will always do this… to myself. Im really doubting my choice of hobby
MirrorProfiles
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,231
There's definitely a time and a place for compromise, and likewise, there's equally valid reasons to demand all the options and bells and whistles. One doesn't negate the other. Presets and the amp knob style things work perfectly for some people, and for certain tasks its perfect. Im firmly in the other side, I want to be able to push the limits of what digital can offer us.
Everything and nothing is good and bad for everyone and no one…
I’m one of those few that isn’t helped by more options. Preferably as little as possible and also told what to do. Which is kinda hard when one wants to use a modeler. It’s easy for people that doesn’t have my brain to say: “dude, just get a preset, just use this and that block and play your damn guitar”
Doesn’t work like that. If there’s an option, I will 100% tweak that to death.
Tuning the guitar is probably the most creative process I can pull off…
Of course I am exaggerating this… but it’s kinda true.
I tried once to use an Iridium for amp/cab tones only just to end up tweaking the f**k out of it for three months resulting in the realization that no matter what i use I will always do this… to myself. Im really doubting my choice of hobby
This is probably currently the greatest difficulties modelers have today.
Catering to the many options some people want, while making it easy enough for people that want it simple. This can be solved with good UX but not many, if any, of the current companies do this.
Some companies have solved the making it easy but don't nail all the options for those that want that, and some companies have nailed reverse so they're great at having tons of options but it's not easy for people that want it simple.
I'm hoping that with the introduction of DynaCabs, Fractal is beginning to focus more on UX and that this is a new direction of the company. The sounds, algorithms and options are all already great, now we just need a better interface to truly make it best in class!
the swede
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,180
I think (just my opinion) Line 6 did this good with the Pod Go interface and overall package. But it’s still tons of options inside that can be daunting for the beginner. They should’ve cut down the content and take the beating from us nerds about it. Either way as Eric has said himself, they take bashings for not having an easier than Helix unit, then take bashings anyway from us for making an easier than Helix product
But the name Pod would indicate it’s intent, but we see that everythings inside so we automatically view it as a Helix.I don’t think it’s a problem, fractal has always pointed towards the more “pro” segment and their UX reflects it. There’s no “I’m a beginner and want to get away easy” stuff there. I suspect there’ll never be with Fractal.
Lysander
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,891
But, those two are not mutually exclusive. A better UI for Fractal would benefit everyone - including pro musicians, who i'd wager thinker with their hardware less than your average bedroom player, TGF-poster do.
The main reason i don't currently own a Fractal product right now is the UI. Wonderful, wonderful sounding boxes... but editing them is a real chore. And it's not that i didn't understand the workflow, i just didn't care after a while.
I think (just my opinion) Line 6 did this good with the Pod Go interface and overall package. But it’s still tons of options inside that can be daunting for the beginner. They should’ve cut down the content and take the beating from us nerds about it. Either way as Eric has said himself, they take bashings for not having an easier than Helix unit, then take bashings anyway from us for making an easier than Helix product
I don’t think it’s a problem, fractal has always pointed towards the more “pro” segment and their UX reflects it. There’s no “I’m a beginner and want to get away easy” stuff there. I suspect there’ll never be with Fractal.
I don't get this sentiment.
You think just because it's "pro" it needs to have a complicated interface?
Good UX knows how to combine lots of options while keeping it simple to the users.
Fractal is currently at the top - but the competition is getting closer in terms of sound, at least for the vast majority of users.
When all modelers sound great, the main differentiator will be how you interact with and use the modeler. If Fractal is keeping their interface complicated and geared towards pros, they might start losing customers - at the very least they will have it more difficult to get new customers.
And we don't want that.
I'm not saying that will happen today. Or anytime soon. But eventually.
This is my observation as well, that more and more people feels like you just described.
MirrorProfiles
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,231
having advanced options and lots of features, and having a great UI aren't mutually exclusive. I don't feel like every single parameter on a page should be afforded the same prominence on the UI. There's a lot of ways of skinning that cat though, and certainly room for it to get better (or worse) so not exactly easy to do.
the swede
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,180
I agree, you’re absolutely right. I just don’t have any experience with fractal other than what I read in forums and see on the YouTube.
No, I absolutely don’t think that. I didn’t really know it’s complicated (see above comment also). But is it at a “problematic” level I wonder? Again.. I have not used fractal, but seen a lot of it on Leon’s channel and such. He does have a few years with fractal behind himself though.
Agreed!
Lysander
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,891
It's not unusable. But Fractal's UI just pales in comparison with other similar devices; there's 18 front-facing controls which interact in weird ways depending on what you're actually editing. F.ex. Axe-FX III and FM9 have a pushable "Value" knob and a separate "Enter" button, when those two could easily be coalesced into one. "Page" buttons change behavior depending on the current view. Etc etc etc.
I fumbled editing my FM3 constantly, and i never had such issues with, say, Helix.
There's a reason why some never bother editing on-device, and rely exclusively on desktop editors. Fractal's are some of the best i tried.
the swede
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,180
When i think about it… dont think Ive ever seen a video of someone poking around on the units, the editor however is what one see the most of on YouTube. And indeed that editor looks great, and easy to use.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,756
That's true for almost any device with an editor software. It's just much easier to record your computer screen and overlay that on your video than it is to set up your camera to show the onboard UI well.
Foxmeister
Roadie
- Messages
- 840
Rhett Shull has entered the chat!
(Lots of hyperbole here from 7:12 as it isn't anywhere near as "unusable" as he makes out, but it does give you an idea of the on device UI)
Lysander
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,891
I chuckled when John Cordy made a tongue-in-cheek reply to this video, showcasing how easy the AxeFX is to use... and messed up his button presses a good number of times.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,610
I genuinely don't feel like there is all that much difference between Helix and Fractal in real-time use. Fractal has a few cool extras like the performance pages, which makes things a bit easier than Helix - but you have to set it up.
Rhett cites the Kemper as being almost the same as an amp head - which is total bollocks. Real amp heads don't have button hold/press mechanisms to lock settings, load presets, swap effects out, etc.
Personally, I find the Kemper waaaaaay more baffling to use than the Helix or Axe FX III. It seriously baffles me, and the Kemper IS the unit I actually DID use solidly for many years - having owned 6 of them over 11 years, and having made 300+ profiles.
This stuff is very subjective, so this is just my opinion, but if Kemper do a new unit, they seriously need to overhaul their ideas on what fast workflow and intuitiveness are.
Although I think the bottom line is ... soon as you go digital and soon as you expect your unit to be an all in one solution.... you're looking at menus, context switching, functional hierarchies, hidden preferences, parameter-overload-potential, and near limitless possibilities.
Seems to me the complaint is a contradictory one - people want limitless possibilities... but you get ease of use specifically by limiting the possibilities. So... pick your poison and quit bitchin'
Rhett cites the Kemper as being almost the same as an amp head - which is total bollocks. Real amp heads don't have button hold/press mechanisms to lock settings, load presets, swap effects out, etc.
Personally, I find the Kemper waaaaaay more baffling to use than the Helix or Axe FX III. It seriously baffles me, and the Kemper IS the unit I actually DID use solidly for many years - having owned 6 of them over 11 years, and having made 300+ profiles.
This stuff is very subjective, so this is just my opinion, but if Kemper do a new unit, they seriously need to overhaul their ideas on what fast workflow and intuitiveness are.
Although I think the bottom line is ... soon as you go digital and soon as you expect your unit to be an all in one solution.... you're looking at menus, context switching, functional hierarchies, hidden preferences, parameter-overload-potential, and near limitless possibilities.
Seems to me the complaint is a contradictory one - people want limitless possibilities... but you get ease of use specifically by limiting the possibilities. So... pick your poison and quit bitchin'
Foxmeister
Roadie
- Messages
- 840
Performance pages are definitely a good addition to Fractal, and I do think that if Line 6 were to bring the LT and Stomp XLs performance view to all units, they could allow for the user to select which parameters the under screen knobs adjust, but Helix has a few tricks up its own sleeve already:
E.g. dedicated amp button, using capacitive touch on a footswitch to quickly move to any blocks controlled by that footswitch, and pedal edit mode.
Absolutely!
