Easiest to program?
- Thread starter KingsXJJ
- Start date
Mongillo19
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,302
I'd say QC if you don't have much experience in Fractal land. I think the difficulty of the Axe Fx is often blown out of proportion but outside file management, the QC is more straightforward
Edit: make sure the QC (or axe Fx) can program what you want. Probably less of a concern on the Axe Fx but the QC is a tad limited if we are talking midi program and whatnot
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,698
depends on if you want to run Doom or not
FAKA!
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
The latest firmware lets you add custom maps/WAD files for DooM II now. Pretty cool.
the-trooper
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,881
Lysander
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,228
I shit you not, it took me a little while to figure out what was wrong with this one
TSJMajesty
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,805
Ooh ooh, Do SPACE INVADERS!! 
the-trooper
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,881
Wrong?I s**t you not, it took me a little while to figure out what was wrong with this one
JiveTurkey
Goatlord
- Messages
- 16,447
Not wrong.
- Messages
- 9,618
I think a more appropriate question is what kind of presets are you talking about programming? I’d assume there are things that are easier to program on one device than another. Not sure if other units feature templates, but if you make one big ass preset in a Fractal, you can store it as a template, then next time you go to make a big ass preset, you can just load the template and change the amps/effects for what you want different.
If it’s just a couple effects, amp/cab, I’d imagine they’re all fairly easy.
I dunno, I have a different perspective on this stuff, I didn’t find the Fractal stuff hard to program (even from the front panel) but I grew up with 80’s/90’s rack gear and am used to navigating screens like that.
If it’s just a couple effects, amp/cab, I’d imagine they’re all fairly easy.
I dunno, I have a different perspective on this stuff, I didn’t find the Fractal stuff hard to program (even from the front panel) but I grew up with 80’s/90’s rack gear and am used to navigating screens like that.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,371
Quad Cortex is far better for "on-the-fly, tweak as you go" type programming. Literally "tap a thing, turn knobs/switches" which is about as close as I've seen a digital modeler get to the pedalboard experience. I like it a lot.
Yeah, QC doesn't have a computer editor but it also doesn't really need one. An editor software would be convenient mostly in a recording situation where you want to be looking at your computer monitor as you have a DAW and whatnot open.
Even if you use Axe-Edit on Fractal, you most likely are doing something like this: put your pick down (or hold it awkwardly), pick up the mouse, move virtual knobs around, grab your pick again, play and repeat. Unless you use the looper to play some riffs as you tweak.
It's alright, but nothing really beats dedicated hardware knobs. Which happens to be where the Fractal onboard UI tends to fail as the arrangement of its controls isn't particularly great and needs a lot of menu diving and paging around, switching between rows etc. You can learn to live with it, but it's a bit of a chore.
Axe-Edit does offer a lot of convenience features. The Quick build feature lets you add the blocks you need really fast and there is less thinking about how to manage the grid most effectively like you have to on Helix and QC. Channels make it intuitive to switch between models or settings. Parallel routing is straightforward.
Assigning footswitches is easy enough on the QC, but also pretty limited. Fractal on the other hand offers a ton of control but it's often way too complicated for what users mostly want footswitches to do. Helix is by far the best in this regard IMO.
The way I use my Axe-Fx 3 is pretty much the template setup @DrewJD82 describes. Take the time to make one really well setup preset, with footswitching and everything configured then just make variations of that.
I like Fractal less for just experimenting with sounds and effects because the effort to do so requires more than on my pedalboard for example. The more you have preprogrammed and the less you touch the stuff, the better Fractal works for me.
Yeah, QC doesn't have a computer editor but it also doesn't really need one. An editor software would be convenient mostly in a recording situation where you want to be looking at your computer monitor as you have a DAW and whatnot open.
Even if you use Axe-Edit on Fractal, you most likely are doing something like this: put your pick down (or hold it awkwardly), pick up the mouse, move virtual knobs around, grab your pick again, play and repeat. Unless you use the looper to play some riffs as you tweak.
It's alright, but nothing really beats dedicated hardware knobs. Which happens to be where the Fractal onboard UI tends to fail as the arrangement of its controls isn't particularly great and needs a lot of menu diving and paging around, switching between rows etc. You can learn to live with it, but it's a bit of a chore.
Axe-Edit does offer a lot of convenience features. The Quick build feature lets you add the blocks you need really fast and there is less thinking about how to manage the grid most effectively like you have to on Helix and QC. Channels make it intuitive to switch between models or settings. Parallel routing is straightforward.
Assigning footswitches is easy enough on the QC, but also pretty limited. Fractal on the other hand offers a ton of control but it's often way too complicated for what users mostly want footswitches to do. Helix is by far the best in this regard IMO.
The way I use my Axe-Fx 3 is pretty much the template setup @DrewJD82 describes. Take the time to make one really well setup preset, with footswitching and everything configured then just make variations of that.
I like Fractal less for just experimenting with sounds and effects because the effort to do so requires more than on my pedalboard for example. The more you have preprogrammed and the less you touch the stuff, the better Fractal works for me.
Lysander
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,228
Depending on an external editor is what defines a unit as "hard to program" in my book.
Sure, desktop editors are great - and Fractal's is probably the better one available right now. But there's a reason you'll find FAS customers who have never even attempted to edit patches in hardware.
Sure, desktop editors are great - and Fractal's is probably the better one available right now. But there's a reason you'll find FAS customers who have never even attempted to edit patches in hardware.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,371
It's not that users cannot learn to use it from the front panel, it's just more effort. Not because it has more parameters, but because it has a lot of nested views, a lot of different looking views that require just that extra bit of reorientation and so on.
Axe-Edit avoids all that because you always see where you are, what is going on and most of the views are consistent in where each knob is located. It's easily the best software editor on any modeler.
With the QC the annoyances start when trying to manage your content. It's just poorly designed and the 2.0 update hopefully improves that big time. The mobile app for 3rd party content is at best mediocre. The parameter editing on the UI is very user friendly though.
I think as an overall package, Helix is the easiest because the software editor, Helix Native and the front panel UI all work largely the same (for better or worse) so you need to learn just one way of doing things.
Lysander
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,228
+1. Helix is (by far, IMHO) the best designed UI in the business.
The fact that one can relatively easy edit a unit a small as the HX Stomp should not be taken for granted.
