Fractal Talk

[JiveTurkey]

So today I put a patch together on the front interface.

The more I think about it, the more I'm starting to think that the difficulty really comes down to having to build shunts yourself. The thing that Helix and Quad Cortex do for you that you have to do yourself on Axe3, is build the actual signal path + routing.

The time spent doing that stuff is the issue. I don't really think it has much to do with scrolling through pages of parameters.

Despite that, it sounds absolutely fantastic.

Shunts and footswitching.

 

[jellodog]

I have a question for front panel experts:

Suppose you have a delay block in a parallel path. In the row above the main row with the amp block in it, for example.

Using the front panel, I could not for the life of me work out how to move the delay block down to the main row below, inline with the amp block.

Couldn't even find any reference to this scenario in the manual. Had to go back to the desktop editor.

 

[JiveTurkey]

I have a question for front panel experts:

Suppose you have a delay block in a parallel path. In the row above the main row with the amp block in it, for example.

Using the front panel, I could not for the life of me work out how to move the delay block down to the main row below, inline with the amp block.

Couldn't even find any reference to this scenario in the manual. Had to go back to the desktop editor.

Page over to the "Tools" tab and move block down?

 

[Orvillain]

I have a question for front panel experts:

Suppose you have a delay block in a parallel path. In the row above the main row with the amp block in it, for example.

Using the front panel, I could not for the life of me work out how to move the delay block down to the main row below, inline with the amp block.

Couldn't even find any reference to this scenario in the manual. Had to go back to the desktop editor.

There's a dedicated page for performing operations on blocks, like moving them around and stuff like that. I really don't like it tbh.

 

[TravisG406]

I have a question for front panel experts:

Suppose you have a delay block in a parallel path. In the row above the main row with the amp block in it, for example.

Using the front panel, I could not for the life of me work out how to move the delay block down to the main row below, inline with the amp block.

Couldn't even find any reference to this scenario in the manual. Had to go back to the desktop editor.

Placement of Drive/Effects blocks on Layout Page!

Glad to be a new member! Although some things seem to be straight forward on the Ultra, I am a little confused on how to place say a (Drive),(Compressor),etc. on a given preset. Say for instance a preset has in the layout page, Wah-Comp-Amp-Cab-and I want to put a Drive block before the amp...

forum.fractalaudio.com

 

[jellodog]

Page over to the "Tools" tab and move block down?

Wow! Why couldn't I find that in manual?

Might be the problem of not knowing specfically what I was looking for in terms of feature names

 

[JiveTurkey]

Wow! Why couldn't I find that in manual?

Might be the problem of not knowing specfically what I was looking for in terms of feature names

or it's not intuitive but I don't give af because the sound obviously

 

[jellodog]

Honestly, I didn't realise that tools page was there for moving blocks. This has made a huge difference! I do mostly edit amp and cab settings on the device when I can't be bothered connecting my laptop and I just want to (mostly) play.

Just need "undo" now; to stop myself from wrecking presets on the fly when a front panel button push goes wrong

 

[Rock Chalk]

It just occurred to me that imo, instead of an Axe IV, what we need is an Axe-Fx III "High Power" model.

Since, again imo, the current model sounds so good, there really isn't the need for a whole other version. Just give me a "high power" model with enough power to run everything I want to run, at whatever quality I want, in one preset, without hitting the 80% mark.

Maybe throw in some more memory space for having more on-board Dyna-Cabs, Control Switches, and a blocks library.

I'd be down for something like that.......at a premium price of course......sign me up!

 

[JiveTurkey]

It just occurred to me that imo, instead of an Axe IV, what we need is an Axe-Fx III "High Power" model.

Since, again imo, the current model sounds so good, there really isn't the need for a whole other version. Just give me a "high power" model with enough power to run everything I want to run, at whatever quality I want, in one preset, without hitting the 80% mark.

Maybe throw in some more memory space for having more on-board Dyna-Cabs, Control Switches, and a blocks library.

I'd be down for something like that.......at a premium price of course......sign me up! View attachment 29240

I am going to gig the III next week. My gigging patch is at like 81%. I am a little worried I am trying to live too dangerously

 

[jellodog]

I am going to gig the III next week. My gigging patch is at like 81%. I am a little worried I am trying to live too dangerously

I'm kinda amazed that you've used that much power. Is this the One Preset To Rule Them All?

 

[JiveTurkey]

I'm kinda amazed that you've used that much power. Is this the One Preset To Rule Them All?

So I am generally good with 3 switches on the FM. Problem is we've added a few songs and they require some extra FX. I have a template built up right now. I swap out the special FX for each song as need. So I have a JVM with rotary block, flanger and tremolo. I can't remember the cost for reverb but I am betting I could turn down that reverb quality given how often I will end up turning it on and get below the 81% level fairly easily.

Biggest adjustment is ALWAYS how to do the gd switching SCENE IGNORE SCENE REVERT JUST USE SNAPSHOTS OH JUST USE 139 PRESETS. So much UGH in this transition.

 

[jellodog]

@JiveTurkey You probably know this already, but by removing unnecessary shunts you can pull down your % CPU usage to a more desirable safety margin.

You can shave off somewhere between 0.1 & 0.2% per unused shunt.

 

[Orvillain]

 

[iaresee]

So today I put a patch together on the front interface.

The more I think about it, the more I'm starting to think that the difficulty really comes down to having to build shunts yourself. The thing that Helix and Quad Cortex do for you that you have to do yourself on Axe3, is build the actual signal path + routing.

The time spent doing that stuff is the issue. I don't really think it has much to do with scrolling through pages of parameters.

Despite that, it sounds absolutely fantastic.

It's been a while, but if memory serves: you can hold down ENTER to have it quickly create shunts across a row of blocks.

Update: yea, just hold down enter and it'll join up the blocks in the row.

 

[Orvillain]

It's been a while, but if memory serves: you can hold down ENTER to have it quickly create shunts across a row of blocks.

Yup. Did that. It's just a bit.... well.... it isn't too fluid. I can deal with it. But I think a lot of people find this kind of thing the big problem.

It is a thing of 'it works' versus 'it is fun to use'

 

[Whizzinby]

The fixed QC routing is much easier, but only because you can’t do shit like route row 1 to row 2 or row 3 to row 4. You can split the signal the within the processor pair, but not route directly to it. (Or at least couldn’t when I owned it)

That’s where 4x8 grid becomes claustrophobic vs the 137x2145 on the Frac stuff. I kind of get the design choice now, because to have the ability to route to that level of complexity, it’s tough to have a fixed signal route.

 

[la szum]

Oh it is perfectly acceptable. It is just a design decision or philosophy difference between the others, that I think leads towards the UX complaints that often pop up.

Basically - Fractal expect you to pull up your big boy pants, which is quite a large expectation it turns out... whereas the others know that we're all drivelling idiots who need help at every turn, and so they do that coz they want our beautiful delicious money coins.

Haha!!

Isn't that part of the inherent issue with any UI? The easier we make it the dumber
and more incompetent we become as humans??

Sure. We can argue that offloading some of that mental capacity to machines allows
us freedom to pursue other activities. Like porn and parlays. :lol

Take GPS and mobile tracking. The sense of direction and spatial recognition that our
species cultivated over thousands upon thousands of generations is being squandered
as people rely on the machines and tech to do the work for us.

And forget about expecting people to be able to read and locate themselves on a 2D map.
East/West/North/South are increasingly archaic for people with access to the tech that
makes the 4 directions irrelevant and unrecognizable to us.

Essentially, making everything easier conspires to make us fatter, lazier, dumber, and increasingly
ineffective in meatspace. Unless we make a conscious choice to counteract the trend in our
own life.

 

[State of Epicicity]

I am going to gig the III next week. My gigging patch is at like 81%. I am a little worried I am trying to live too dangerously

Man, that is too close for comfort for me. May the wind be at your back!

 

[Foxmeister]

It just occurred to me that imo, instead of an Axe IV, what we need is an Axe-Fx III "High Power" model.

I think the Axe-FXIII is already absurdly more powerful than the competition and creating a unit that is even more powerful benefits such a vanishingly small number of use cases that it probably simply isn't worth it.

YMMV of course