I Gotta Wonder About Fractal's, er, "Perception"

[laxu]

If the UI gets reworked, they'll start bitching about no touch screen. It's always gotta be something.

Nah, most likely there's some people coming out of the woods who say "the old one was so much better!"

No point bitching about a touchscreen on an existing product line. I'd only start bitching about it if the next gen doesn't have it.
I do wish we lived on the timeline where Helix had a touchscreen because that would have made it a thing much sooner than it is. Now the cheaper brands have been leading that movement.

I feel this Fractal gen is pretty much done though. Fw updates have become fewer, and the main reason there are any updates is the work being done to improve the VP4 as it's a new product.

 

[norminal]

Fw updates have become fewer, and the main reason there are any updates is the work being done to improve the VP4 as it's a new product.

I disagree. The last update (FM3 and FM9 still in beta) is pretty substantial. It’s been close to an update a month. Plus, if I’m not mistaken, there are different teams for each device.

 

[laxu]

I disagree. The last update (FM3 and FM9 still in beta) is pretty substantial. It’s been close to an update a month. Plus, if I’m not mistaken, there are different teams for each device.

I've been mainly following Axe-Fx 3 updates and those have become less frequent, or that's how it seems to me.

 

[Tanax]

I don't think most are against improvement.

Most are fucking tired of hearing bullshit about how "useless" it is in the current state.

It's me. I'm "most"

There's a reason for people complaining though. Little to nothing has been done. AxeFX 2 -> AxeFX 3 saw no UX improvements what so ever.

 

[laxu]

There's a reason for people complaining though. Little to nothing has been done. AxeFX 2 -> AxeFX 3 saw no UX improvements what so ever.

When the Axe-Fx 3 released I was so disappointed I went to tube amps for a bit.

But to be fair, the Axe-Fx 3 is in some ways better and in other ways worse.

Good:

• The bigger color screen.
• Knobs under the display. It's easier to mentally map their functions to what they do on screen.
• Level knobs for all outputs.
• Home views.
• Removal of some of the superflous dedicated buttons, and putting those functions under knob presses.

Bad:

• A lot of the underlying UI workflow is the same.
• X/Y buttons were a good way to quickly go between block settings, and worked as quick access to e.g amp and cab block. I wish they had put e.g 4 dedicated channel buttons somewhere instead of that big Axe-Fx 3 logo.
• No more one button access to various setup menus like e.g global settings.
• The under screen knobs are pretty cramped. I don't have big fingers but you can't quite fit your fingers in there comfortably so you twist knobs with your fingers on the top and bottom of the knob.
• Keeping the navigation button layout. It sucks. It's too far away from the display that most of the time nav buttons + big knob is the fastest way to operate the onboard UI. Reaching between nav buttons and under screen knobs requires two hands or a lot of back and forth movement.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

There's a reason for people complaining though. Little to nothing has been done. AxeFX 2 -> AxeFX 3 saw no UX improvements what so ever.

That is simply not true. Performance Pages alone are a MASSIVE improvement.

 

[Sascha Franck]

That is simply not true. Performance Pages alone are a MASSIVE improvement.

Very, very defenitely. Especially when you team them up with global blocks, as this dude is doing here:



I didn't get that far when I had the AFX III borrowed, so I can't tell how well it works, how confusing it might be and what not (maybe the functionality has even been added later on), but when I first watched this video it made me sort of rethink my "no more racks" paradigm.
And in case it was possible with the FM9, I'd certainly rethink it again.

Anyhow, I wish those performance controls (regardless of whether there's global blocks as well or not) were standard in any kind of decent modeler. But unfortunately, reality is as far away from that as it gets (is there even any single other modeler with such a function?).
So yes, FAS has a very strong point in favour of their UI here.

 

[laxu]

Very, very defenitely. Especially when you team them up with global blocks, as this dude is doing here:



I didn't get that far when I had the AFX III borrowed, so I can't tell how well it works, how confusing it might be and what not (maybe the functionality has even been added later on), but when I first watched this video it made me sort of rethink my "no more racks" paradigm.
And in case it was possible with the FM9, I'd certainly rethink it again.

Anyhow, I wish those performance controls (regardless of whether there's global blocks as well or not) were standard in any kind of decent modeler. But unfortunately, reality is as far away from that as it gets (is there even any single other modeler with such a function?).
So yes, FAS has a very strong point in favour of their UI here.

Remember that the global blocks system relies on saving the preset so if you do a tweak, you have to remember to save it every time to update the global blocks for those changes to appear in other presets.

I think it would be much nicer if it had some sort of auto-save feature so you can just consider "this is my amp, if I turn something on it it will affect all the presets with global block linking."

It's also only available on the Axe-Fx 3 and so far Fractal has not offered even a limited version (less global blocks or only available on amp/cab or something) of it on FM9/FM3.

The Performance page options can only be assigned from Axe-Edit. If you forget to do it for your preset, better dig that laptop out. You also quickly find that you have to make choices for what you actually want to be available because everything you'd like to have just won't fit in them. E.g most amp block basic params already take up most of the global page, then you are left with the per-preset page.

One of the first things wished when this was released was more pages for it so you could map more parameters. Has not happened, even though I think it could help a lot by allowing users to build more of a custom UI with the relevant params they want to tweak on the fly.

These are good features, but also areas where Fractal could offer better solutions.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Remember that the global blocks system relies on saving the preset so if you do a tweak, you have to remember to save it every time to update the global blocks for those changes to appear in other presets.

Oh, didn't even exactly realize that. That's pretty weird if you are in fact offering such a thing as global blocks. Is it the same when using an extermal MIDI controller to adjust global blocks? Because that'd even be downright stupid. I mean, let's say you're doing it like me as in controlling things from a tablet, would you have to have a dedicated "save" control button?

I think it would be much nicer if it had some sort of auto-save feature so you can just consider "this is my amp, if I turn something on it it will affect all the presets with global block linking."

It's like that with the GT-1000. Once you assign something to be a "Stompbox" (stupid Boss lingo for global blocks), all patches using that stompbox will automatically change, you can even alter entire amp models and what not. No need to ever think about saving.
I will however admit that this can as well be quite a drawback because you might fool around with a stompbox block without thinking about it much, then attend a gig and have all your settings changed. Nothing dramatic when all you did is, say, changing the treble parameter of an amp, but in case you selected a different master delay type and adjusted a lot of things, it might just throw you out unexpectedly.
No idea how this would be handled in an ideal world, I could imagine having a sort of setlist thing that would clearly be indexed in the display and within which you could alter any parameters but possibly not change any models.

It's also only available on the Axe-Fx 3 and so far Fractal has not offered even a limited version (less global blocks or only available on amp/cab or something) of it on FM9/FM3.

I know, which is why I've ditched the thought of getting one of them.

The Performance page options can only be assigned from Axe-Edit.

Oh, that's not good.

One of the first things wished when this was released was more pages for it so you could map more parameters.

Very understandable.

Regardless of all that, I still think those performance pages are a great thing to have.

 

[laxu]

Oh, didn't even exactly realize that. That's pretty weird if you are in fact offering such a thing as global blocks. Is it the same when using an extermal MIDI controller to adjust global blocks? Because that'd even be downright stupid. I mean, let's say you're doing it like me as in controlling things from a tablet, would you have to have a dedicated "save" control button?

Yes I think it's the same. Fractal's MIDI knob control options are downright miserable in the first place. Max 16 param mappings, and params locked to having that MIDI controller connected, and if you don't you need to remove the mappings one by one to make Axe-Edit and front panel work again.

So it's just not a good solution unless you are willing to have middleman software to translate MIDI -> Axe-Fx 3 Sysex to get around this limitation. It's not easy to do when Fractal offers no real Sysex specs for this sort of thing, reverse engineering needed.

It's like that with the GT-1000. Once you assign something to be a "Stompbox" (stupid Boss lingo for global blocks), all patches using that stompbox will automatically change, you can even alter entire amp models and what not. No need to ever think about saving.
I will however admit that this can as well be quite a drawback because you might fool around with a stompbox block without thinking about it much, then attend a gig and have all your settings changed. Nothing dramatic when all you did is, say, changing the treble parameter of an amp, but in case you selected a different master delay type and adjusted a lot of things, it might just throw you out unexpectedly.

Yeah the Boss system seems more like how I wish it functioned, a "set it up and don't think about it" thing. I agree with the drawback you presented, but that would be easy to get around by simply not allowing global blocks to change models.

No idea how this would be handled in an ideal world, I could imagine having a sort of setlist thing that would clearly be indexed in the display and within which you could alter any parameters but possibly not change any models.

The problem at least on Fractal is that whether global blocks are in use is not that easily discernable. It should have the entire block be a different color in the onboard UI or something.

Regardless of all that, I still think those performance pages are a great thing to have.

Oh sure, but I see so much more potential in them.

Which cycles back to my beef with their usability. Lots of good starts, but not taken to where they are great to use. Of course other modelers have different ones, like Helix's way of ditching MIDI param mappings if you change models etc.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

most amp block basic params already take up most of the global page, then you are left with the per-preset

if you’re trying to put full tone stack in your performance pages, you’re doing it wrong. They are called “performance pages” not “sit down to tweak” pages. Gain, treble (or presence depending on amp) and level. At the most.

 

[laxu]

if you’re trying to put full tone stack in your performance pages, you’re doing it wrong. They are called “performance pages” not “sit down to tweak” pages. Gain, treble (or presence depending on amp) and level. At the most.

I don't know about you, but if I use a different guitar for example, then I might want to tweak the amp settings to accommodate the guitar. That doesn't mean I have to have every switch and knob there.

But you can see how you quickly run into having to compromise on what to put there, and simply e.g doubling the number of parameters would go a long way to having more of a "the things important to me" system.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

I don't know about you, but if I use a different guitar for example, then I might want to tweak the amp settings to accommodate the guitar. That doesn't mean I have to have every switch and knob there.

But you can see how you quickly run into having to compromise on what to put there, and simply e.g doubling the number of parameters would go a long way to having more of a "the things important to me" system.

If I plan to use two different guitars IN A PERFORMANCE that sound substantially different that they need different amp settings, I would make a scene or channel for each guitar. If I'm just playing around in my jam room..."OH GAWD!!! I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PRESS THE EDIT BUTTON FIVE TIMES TO GET TO THE AMP BLOCK!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!"

 

[laxu]

If I plan to use two different guitars IN A PERFORMANCE that sound substantially different that they need different amp settings, I would make a scene or channel for each guitar. If I'm just playing around in my jam room..."OH GAWD!!! I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PRESS THE EDIT BUTTON FIVE TIMES TO GET TO THE AMP BLOCK!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!"

Don't forget to page left at least once, nav down to go the row with the presence knob, then back up because now you have too much treble, then back to tweak presence a bit, then back one row, ↑↑↓↓←→←→B,A,EXIT.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Don't forget to page left at least once, nav down to go the row with the presence knob, then back up because now you have too much treble, then back to tweak presence a bit, then back one row, ↑↑↓↓←→←→B,A,EXIT.

This would be where the person developing their own workflow would prioritize placing the presence knob on a Performance page


Again, the Fractal UI can be improved. But a lot of the massive complaints are "I don't want to actually think through how I use the device. I just want to throw the kitchen sink into a preset without a whole lot of thought, and then without much thought, be able to clean up the mess I've made for myself."

 

[Sascha Franck]

Yes I think it's the same. Fractal's MIDI knob control options are downright miserable in the first place. Max 16 param mappings, and params locked to having that MIDI controller connected, and if you don't you need to remove the mappings one by one to make Axe-Edit and front panel work again.

So it's just not a good solution unless you are willing to have middleman software to translate MIDI -> Axe-Fx 3 Sysex to get around this limitation. It's not easy to do when Fractal offers no real Sysex specs for this sort of thing, reverse engineering needed.

I think I've read that from you before. Quite a big "ouch!"

I'm actually really wondering why nobody is doing global blocks properly. From all I can see, Boss is still doing it the best, but it's programming hell, no less (let alone there's a limit of 16 assignments as well - and no, I really don't feel like figuring out all kinda SysEx settings, which exist on the GT, too).

Bidirectional MIDI, OSC, Mackie HUI and what not messages exist since I don't know how many years/decades (I used the first Mackie/Logic Control at the beginning of the millenium), there's plenty (well, kinda) controllers and things such as TouchOSC supporting it, and yet there's not one modeler to support it as well. If you want to get it working, you're all the way in DIY land and in case you really wanted to make bidirectional communication work, be prepared to deliver yourself to a lunatic asylum.

The problem at least on Fractal is that whether global blocks are in use is not that easily discernable. It should have the entire block be a different color in the onboard UI or something.

With the GT, stompbox blocks are at least somewhat indexed by a brighter, solid color.
But I actually wish that things would be handled outside of "normal" patches. Such as within the mentioned setlists or whatever. Only patches within such a patchlist would be able to be modified "patchlist wide" (of course there should be ways to "save as" and "un-global" blocks), your usual patch lists shouldn't be affected at all.

Anyhow, for my needs I'm kinda sorted regarding all these things, but in case Fractal decided to bring global blocks to the FM9 and also somewhat improved them, I might as well get re-interested.

 

[DLC86]

I don't know about you, but if I use a different guitar for example, then I might want to tweak the amp settings to accommodate the guitar. That doesn't mean I have to have every switch and knob there.

But you can see how you quickly run into having to compromise on what to put there, and simply e.g doubling the number of parameters would go a long way to having more of a "the things important to me" system.

There's really no need to put amp parameters in the performance pages, right there you just need to push the C or D encoder to go straight to the amp blocks.

 

[timbuck3]

HahaCliff should hire quilter to redo the gui