Few? Maybe people around here don’t care much now, and perhaps interest has waned a bit lately, but PCOM was a huge deal going all the way back to the official announcement. The wailing across the internet when it took so long was loud and persistent. There were (and likely still are) many more people calling for it than people who are saying it’s a waste of time.
IMO people cared more about being able to use the plugin amps, fx and whatnot and less about being able to put the plugin presets on their QC. If NDSP had not sold the device partly based on having plugin compatibility, you'd more likely see "Hey can we have a <plugin amp model> on the QC, we know you have it on the plugin!" requests.
It’s nice to have choices. Maybe for other people they’d prefer to just profile their plugin tones. Personally I think it would be cool to have the multiple options. Your preferences don’t have to match others’ preferences, and theirs not matching yours doesn’t make them wrong.
Never said it did.
I'm merely questioning if your approach of "make sounds I like on a plugin -> capture plugin -> put capture on another modeler" is putting the cart before the horse. You could figure out how to make the modeler do the same thing with the tools it has, and that might be a much faster way to go get to where you want to be.
It'd probably take you a good chunk of time to set it all up to get accurate captures, and if you change something you need to do it all over again, whereas you could otherwise just reflect the adjustments on the other modeler. But if it makes sense to you, then by all means do it.
Why do you have a variety of tools? Why’d you even bother with the Tonex? To have multiple options suited to your needs?
Tonex was really a "the IK Groupbuy deal was too good to pass" type thing. It's still pretty neat to have a limited, but almost entire guitar rig fit into my pocket. At this point I'm trying to find a good usecase for it in my rigs.
ETA: Why do you keep going on about Fractal’s UI? Why not just learn to use it as so many other people have and as so many people like to say on the various forums? Surely if it works for them it should work for you? Obviously that’s sarcasm. I think almost as obviously, I’m just making the point that them (and plenty of others) being able to adapt to the Fractal UI is just as acceptable as you (and plenty of others) not wanting to. This is no different.
You've read my posts - I will complain about literally every piece of tech I own. It's not because I want to be difficult, but because I want the gear I like to be even better.
Fractal's issue has never been how it sounds, or the features it has. It's great for that. So obviously I'm going to complain that using it is more cumbersome than it needs to be. Since Fractal didn't want to do anything about that, I moved on and sold my Axe-Fx 3.
I'm not going to mind that Fractal offers NAM support, but with over 300 amp models on the unit already...does it truly change anything?
But some variation of profiling is certainly a useful option.
