Eleven Rack Modulation Effects Roto Speaker

[cessnapilot]

Yeah since when does what we can do in the box have to 100% reflect reality, or be perfectly true to "vintage" equipment? It's a great starting point and yeah if I want I can sound like that, but let me get STOOPID too!

[guitarless]

Thank you Mr Townsend for your time and contribution to this thread. Again, a great source of information. Thank you.

[guitarless]

Mr Townsend, could you share with us the reasoning behind keeping the FX Loop a single module whether stereo or mono, please? There are two Send and Return Inserts but no support for two movable mono FX Loop modules. Thank you.

[Chris Townsend]

Originally Posted by guitarless

Mr Townsend, could you share with us the reasoning behind keeping the FX Loop a single module whether stereo or mono, please? There are two Send and Return Inserts but no support for two movable mono FX Loop modules. Thank you.

I don't remember exactly what the reasoning was, but I imagine that complexity of the user interface was a major consideration. It can get tricky when the FX loop operates as single stereo loop some of the time and two independent mono loops other times. The amp outputs work like that, which does cause some confusion, and I think it would be more complicated scenario with the FX loop. Also, I would imagine if users wanted 2 loops it often be one mono before the amp and one stereo at the main outs, but that would require 3 ins and 3 outs, which we didn't have. Anyhow, I'll leave it at that.

[guitarless]

...and thank you for that Chris Townsend.

[cessnapilot]

Originally Posted by Chris Townsend

I don't remember exactly what the reasoning was, but I imagine that complexity of the user interface was a major consideration...

With a good (standalone?) GUI...well, let's put it this way, we can handle complexity. Don't dumb it down. If we wanted dumbed-down, we wouldn't be going in for this sort of stuff. A lot of what I do is in HMI, and I see this all the time. Engineers always believe that they have to sacrifice features and complexity for a level of usability that grossly underestimates the end users ability to learn a new system. IMHO you guys can do a lot better than the little LED screen (why oh why do we keep seeing these cheesy little screens? It's 2010 for the love of...) and PT dependent on screen GUI.

[blewis]

Originally Posted by cessnapilot

Don't dumb it down.

Sure...

But, let's give credit where credit is due. Some of the "dumbing down" stuff they've done has resulted in an incredibly intuitive front panel interface.

One "dumbing down" "feature" I can think of is them not adding speaker breakup because they found the code was too heavy and if added, they couldn't guarantee that there would be enough DSP for all FX in all slots.

After hitting the "DSP limit" on the HD500 willy frickin' nilly, this dumbed down user protection actually comes off being viewed as "higher quality" - you just can't hit a DSP limit. The user doesn't have to manage it.

Just thoughts...

[TieDyedDevil]

Originally Posted by blewis

But, let's give credit where credit is due. Some of the "dumbing down" stuff they've done has resulted in an incredibly intuitive front panel interface.

Amen to that!