We thoroughly appreciate the feedback, the insight, and all the support we get from our community! Thank you all for believing in what we think is the future of looping!
2 Likes
It seems thereâs basically two kinds of Aeros users - one using quantized, click-track modes (which I think? includes Beat Buddy users), the other freeform. I think these are analogous to LaurentBâs "immediacy-mode"or âdeferment-mode.â Some users may switch between the two modes - donât know about that.
Since users appear to fall into these two categories it seems sensible to have separate sections In the quickstart guide & manual, one âFor Quantized/Beat Buddy Useâ & one âFor Freeform Use.â Had this existed I believe I wouldâve saved much time over the last month figuring things out. Such targeted instruction materials may allow you (minus programming constraints) to have actions keyed to different functions in the different modes while at the same time actually simplifying the learning curve for those like myself (& probably many others) who never intend to use quanitization or Beat Buddy. It could simplify things for quantize users too.
That leads to my last thought. It appears making a device the size of Aeros (which is great - I too donât want to have to get another pedal to make this pedal work) be all things to all people is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible. A solution would be to offer two Aeros versions: 1.) Program the crap out the Aeros to make it work like a dream machine for us freeformers. Not having all those conflicting functionality/programming needs for non-freeform use allows this. 2.) Do the same for the version optimized for quantization/Beat Buddy use. Not having freeform functionality needs may allow you to add features so players not wanting Midi Maestro wonât need it. You wouldnât need to make a new Aeros - just two separately programmed versions of the same device that would satisfy a vast range of looper enthusiasts. No one would have any reason not to buy it (except for $ of course)! I have the Aeros but am waffling around returning it because of the freeform issues. Iâd buy one programmed for flawless freeform use in a heartbeat nanosecond.
1 Like
Very interesting indeed.
Yet I do not see such a strict split between the 2 modes of the Aeros. It is true that those two behaviors are pretty different but they actually share a lot in common (I even already pushed for a third âhybrid modeâ where you could, I think, get the best of both worlds).
I see the Aeros as a pretty versatile hardware platform, and what we can get out of it is actually to be written. I do not really see any conflicting features between the quantized mode, the freeform mode or even the potential future hybrid mode, but I understand the need for @DavidPackouz and @BrennanSingularSound to streamline the ideas so that functionalities are exposed to the user in a consistent and meaningful manner, hence sometimes some replies where they will say things like âwe donât want to do that because of quantized mode or MIDI or whateverâ⌠where they should probably say âwe can do this but we have to find a consistent way to expose it so that it remains valid/understandable across the different modesâŚâ
As long as it is not an excuse for not implementing something necessary but only to offer the best possible user experience, Iâm fine with it, and I can hear arguments.
I will probably not become a user of the quantized mode, but I could definitely become a user of the potential hybrid mode (which if you think about it is reallllly close to the quantized mode), and the idea to have an evolutive platform which enables these kind of innovations is clearly one of the key driver for me to have chosen the Aeros, and I would definitely not like a scattered ecosystem where you would have an Aeros for midi-ers, Aeros for covers, Aeros for improvisersâŚ
Like you, I am waiting for a flawless freeform mode, and I think itâs on a good trend now. Voicing our concerns in topics like this one for example about the fact on-press events for recording actions are not negotiable make things progress in the right direction, and I think it has been heard and agreed now.
P.S. Please forgive me for shamelessly pushing for the hybrid mode 
⌠Hummm 
did I again ?
1 Like
Hello @DavidPackouz,
@BrennanSingularSound mentioned here that the fix for the ânext partâ was in test (
). Does it cover the re-record flows too ?
Is there a date for a 3.0.1 (or 3.1.0 whateverâŚ) ?
We donât have enough buttons for all the actions we want to do quickly and/or in real-time. Probably need at least one button for a multi-use with on-release, hold, double tap, etc. In this case the mixer on-hold action which means that button cannot be used for an on-press (unless we always want to activate the on-press action before entering the mixer). So we get boxed in with things like ânext partâ that some people really need to be on-press.
Perhaps we can give the user another way to trigger this action with precise timing (on-press). Getting to to on-press version of ânext partâ will take an extra step, but once you had it ready, it would be real-time.
So hereâs one way. Iâm sure there are other ways/variations
- Step one - Get Ready: User double taps bottom left button.
- At this point âNext Part Nowâ is ready! Footswitch menus change to: âNext Part NOWâ , âSelect Songâ , âDelete Track >â. (Play/Stop AlL button turns to an Exit button with an onscreen label.). Note that the specific labels and actions are not important and should change.
- Step Two - Do it: Pressing the left button âNext Part NOWâ triggers the next part in real time
(The above is similar to Hands-free song selection with @BrennanSingularSound idea to keep hold fior quick mixer acess âŚso we use doiuble tap).
Whatever the solution, I hope it allows the Aeros to do more in the future without repeatedly dealing with this hard issue.
This is no longer an issue, donât worry about next part, we are working on the other cases for immediacy as well.
2 Likes
Another option (with added expense) is if a two (or three) button external switch could be utilized instead of an expression pedal, the undo/redo command could be routed to one of those switches and the re-record command stay at the respective on board switch. This is the way they PigtronixâInfinity works.
If it were possible, this is a much less added expense than a midi control pedal or the Maestro pedal.
1 Like
@JusDandy
The device has to be standalone for all standard flows. And record / overdub / undo / next part all those kind of things are not at all like fancy requests from outer space. So for these, there has to be no need of extra hardware and it should work flawlessly.
Obviously beyond that, and this is what is cool with the Aeros, it can be expanded with Midi devices and or expression pedal to implement complex flows or potentially as you mentioned re-route existing commands to other more-convenient-for-your-usage external deviceâŚ
This has already been requested but it doesnât look like it got a very positive replyâŚ
1 Like
This has been (tentatively) implemented in firmware 3.1.3
The 2 tested flows:
-
re-record of a track
-
switch to next part when recording
See bug report
Is this the reason when Iâm in Free Form mode I can hardly EVER get my loop to start without a delay? Iâm really about ready to return this thing. I want to love it so bad! All I ever do is Free Form mode and itâs just not usable.
We are working on this and it should be fixed in the next iteration, we will have news soon, thank you for your patience, freeform has been a hard nut to crack but we are so close!
It is with great pleasure, that I think this topic can be closed as implemented since the release of the 3.1.10 firmware.
If any new issue is discovered, it should be now in a new bug report.
2 Likes
