Did you see something regarding changing stomp colors? Can’t wait to see that feature available but I only saw the information from the latest Development update which states that you will be able to change the scene color in gig view.
From the April Development Update:
"Gig View
Gig View’s UI has been updated for all modes. Additionally, it is now possible to copy or swap Scenes via Gig View. It is also possible to change the color assigned to a Scene in Gig View"
Why does it remotely matter what it looks like?
Can you not edit a patch unless you can see a picture of an amp/pedal?
Ah yes, sorry. In the video, the color selection was visible.
And I thought it was for stomps, since the button said “Rodent Drive”. In fact, it was a scene called like that.
So yes, scene coloring was visible, no new info about stomp mode colors.
I’m hoping they allow stomp renaming; having “multiple devices” on a few different stomps can be confusing.
Really hope they get to the stomp colors soon. It is a higher priority IMO than custom scene colors. At least scenes have customizable names. Given the fact that you only have a vague icon of a “category” (e.g. ‘Modulation’, ‘Filter’, etc.) and no custom naming for stomps, being able to customize their colors seems vital.
A large number of players have migrated first from pedalboards with stomps, and then to modelers that allow custom names/colors for stomps, before adopting the QC. Many of us have developed a general color scheme over the years that tells us at a glance what type of effect/stomp we have assigned.
Stomp color provides an important quick and easy visual cue during performances. You can’t always rely on the position of the footswitch as it may, by necessity, be assigned to different stomps in different presets. Additionally, footswitches that say ‘Multiple’ convey next to no useful information. I’m sure they are working on custom stomp naming/colors, but it can’t come fast enough for me.
Yeah, same here. I use hybrid mode and sometimes forget what the “multiple devices” was meant to do… 
So yes, would definitely appreciate free naming and colors for stomps, too.
how are you getting multiple devices on stomp mode? i thought the whole point of stomp mode was having one pedal on/off per switch… i´ve had no issue adapting to the colors per stomp so i would feel scene mode is more important to name since the basis for it is changing many pedals in one click so having it named “chorus” “verse” “solo high gain” would be essential… just curious about how you are getting the “multiple devices” since it would be the same problem and they should both be worked on and would basically have the same fix so fixing one would fix the other… or am i missing something?
See page 50 or 55 in the manual. You can assign multiple blocks’ bypass states as well as other parameters to a footswitch.
Yes, but this feature (custom scene names) already exists so there is no need to prioritize it in upcoming updates. The issue being raised was whether or not custom stomp colors should take precedence over custom scene colors. My contention was custom stomp colors would be more helpful in the short term as we already have custom scene names. We have neither custom colors nor custom names for stomps. In the long term, custom names and colors for both scenes and stomps would be ideal and I would be shocked if they are not working towards that.
Another situation i need stomp renaming is when I have more than one delay. Would be nice to rename one to “subtle” and another to “dotted 8th”. Currently they both just say “simple delay” and it can be a gamble if i dont recall which is which.
Minute 12:48
In Ola’s Video they say it’s in early beta and not even feature complete.
So not that soon.
oh cool i get it now thanks for explaining 
Another use case where I use multiple devices per stomp:
I have a preset where I have my normal room reverb, but need a strong reverb sometimes.
So I have a stomp that activates the spring reverb and at the same time deactivates the room reverb.
I wouldn’t have expected anything other for an editor than this and frankly would not have wanted anything more personally. The whole purpose in my opinion is to mirror the screen of the QC on a desktop for ease of use and not having to rely only on bending down and using the touchscreen all the time. This accomplishes that perfectly. I have Fractal and Helix as well and their editors also mimic the signal chain on the unit’s LCD. Now perhaps when you click a block to edit the parameters, things may look differently or not but in general they still match up the workflow with what’s on the actual device. Extra windows and parameters and such are great and if they can add them in while retaining the overall characteristics of the unit then great.
Why would anyone want or even care to have the editor look like something other than the QC screen anyway? There should be pretty much a 1 to 1 match of each other and it looks like Neural have done just that based on the snippet I watched. I couldn’t imagine having two completely different looking and operating workflows. I want to feel as if I’m simply working directly on my QC but from an external device. Now let’s add something equivalent to HX Command Center to the editor.
Thanks Neural! Hopefully we’ll see a beta version soon.
yeah thats what i was expecting as well… my guess is since its been so long to just replicate the screen people expected it there to be much more
I’d expect not much more, but the ability to backup and restore the whole QC or single presets is something I would like to see.
This would be fantastic! Before it happens though Neural would have to revise their currently closed system model for presets, or figure out how to enforce it upon local backups. For example, the currently enforced inability to download someone else’s preset, edit it, and then upload it back to the public cloud.
The minute you add a librarian function that allows backing up of your presets locally. You have to either change the current preset policy or figure out how to enforce it.
If Neural decides to retain the current preset policy, one easy method might be to prevent the individual backing up of edited and resaved copied presets. The reason you might have to prevent it during backup, is that almost any format that allowed the preset to be downloaded (for instance keying it such that a restore could only be done by the QC that executes the backup) would also allow the backed up preset to be hacked/edited and then shared. Precisely what their preset policy currently prevents.
Another option is to do away with the prohibition against sharing modified presets downloaded from other users. This would probably really piss off providers of paid presets and make it almost impossible for them to protect their intellectual content unless Neural implements some kind of phone-home protection for paid content. Of course, people can get around that protection now by manually recreating presets, but it at least provides a disincentive for intellectual property theft.
Anyway, just trying to trot out some of the issues they are no doubt wrestling with if they open up their system by allowing local backups. Probably have only scratched the surface and there might be any number of methods they can implement to get around this. If local backups for individual presets comes any time soon, I would be pleasantly surprised to say the least.
They have also had 2+ years to get a status Video update on the editor out…
yeah i saw that too… 
Well we’ll see. I’'m really pumped for the Desktop Editor (more for it’s functionality to organize stuff than actually building presets)
@spikey I can’t imagine how long it will take them to solve all the other problems!