Do you think this 1.9.2 update was a bad idea in terms of releasing it?
It seems the latest Studio update is not really as good as advertised.
Extrusion issues, prints failing with profiles that always worked fine, supports impossible to remove, … the list keep going…
What are the issues you encountered?
Did you find enough that works better now to deal with the new issues Bambu created?
can refer to this thread with overextrusion
Extrusion issues, prints failing with profiles that always worked fine!!!, supports impossible to remove
I haven’t had any noticeable or notable issues. I’ve printed with supports and haven’t had any problems there, and haven’t felt like there were issues with over-extrusion. I noticed a few people comment about issues with the latest update. I did update, but kind of forgot about it all while I trucked along.
I don’t do as lot of extra calibration stuff though, so tend to use stock settings most of the time.
I wonder that you write only before the update everything printed elegantly and now I have to calibrate it for BL filament and it still looks bad
I’ve been working on a major project before and after the update, and for me the prints have been pretty much the same. I have tree supports and regular supports on a couple of parts, and the results have been what I would expect.
For my setup, it’s all Bambu filament. I haven’t adjusted anything from stock, run flow calibration test, or anything like that. Usually I’ll do the flow dynamics calibration when using non-bambu filament, but for Bambu filament, I run it stock.
It’s mostly been PLA.
I’m trying to think of the variables in my setup, that it might give some insight into why some of us have issues while others don’t.
Gotta say, had no issues with the beta and no issues with the final release. All filaments fine, supports are fine.
It’s working fine for me. I even tried a new VarioShore TPU with some custom parameters. Had to slow down the X1C and crank up the heat but came out great. I also noticed this version corrected the “Cutoff Screen” I complained about months ago.
All in all, I be happy. 
I have to echo the users here in saying that I haven’t had any issues with the latest Bambu Studio. I really like the new assembly and measurement additions. Haven’t had any issues with support with ABS/ASA. I run almost totally stock settings other than infill type.
Ok, not really comprehensive (yet)…
But it seems the issues experienced are not general, some have them others print just fine with the new version.
Makes me wonder whether or not the problems relate to the installation and all those user folders created in various places.
For example, those filament settings that appear in several places and now with different time stamps…
I’ve had several issues with prints that normally print without issue, mainly supports welding to the model but also Bambu Studio not applying supports in areas that it really should do.
Couldn’t find a workable solution so have had to go back to 1.9.1
I am facing a major issue with the latest update, I cannot change some values like bed temps, min layer time, flow ratio and others. It’s frustrating.
I keep clicking on the damn input but it does not do anything like it’s disabled or something.
I will say I’ve had minor issues only within the latest version of BS. But due to the fact I do not use the software as my “Main” slicer over OrcaSlicer I’ve not taken the time to report such issues since they do no translate over to Orca Slicer.
Ever since utilizing OS over BS I mainly always keep studios up to date with either latest full versions or their beta upgrades merely to see what functions are new or optimized over Orca.
IMO Bambu Studios has only a little way more to go before finally becoming adequate enough to become a daily use program within my daily activity. My largest concern and issue is I can literally take a model of basic geometry, slice it within both programs, use exact same stock settings, then come out with different print results.
This to me is baffling and I’ve tried to search within both to see any major difference but it’s most likely in the compiling of the code within the programs that sets the differences. This has been also shown via youtube with some 3D print channels doing this exact comparison and seeing the results differ even with 100% same parameters.
This latest v1.9.3 of Bambu Studios still results in different results in terms of model quality results compared to the current Orca Slicer v2.1-Beta I’m actively using daily.
That IS a valid point you are raising here…
If both slicer use the SAME backbone structure we should get the same results - but we don’t.
I have seen this in past with new manufacturers hitting the market.
Whatever there is ‘for free’ they include somehow, make some minor changes AND add their own stuff on top.
Bambu provides sort of a change log, always a few version behind an never actually revealing anything.
Find that rather annoying as it makes finding the cause of a new problem rather impossible.
For many years Simplifu3D was my go to slicer.
Well, until it no longer performed for me as advertised and made more problems than solutions.
In some ways Bambu is going the right direction here but they simply lack the staff support to stay on top (on time).
Being all closed source does not help much either.
As you said, they ARE close…
But from where I am sitting they manage to include too many issues with the lots of ‘fixes’ and improvements.
I rather have two versions available.
One that is ACTUALLY stable and bug free (even if a bit older) and a new version where everyone can participate to make it better.
Right now we have a stable version that isn’t bug free being replaced by one with more feaures, some of the old bug fixed and new ones added 
I must be doing something wrong because every time Bambu issues an update everything seems to work better. But then I do tend to use default settings. The things that push the envelope tend to be best solved in modeling, rather than tweaking a printer.
I might have found one of the issues causing users to get into trouble with these updates - Wingoofy
I took an old computer, installed a fresh windows and some old version of Studio.
Checked that all works as advertised and started to update one version after the other.
Then, once I reached the 1.9.3 I did some test prints that kept failing on my stndard computer and they came out just fine with the standard settings.
The first hickup happened when used the system restore point to try again, starting with some 1.8 version.
Here I first copied over my settings and such from the other computer to have a good selection of profiles and so on.
Updated to 1.9.3, tried some prints and the ones using MY changes kept failing to impress, the ones where I imported the STL files instead to then use only Bambu defaults again printed fine.
The third and worst hickup happened when I used a Windows back that contained all the things I like to have included on my PC’s…
For starters a Windows installation, void of the Internet Explorer and Edge like mine does not really work for Studio.
And Bambu seems to rely a lot on things they don’t include in their package while others try to replace older versions.
In the old days Visual Basic runtimes were always a nightmare but I have a hard time finding what Bambu uses and requires that comes from Windows or other generic sources.
Like on my standard PC a lot of things just went nuts.
Slicing a large and detailed model takes forever and then some time.
3MF files that always printed fine totally fail or come out in unacceptable quality - literally all bad things users ever complained about after an update that are not really related to the update.
So I tried to figure out if there might be a way to get those 3MF files working as advertised again.
Don’t ask why or how much time I wasted trying to find anything different enough showing up in Studio when importing those 3MF files…
Of course they look just fine there…
There is only two things left that can cause our issues:
Did you know, for example, that YOUR profiles and settings are just like an overlay onto the Bambu defaults ?
You can change certain things but way more happens ‘under the closed hood’.
This becomes painfully obvious when you follow the trail of .json files.
Even the nozzle definitions go into the creation of the g-code…
Let’s say you old 3mf file comes with a filament that you still use and also with a print profile you still use.
Both have seen a couple of updates that are NOT included in your old 3mf file.
Which ones you think should have priority and based on what factors?
There is good reasons why there is neither a sliced model nor g-code included in the 3mf files…
Here is what allowed me to get most of my old 3mf files working just fine again with the updated Studio versions:
Import you project file.
Make some meaningless changes, like updating your AMS allocations or setting a different filament for the part.
Save the project into a new 3mf file.
Close the project and import the newly created 3mf file.
It should now print fine…
Pay attention to profiles!!!
Quite often a 3mf contains a custom print profile, not just a standard one with some minor changes.
As long as they are just full of changes but won’t have their own name all is fine…
For example:
I have a custom profile optimised for 0.15mm layers.
Studio seems to be unable to determine whether a 0.12 or a 0.16mm profile was the initial base for this.
One Studio version prints it fine, another fails.
I could bet last weeks bad weather on Studio taking the 0.1mm profile that I used to create it for the working ones and a 0.16mm profile for ones that fail.
Or may it uses a 0.12mm profile for the working ones, does not matter much in terms of extrusion related stuff.
Have not found a workaround to get them going perfectly again without major works.
What does seem to give at least acceptable results is to change the print profile to something completely different but to keep all settings.
Than change back to one of the defaults that match the original while again keeping the settings.
Save this file and close it in Studio.
Once imported again it shall print with acceptable quality but you might still have to double check those support settings.
Interesting reading…and the reason why I am sticking to 1.8.4.51 for now.
I would love to play with some of the new toys in 1.9.x.x but I prefer to have a stable and reliable workflow.
I’m surprised that we don’t see more mention of the way user profiles depend on system profiles, which are potentially subject to change.
Examine the .json for a user filament profile and you will see that it inherits most of its settings from a whole string of other .json files - only the differences are in the user .json file.
Following the lineage of one of my Overture PLA files, I see that it inherits settings from the system profile Generic PLA.json, which inherited from fdm_filament_pla.json, which inherited from fdm_filament_common.json.
So for example, if a user profile has not modified a fan speed and an update changes the fdm_filament_common profile, the g-code will use the new speed, not the speed the user saw the last time they saved the profile. I believe this happened just a few weeks ago, resulting in many failed prints due to too much cooling.
The system profiles are replaced with every Studio update, and sometimes in between Studio updates. I received a “code” update just yesterday. I think this was to add or correct an A1 profile, but ALL my system .json files now have yesterdays date.
I think the only way to guarantee an unchangeable user profile might be to make a change to every setting, save the profile, then change every value back to the preferred setting. Or use a text editor to write a complete .json file.
This profile structure is not new in Studio 1.9, it has always been used, and probably is also used by the slicers that Studio is based on. The only reason it works is that Bambu usually does not make changes to the system profiles.