Fractal Talk

[MirrorProfiles]

Ha it’s definitely close and no worse than the real thing IMO. At the same settings it was noticeably smaller than the real amp - you can see that I’ve turned up the gain, the bass, treble and presence a bit to get closer to the amp (let’s put that down to tapers and tolerances). After normalising both I gained the Fractal up another 0.5dB or so, seemed to feel closer when I level matched by ear (although there’s also a chance I went too far).

I always find it interesting when comparing to the real amp, it makes me dial in modellers slightly different, and learn new things about them. It’s why I feel quite strongly that tapers, and similar GUI’s count for so much, because I think it’s helpful to use our familiarity and experience with the real amp to inform how we use software versions of them.

Also interesting to note the thing @James Freeman brings up about the knob positions - on an amp like a 5150, I often set things around 1-3, or 7-9 and they’re areas where the angle of the knob pointer will vary most in axe edit. To get a starting point you have to base it off the numbers rather than eyeballing the knob positions

 

[CakeEater]

Are there some ways that the FM9 is better than the Axe-FX 3? Bradford from Worship Tutorials said that the reverbs are on their own core, and so can usually be run at a higher quality. A YouTube commenter on that video also mentioned that there's a gap in amp channel switching on the Axe-FX 3 that's not on the FM9. That said, is there other ways that the Axe-FX 3 can sound better than the FM9?

 

[laxu]

Are there some ways that the FM9 is better than the Axe-FX 3? Bradford from Worship Tutorials said that the reverbs are on their own core, and so can usually be run at a higher quality. A YouTube commenter on that video also mentioned that there's a gap in amp channel switching on the Axe-FX 3 that's not on the FM9. That said, is there other ways that the Axe-FX 3 can sound better than the FM9?

No. The Axe-Fx 3 has about double the processing power of the FM9 so which core is used doesn't matter.

It's more relevant for FM9 vs FM3 where on the FM3 you will usually have to reduce reverb quality to the lowest (which still sounds great) if you want to run a more complex presets.

Axe-Fx 3 now also has gapless switching for a lot of stuff so whatever you were watching is most likely out of date.

The only ways the FM9 is better than the Axe-Fx 3 is form factor and not requiring more gear for footswitching.

 

[DLC86]

The only ways the FM9 is better than the Axe-Fx 3 is form factor and not requiring more gear for footswitching.

And the zoom view on the home screen

 

[CakeEater]

No. The Axe-Fx 3 has about double the processing power of the FM9 so which core is used doesn't matter.

It's more relevant for FM9 vs FM3 where on the FM3 you will usually have to reduce reverb quality to the lowest (which still sounds great) if you want to run a more complex presets.

Axe-Fx 3 now also has gapless switching for a lot of stuff so whatever you were watching is most likely out of date.

The only ways the FM9 is better than the Axe-Fx 3 is form factor and not requiring more gear for footswitching.

Good to know, thanks!

 

[JiveTurkey]

Bradford?

 

[CakeEater]

Bradford?

 

[JiveTurkey]

I made a decision early in life not to take advice from someone named Bradford. It's served me well.

 

[CakeEater]

I made a decision early in life not to take advice from someone named Bradford. It's served me well.

It's certainly a North American name.

The statement in question is timestamped here for reference :

 

[Stratzrus]

Things change so rapidly in the Fractalverse that anything written two years ago is probably out of date. Members here or on the Fractal forum can give you the current info on functionality.

 

[deadpool_25]

Things change so rapidly in the Fractalverse that anything written two years ago is probably out of date. Members here or on the Fractal forum can give you the current info on functionality.

Truth. And it's constant improvement.

 

[deadpool_25]

Are there some ways that the FM9 is better than the Axe-FX 3? Bradford from Worship Tutorials said that the reverbs are on their own core, and so can usually be run at a higher quality. A YouTube commenter on that video also mentioned that there's a gap in amp channel switching on the Axe-FX 3 that's not on the FM9. That said, is there other ways that the Axe-FX 3 can sound better than the FM9?

I pretty much agree with laxu here.

I don't think there was ever less gap on the FM9 tham on the AxeFX III? I suppose it could've if it varied by the CPU load on the preset you're switching to and/or from. Hm. Moot point now though and it looks like gapless will be on the FM9 probably this week. Today??

The way the FM9 uses its cores CPU load could end up in the same ballpark as on the Axe IIRC. Like on the FM9 you can load two amps blocks, two delay blocks, and two reverb blocks for "free". Still, the Axe is just far more powerful in terms of CPU so I don't think you could build a (reasonable) patch on the FM9 that wouldn't fit in the Axe. Although reverb quality might actually change that statement.

And then you have the block inventory. The Axe is definitely more capable in that sense, for example having two pitch blocks (doesn't it have four delay blocks as well?). Other stuff too.

And there are IO differences too.

The Axe is absolutely more powerful, but the FM9 is incredibly capable and an all in one unit.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Do these guys need all those elaborated boards to compensate for the complete lack of rock'n'roll, blues, funk, soul or any other dirty elements in their music?

 

[Aleksi]

Do these guye need all those elaborated boards to compensate for the complete lack of rock'n'roll, blues, funk, soul or any other dirty elements in their music?

Matthew 22:37: "You shall love the Lord your God with a 20k pedalboard."

 

[GTR37]

Do these guye need all those elaborated boards to compensate for the complete lack of rock'n'roll, blues, funk, soul or any other dirty elements in their music?

If it is the worship genre then yes it based on multiple reverbs , big ethereal tone swells etc ,
It not lack of creativity just what that specific genre calls for
A country guy could say the same , do the rock guys really need that much gain?

 

[Orvillain]

Do these guye need all those elaborated boards to compensate for the complete lack of rock'n'roll, blues, funk, soul or any other dirty elements in their music?

The fact you didn't list metal reveals your own lack of rock n roll.

 

[Orvillain]

Bradford from Worship Tutorials said that the reverbs are on their own core, and so can usually be run at a higher quality.

I do not think that is accurate.

The reverbs have their own core, yes. But this doesn't mean they are higher quality than the reverbs you get on the Axe III.

 

[JiveTurkey]

I do not think that is accurate.

The reverbs have their own core, yes. But this doesn't mean they are higher quality than the reverbs you get on the Axe III.

WWBD though?!?!?!?

 

[State of Epicicity]

Are there some ways that the FM9 is better than the Axe-FX 3? Bradford from Worship Tutorials said that the reverbs are on their own core, and so can usually be run at a higher quality. A YouTube commenter on that video also mentioned that there's a gap in amp channel switching on the Axe-FX 3 that's not on the FM9. That said, is there other ways that the Axe-FX 3 can sound better than the FM9?

To elaborate on a big point someone mentioned, the speed of updates on the Axe-FX III is much faster, and that's what you want if you want the latest models and features as soon as they're available. The inventor, Cliff Chase, actively develops that unit directly. One update was the result of him waking up at 3 a.m. realizing how better to model the heating of a voice coil, if I recall correctly.

These updates can be very very fast, very often, though a few months can go by.

On the other hand, the FM9 and FM3 develop at a much slower rate. Not all updates will never ever go to those units, or even be possible on the FM3, i.e., due to the less powerful processor, but whatever has been updated on the Axe-FX III that can be moved will be ported over by other engineers.

It takes much longer, and you'll also have to join their their subgroup within our cult in to swear your blood oath to wish publicly at least once an hour on for the latest updates to be ported over. These are the rules.

 

[JiveTurkey]

To elaborate on a big point someone mentioned, the speed of updates on the Axe-FX III is much faster, and that's what you want if you want the latest models and features as soon as they're available. The inventor, Cliff Chase, actively develops that unit directly. One update was the result of him waking up at 3 a.m. realizing how better to model the heating of a voice coil, if I recall correctly.

These updates can be very very fast, very often, though a few months can go by.

On the other hand, the FM9 and FM3 develop at a much slower rate. Not all updates will never ever go to those units, or even be possible on the FM3, i.e., due to the less powerful processor, but whatever has been updated on the Axe-FX III that can be moved will be ported over by other engineers.

It takes much longer, and you'll also have to join their their subgroup within our cult in to swear your blood oath to wish publicly at least once an hour on for the latest updates to be ported over. These are the rules.