Fractal VP4 Processors versus Axe-FX II, FM9, FM3 ... and implications for future products?

Cliff can correct me, but the main benefit for Fractal here is cost and porting effort required by having a directly Axe-Fx 3 compatible platform.

If TI is now offering DSPs that are more power efficient, cost effective and more straightforward to integrate, then future Fractal products could move to using only TI processors instead of the mix of TI and Analog Devices. Axe-Fx IV is likely to use the newer TI C77x cores, but "FM4" and "FM10" are still a mystery, if those products happen in the first place.

Cliff did make a comment here about the Analog Devices SC594. While this was in regard to a potential future Line6 product, I'm sure Fractal has considered the same processor for their future FM series as well. Afaik the SC594 should be about as powerful as the FM9 but with a single chip. So you could think of getting a "FM4" that has the same DSP capabilities as the FM9 - basically "more than enough for 99% of guitarists out there."

Fractal could potentially make just a single floor unit for next gen, finally realizing the idea of the modular system that the FM3+FC6/12 can be, but without the DSP compromises the FM3 makes.

I'd love to see a "FM0" brain type device where you can connect a variety of external peripherals. The LuminiteFx Graviton M1 MIDI controller is a great example of that sort of product line, and a direction I'd love to see on future modelers. Every peripheral works wirelessly without issue, and you can make it as complicated or as compact as you want. For gig-proof security you can still connect the footswitches with a wired connection too.
I’d love to buy a fm4 with the power of the fm9 turbo
 
It does make you wonder if the VP4 can shadow AxeFXIII firmware updates a little more closely than the FM series, but, to be honest, Fractal seems to have significantly reduced that "delay" with recent firmware updates.
I'm guessing the "delays" we saw in some recent updates was due to the development of the VP4.
 
The product is called virtual pedalboard 4 and is an fx only unit.
Here we have a thread discussing why it doesn’t run amps and can’t run more than 4 blocks of fx. I’m all for these discussions but the business decision for it to run what it runs is real. If fractal chose to have an axefx3 level of power in the box but still limited it to run what it runs for the price point then that’s kind of on them. We can’t punish a company and infer that they should squeeze more juice into a box because it theoretically can.

Also I’m pretty sure cliff and co is all over this stuff. They would have chosen a suitable power spec with the right amount of headroom. Maybe we get more and maybe we don’t but it feels kind of slack to nitpick what it can and can’t do and then infer they should unleash the kraken on it.

FWIW I’d love a qc style unit from fractal that’s as powerful as the axe3 but I’d expect to pay axe3 prices for it
 
The product is called virtual pedalboard 4 and is an fx only unit.
So why include USB audio without including a headphone out like the other units so I can monitor the signal back if I wish to use for recording?

The VP4 is being presented as a complimentary to the FM3 so you can create more complex patches (fantastic) - but the implementation of the connectivity is bizarre to me.
 
So why include USB audio without including a headphone out like the other units so I can monitor the signal back if I wish to use for recording?

The VP4 is being presented as a complimentary to the FM3 so you can create more complex patches (fantastic) - but the implementation of the connectivity is bizarre to me.
I'm recording stuff right now through my monitors and not headphones, people do things differently I guess. I agree a headphone jack would have been nice but seems like this was always an interconnective unit... again whats the alternative, NOT make it a usb device for people wanting to record with monitors?
 
So why include USB audio without including a headphone out like the other units so I can monitor the signal back if I wish to use for recording?

The VP4 is being presented as a complimentary to the FM3 so you can create more complex patches (fantastic) - but the implementation of the connectivity is bizarre to me.
The USB audio interface functionality probably comes close to free with the platform, namely they don't need to spend a whole lot of effort on it. If they just disabled it, someone will complain that it does not do it and say "but even the Tonex One does it!" or some other crap like that.

With aggregate devices on MacOS at least you could use it just fine as part of your recording chain.
 
@2112 - Are you gonna do a video on expert/advanced editing of blocks? Do you get the EQ for the reverbs and delays??

Marco Fanton showed the Expert mode inside VP4-Edit. I really like the UI.
Unfortunately I don't speak Italian, but seeing the UI and hearing the VP4 in 4CM was very cool.

@1:54:28 (and also 1:31:45)

 
Marco Fanton showed the Expert mode inside VP4-Edit. I really like the UI.
Unfortunately I don't speak Italian, but seeing the UI and hearing the VP4 in 4CM was very cool.

@1:54:28 (and also 1:31:45)



OMG. Sliders, not knobs!

@Digital Igloo was right all along? :rofl

One wonders if this is a precursor to a version for iPad / iOS / Android 🤔
 
Back
Top