Dom Mcsweeney
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,086
When do you predict the next Fractal Audio Axe iteration will drop, now that they've stated that it will be NAM-compatible?
- Thread starter nightlight
- Start date
Boudoir Guitar
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,767
I think adding NAM will lead to a lot more sales of IV gen devices than going deeper into the tweaker’s-device pigeon hole. Whether it’s enough to hire/train more folks, I dunno.
- Messages
- 10,877
Yes basically lol
ChordInversion
Roadie
- Messages
- 847
I don't think that's an accurate description of what I mean, but I am very, very happy to let it go.
I can appreciate trying to look a few moves ahead, but I think there are way too many variables in play. That said, I am (and have been) resigned to the notion that I am unlikely to get what I want. The fashion is what it is.
It seems some folks want an apology or something. Regardless of how this conversation goes, we are not deciding what will be in Fractal's next gen. We probably aren't moving the needle even a tiny bit. There are no stakes here. It's really gonna be ok that I don't want NAM. It's gonna be ok for me, and I'm the one who is almost certainly not going to get what I would prefer. It'll be ok for the NAM fans, too.
Last edited:
Frodebro
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,687
I didn't start it as it's really not an issue for me either way. But I guess some fellows got a bit miffed because I didn't share their opinion. And that is where things started getting weird.
Mongillo19
Rock Star
- Messages
- 7,439
Yeah, that's what happened
Captures serve their purpose and are useful. It’s already stated it’s coming so I’m not sure what the argument is about.
NAM currently crushes everyone in accuracy but there are no ‘major’ players that have hardware for it. The work is done and it’s smart for fractal to pick it up vs. develop their own (which I don’t think they would have done anyways)
All this does is add to the checklist of Fractal being top dog in terms of sound. Best modelling tech and best capture tech in one device. No downsides to that.
I recently bought a Stadium and the Ui is extremely good. There are dials and buttons for when dials/buttons are the best input method i.e. adjusting amps, pedals, levels etc. and there’s touch when touch is the best input method i.e typing preset names (or anything), moving blocks around, quickly selecting something to edit, moving a mic. The best method is a combination of both, each playing to its strengths. It’s the first all in one I’ve used where I haven’t felt the need to connect a computer at all, which to me is a huge plus
NAM currently crushes everyone in accuracy but there are no ‘major’ players that have hardware for it. The work is done and it’s smart for fractal to pick it up vs. develop their own (which I don’t think they would have done anyways)
All this does is add to the checklist of Fractal being top dog in terms of sound. Best modelling tech and best capture tech in one device. No downsides to that.
I recently bought a Stadium and the Ui is extremely good. There are dials and buttons for when dials/buttons are the best input method i.e. adjusting amps, pedals, levels etc. and there’s touch when touch is the best input method i.e typing preset names (or anything), moving blocks around, quickly selecting something to edit, moving a mic. The best method is a combination of both, each playing to its strengths. It’s the first all in one I’ve used where I haven’t felt the need to connect a computer at all, which to me is a huge plus
![[Nathan]](/data/avatars/m/0/613.jpg?1726885163){kind=avatar}
[Nathan]
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,320
Who cares if they "need" it, its coming.
Need is a strong word, I'd say having capture tech alongside modelling is an extremely valuable "value add" to your lineup. The good thing with something like NAM is that you don't need to develop your own stack its an open source solution (and arguably the one with the best results right now). It's just easy pickings for it to be supported.
[Nathan]
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,320
Whats crazy is that NAM is open source and the cost / R&D to get it up and running in ANY modeller is negligible to what you'd have to do to develop it from the ground up. If I was part of a team building a modelling unit and the 3 choices were (no captures, making our own capture stack, having a NAM capture player). I'd firmly spend my time getting NAM up and running and thinking of some cool ways of bending NAM in a unique way on that device. There are so many ways to take the NAM technology its not just a pigeon holed one shot capture tech.
I know you know this its more just like... these guys have done the 90% work. Why would you leave it out or start your own? Take what they've done, run with it and make it better.
MachineAgainstTheRage
Newbie
- Messages
- 6
I think none of the major modelers should have Mesa Mark amps cuz I don't use them and I don't want them. They could use those resources to model the fart pedal instead.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 8,756
Because creating a component modeling system is vastly more complex than captures. That's why it's easier for products that traditionally relied on component modeling to add capture systems than the other way around.
When several of the competition have some sort of capture system, it makes sense for your product to have it too. Especially with a vocal minority asking for it.
Add to that the current "popularity" of null tests to measure and compare the accuracy of various capture systems, and NAM makes even more sense. I hope that Line 6 Proxy will be amazing and all, but I doubt that it will "beat" NAM in terms of accuracy, at least not with this pseudo-scientific way that some people promote and use to test profiles accuracy. So yeah, FAS made a smart choice there: fulfilling the wish of some of their users to have capture-enabled devices while limiting to a minimum the effort to implement it thanks to NAM.
Chocol8
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,177
I'd be pretty surprised if it doesn't effectively match NAM in terms of accuracy with improved functionality. I would be far less surprised to find out Proxy is leveraging NAM or parts of NAM under the hood.
I think a lot of people in this thread have inaccurate opinions on the accuracy differences between NAM, Tonex V2 and QC V2. They are MUCH closer to each other now, and there isn't an obvious clear winner. I see no reason Proxy won't join the group.
That said, NAM in 18 months is going to be different than NAM today. By time the Axe IV comes out, NAM could be different, by time the AXE IV hardware life is coming to an end, NAM WILL be significantly different. It makes a lot of sense for Fractal to support it from day 1 with the expectation that the value will increase with time. The short sighted "I hate captures" guys will be eating crow in a few years.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 8,756
In what way do you think NAM will be somehow ground breaking? Parametric captures are the only thing I could see making a real difference at this point.
To me the issue with captures is all about workflow, and not sound with Tonex V2, QC2 or NAM. It's a file browser with shit tier metadata on literally every competing product on the market.
Chocol8
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,177
That's a pretty fucking big thing though. If they get just that right, it will kill the component modeling market due to the time/cost factor alone. But there is also much more to be had in capturing effects and signal chains. The ability to bake a bunch of blocks down into a single capture, will open up options, especially on smaller/lower powered units.
Yes, hence my question if there's been any clarification afterwards. I assume by your answer that there's been no further information. Thanks!