Wish axe fx 4 on the floor. Need floor until with the same DSP as rack unit. FM9 form factor

josephyballew

josephyballew

Inspired
Axe 3 or 4 as a floor unit. You have to admit AXE FX 4 on the floor has a ring to it. I know you can't have the ins and outs the same, but you can have the DSP and same effects and such.
 
What doesn't the FM9 do for you that the Axe-Fx 3 in a floor unit would allow?

I don't think what you ask will happen for current generation because the TI based system in the Axe-Fx 3 is way different and there's no incentive for making a new PCB etc to cram that to the FM9 form factor. Maybe next gen they will have something more powerful in the floor format.
 
josephyballew said:
Axe 3 or 4 as a floor unit. You have to admit AXE FX 4 on the floor has a ring to it. I know you can't have the ins and outs the same, but you can have the DSP and same effects and such.
Click to expand...

You can’t have the DSP.

The FX3 CPUs run so hot that they need forced air cooling. The chassis of the FM9 was designed for a CPU that uses passive cooling and doesn’t have space for the FX3 fans.

"The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs. The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core. If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:

  • Axe-Fx III: 100%
  • FM9: 50%
  • FM3: 25%
So why not use the TI DSPs in everything? Power. The TI DSPs use more power and generate more heat requiring active cooling. They are also more complicated to use requiring dedicated clock generation units, multiple power supplies with specific sequencing requirements, etc." [6]
Click to expand...

Maybe in the future there will be a smaller set of CPUs capable of keeping up with the FX3 that don’t generate the heat, or they’ll have a cooling chip that can keep the CPU cold at a price point that makes it feasible. I’m sure Fractal is aware of what is on the horizon, such as…

https://www.froresystems.com/

but it needs to fit into this philosophy…

"The entire product line was conceived years ago. The goal was to maximize the number of parts shared between products. The footswitch PC boards do three switches each. An FM3 has one board. An FC6 has two. An FM9 has three and an FC12 has four. All products use the same LCDs, encoders, side plates, etc., etc. This reduces cost and repair inventory. The FC6 and the FM3 are basically the same enclosure. The FC12 and FM9 are basically the same enclosure. This isn't a huge market. Margins are thin so you have to think of ways to minimize development and product costs. Parts bin methodology is the route we took on this generation." [1]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ole
Rock Chalk said:
Now that's a floor unit.......View attachment 121791
Click to expand...

Pretty wild but also maybe too heavy to be worth it. I would love to see a modular Fractal system one day instead, so you can add as much I/O and fx blocks as you need (eg as many Pitch or Synth or Amp Blocks). One module would have it's limit, and then you could keep adding modules and connect them to a master grid.
 
josephyballew said:
Axe 3 or 4 as a floor unit. You have to admit AXE FX 4 on the floor has a ring to it. I know you can't have the ins and outs the same, but you can have the DSP and same effects and such.
Click to expand...
Isn't that the FC12 with the AX3 racked? One cable from floorboard to rack.

I wouldn't want all that I/O (and accompanying cables) sitting on the floor in front of me.

Hell, FC12 and two or three AX3s racked. Expandable power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom