Now that the Axe-fx 2 has been released... we probably will never see the Axe-PC

iPad ? what about a mobile versión ? :-DDDD

Seriously, you guys think this soft can run under a regular pc under win or iPad or whatever with assumible latency ?
 
Its fun to speculate, but I'd rather not see Cliff waste his time. Zero interest in AxePC for me. Why deal with the headaches of a PC? Now that you've got USB in/out and a II compatible Axe Edit I really don't see the necessity of a plug-in at all.
Better to use the time to make the II better (not that I have a single wish list item at this point, but I'm sure Cliff has ideas)
 
Jack Napalm said:
I think its awesome there are people here that know more than the creator. Cliff has already stated that a typical processor found in PC's can't handle the load. Maybe he doesn't know that much after all. :lol
Click to expand...

Define "typical". Obviously there would be minimum system requirements, however modern processors are extremely powerful.

Lets compare the GFLOPs between the Tigershark and a modern i7 processor:

Tigershark = just under 4 GFLOPs.
Core i7-980 = up to 95 GFLOPs.

Even with the additional overheads of Windows or OS X, a modern processor would at least match the Tigershark in terms of real-time performance.
 
Last edited:
It's not about the processor, it's that with a multi-task O.S. taking the control of the machine, you cannot guarantee usable latency 100% of the time.

And yes, Cliff himself did the test and posted here. I don't remember the exact words, but was about despite the pc can handle *momentarily* the load, it was unusable.
 
If I remember right its not just about he load. Its about the type of calculations as well. Cliff has stated much better. He obviously has a better grasp on his hardware than a blowhard that spouts off technical terms without understanding the whole picture.
 
mcmurray said:
Define "typical". Obviously there would be minimum system requirements, however modern processors are extremely powerful.

Lets compare the GFLOPs between the Tigershark and a modern i7 processor:

Tigershark = just under 4 GFLOPs.
Core i7-980 = up to 95 GFLOPs.

Even with the additional overheads of Windows or OS X, a modern processor would at least match the Tigershark in terms of real-time performance.
Click to expand...

If your logic was accurate, there would be no market for Tigershark. Cliff would've just used an i7.

The truth is different processors are designed to do different things. It's not just about SPEED, it's about architecture of the chip. Ever wonder why performance is different between Phenom and i7 processors? It's because the architecture handles different things with a different degree of efficiency. Even though these are both PC processors, one will out-perform the other at the same speeds doing different tasks. The SHARC processors are designed for low latency DSP processing. An i7 simply isn't designed to do the job.
 
I guess I am just missing the point as I don't see what advantage having it as a PC.

You can already hook it up to your PC via Axe Edit and can record direct to your DAW with it as well as set it as the output device.

Plus it is in a form factor that I think is probably much easier to gig with as it does not require a monitor.

What advantage would you gain by having Axe PC. And I am asking genuinely as I really don't know, not trying to be smart.
 
I think the Axe Pc is a swell idea.

The ability to tweak multiple tracks in my DAW simultaneously allows for a completely different recording experience in ease and flexibility. It is not comparable to what is offered now in any way.

When I use the ultra for recording - it's 99% reamping and I don't see how the the Axe II would be make it any easier.
 
Last edited:
sarge said:
I guess I am just missing the point as I don't see what advantage having it as a PC.

You can already hook it up to your PC via Axe Edit and can record direct to your DAW with it as well as set it as the output device.

Plus it is in a form factor that I think is probably much easier to gig with as it does not require a monitor.

What advantage would you gain by having Axe PC. And I am asking genuinely as I really don't know, not trying to be smart.
Click to expand...

A as VST plugin it would pretty cool to have. I have laptop and travel often. It would be nice to be able to have the sounds of the AxeFx anywhere. I am sure there are other uses. I would love to see it but it doesn't seem like it will happen.
 
Sidivan said:
If your logic was accurate, there would be no market for Tigershark. Cliff would've just used an i7.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges.

The Tigershark is an embedded device. The i7 isn't.

sarge said:
I guess I am just missing the point as I don't see what advantage having it as a PC.
Click to expand...

Apart from the fact that it would be cheaper due to no special hardware required, having the Axe as a VST would make recording and reamping so much easier.
 
Last edited:
First off, porting the entire Axe Fx product to multiple operating systems (Mac, Windows, Linux?) would be labor intensive and most likely wouldn't result in the same product with anywhere near the same quality.

So when you refer to an "Axe Fx PC", what you're really talking about is a new product. More than likely Fractal Audio doesn't see this type of product meeting their standards, having poor margins, and/or deviating resources/focus from the Axe Fx product.

The USB interface really makes the "Axe Fx PC" idea unnecessary.

I like that they stay focused and committed to a single product that essentially does it all.
 
sheky said:
What does having USB have to do with being able to use the Axe as a plugin?
Click to expand...
It doesn't, but what I believe Mr_You is getting at one USB cable and it is part of your computer much like printer, external hard drive, or a audio interface.
With the Standard/Ultra would have to cable out to some sort of interface for audio and midi. And still not as flexible as the AF II with it's one USB cable
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom