The Axe-Fx 3 works only at 48Khz

Status
Not open for further replies.
It will be nice if someone could answer this question:

Is it possible Fractal can update via firmware like Kemper did?

Since i'm considering buying an AXE FX3 it will also be nice to know if a selectable sample rate can be implemented by Fractal Audio via Firmware update or the hardware is inadequate to support other sample rate than 48Hkz.

Thanks
 
I’ve been following this thread since it started, and came to the conclusions below:

1. I originally assumed it a troll thread from the title. Turns out it wasn’t, and the OP apologized for complicating the intended question by poorly wording the issue due to frustration. Agreed.

2. The OP is far from the first person to voice frustration with the limitation.

3. The limitation of sample rate has been explained by the designer. It is apparent that the sample rate could be variable, and another forumite posted some options of circuitry that might be included. If this technology were included with the operating quality demanded by Mr Chase, it would up the price of the Axe Fx significantly. This also has been covered elsewhere.

4. The single most constant knock I personally hear from persons considering purchasing the Axe Fx is price. “Are you kidding? For that much money I could buy a (insert amp they’ve never played but is popular on whatever forum they frequent here).” Adding to the price adds to the number of people not likely to buy in order to learn how short sighted the above cost question really is. Also covered elsewhere.

5. The Axe Fx III is advertised as the center of your audio workstation. And for most users, it can be. But not for all, and I don’t think anyone is arguing that.

6. I am adding to a pages-long post in order to restate what has already been restated multiple times elsewhere, and I should stop.

7. I rarely stop when I should.

8. My opinion is that the Axe Fx is unmatched in what it does, and how much ground it covers. I can’t find a plausible reason Mr Chase would have failed to include higher (or other) sampling rates if he could have at the price point, without compromising something more vital. I accept that at face value. For some, the prioritizing of functions used to make that decision is unacceptable. I accept that too.

9. Time to move along.
 
Last edited:
Could someone answer this and stop focusing on the rant for a little bit? Thanks

Since i'm considering buying an AXE FX3 it will also be nice to know if a selectable sample rate can be implemented by Fractal Audio via Firmware update or the hardware is inadequate to support other sample rate than 48Hkz.

Kemper did from a Firmware update.
 
Could someone answer this and stop focusing on the rant for a little bit? Thanks
.


Lesson to be learned here, no?

As I originally said, your arguments would of been much better perceived without the ranting profantity, calling the designer/company clueless etc.

If you desired to have a serious discussion then present your questions/concerns in a professional manner and people will respond accordingly.

Likewise, when people do respond with a suggestion, saying comments are useless et al., does not really motivate others to want to take their time to help you. It makes many people just want to add you to their “ignore” list.
 
Haven't read thru the entire thread... so this may have already been mentioned
If you have an audio interface that can re-sample (on-the-fly) its S/PDIF or AES digital input, this is a moot point.
You can set your audio interface to the desired sample-rate... and it'll re-sample the Axe-FX III to match.

BTW, This "locked" sample-rate issue is something that affects many different musical devices.
  • Yamaha Montage is locked at 44.1k
  • Axe-FX is locked at 48k
  • UA OX Amp Top Box is locked at 44.1k
If using a device with locked sample-rate is imperative to your work (and you can't deal with being locked at that sample-rate), the most practical/effective solution is to use an audio interface that can re-sample its digital input.
 
Could someone answer this and stop focusing on the rant for a little bit? Thanks



Kemper did from a Firmware update.
Since tone does not matter but is a tool to be used...

I think it is pretty fucking stupid for someone to show up on a product forum hurling profanities, being argumentative and condescending and expecting a productive conversation. Then trying to pull out a full heat reversal like they are some kind of victim? Not buying it.

You set the tone. You reap what you sow.
 
Since tone does not matter but is a tool to be used...

I think it is pretty fucking stupid for someone to show up on a product forum hurling profanities, being argumentative and condescending and expecting a productive conversation. Then trying to pull out a full heat reversal like they are some kind of victim? Not buying it.

You set the tone. You reap what you sow.

No victimism, just trying to shift the attention to a good question that none seems to care about.
And originally was not a question of mine.

People seems to care too much about higher sample rate, my original posts (rant) is not about sound quality is about ease of use and few get this point, it's ok to have this limit of 48Khz and nit higher sample rate than that but why not 44.1?
So i feel this comment about "1874239854875Khz will costs too much to be implemented" are really useless, because they are just out of context. Apologize if you felt to much anger out of it.
 
Haven't read thru the entire thread... so this may have already been mentioned
If you have an audio interface that can re-sample (on-the-fly) its S/PDIF or AES digital input, this is a moot point.
You can set your audio interface to the desired sample-rate... and it'll re-sample the Axe-FX III to match.

BTW, This "locked" sample-rate issue is something that affects many different musical devices.
  • Yamaha Montage is locked at 44.1k
  • Axe-FX is locked at 48k
  • UA OX Amp Top Box is locked at 44.1k
If using a device with locked sample-rate is imperative to your work (and you can't deal with being locked at that sample-rate), the most practical/effective solution is to use an audio interface that can re-sample its digital input.

Thank you Jim, your answer is gold.
Can you tell me how can i practically do that?
 
Could someone answer this and stop focusing on the rant for a little bit? Thanks



Kemper did from a Firmware update.
From what I could glean from information posted earlier in this thread, it seems that it may be technically possible to add this feature into the firmware, but it would require a complete reworking or all the IR’s and is therefore extremely unlikely.

This is just my own interpretation and takeaway, so I may be mistaken.
 
I’m guessing this would be a hardware issue and not easily retrofitted. Would it be something Fractal would be willing to do after market? It’s not a big deal for me, but obviously a strong enough demand for it.
 
There is an answer to how to do that (resample) here

Jim told a different thing, it seems you don't need to spend 700$ dollar in a useless hardware SRC if you have the right audio interface.
So if anyone know something about how to practically do what Jim said it will be really helpful.

Haven't read thru the entire thread... so this may have already been mentioned
If you have an audio interface that can re-sample (on-the-fly) its S/PDIF or AES digital input, this is a moot point.
You can set your audio interface to the desired sample-rate... and it'll re-sample the Axe-FX III to match.

BTW, This "locked" sample-rate issue is something that affects many different musical devices.
  • Yamaha Montage is locked at 44.1k
  • Axe-FX is locked at 48k
  • UA OX Amp Top Box is locked at 44.1k
If using a device with locked sample-rate is imperative to your work (and you can't deal with being locked at that sample-rate), the most practical/effective solution is to use an audio interface that can re-sample its digital input.
 
From what I could glean from information posted earlier in this thread, it seems that it may be technically possible to add this feature into the firmware, but it would require a complete reworking or all the IR’s and is therefore extremely unlikely.

This is just my own interpretation and takeaway, so I may be mistaken.

While you’re mistaken, you’re in good company - a number of other people in this thread have also jumped to this incorrect conclusion

What you’re referring to is the internal processing sample rate. This thread about a different sample rate: the I/O sample rate. Currently they match (although for certain computations a higher sample rate is used to avoid aliasing). The OP is asking for a sample rate conversion at the end of the processing chain (similar to what you find in other guitar processors like Helix and Headrush), but the internal sample rate, and cpu load, would remain unchanged.
 
While you’re mistaken, you’re in good company - a number of other people in this thread have also jumped to this incorrect conclusion

What you’re referring to is the internal processing sample rate. This thread about a different sample rate: the I/O sample rate. Currently they match (although for certain computations a higher sample rate is used to avoid aliasing). The OP is asking for a sample rate conversion at the end of the processing chain (similar to what you find in other guitar processors like Helix and Headrush), but the internal sample rate, and cpu load, would remain unchanged.
Thank you for the well delivered clarification. I hope that it will be implemented one day, if it is indeed possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom