The CNFB Method

Cool shit Cliff.

But let us users not conclude as that 40% improvement in one calculational aspect directly equates to 40% reduction for amps or drives overall due to overhead etc. Plus lab tests don't necessarily translate 100% to production code.

Also, if CC does do a rework to "Cygnus X2", let's not expect a few week turnaround and/or continually bug him ... there's like 300 amps in there!
 
Last edited:
If I remember correctly, you posted something about a trivial way of simulating OD pedals awhile ago, is this the follow up of that ? I wonder how this is going to effect the Axfx III longevity. Extending product cycles and such ?

Also congratulations mate, nothing better than accomplishing something that is of importance to oneself
 
greiswig said:
FAS has also proven the value of their firmware over time, and as much as I hate to say it, I bet there are a lot of us who would be willing to pay for truly substantive updates to the firmware in existing hardware. Given the relative margins, it might be worth considering.
Click to expand...

IF such updates can even be installed in old units.
 
greiswig said:
FAS has also proven the value of their firmware over time, and as much as I hate to say it, I bet there are a lot of us who would be willing to pay for truly substantive updates to the firmware in existing hardware. Given the relative margins, it might be worth considering.
Click to expand...
I absolutely would be down for this, however I don't think DSP was the issue- I recall Cliff mentioning the II simply didn't have enough storage for anything else, it was completely maxed out. As much as I'd love a new firmware update, even at a cost, I don't see it happening. (Unless Cliff invents CSCA- Chase Super Compression Algorithm, saves space without any CPU usage unpacking!)

And I'm fine with that, the II still sounds kickass and when I can justify getting a III one day, I most certainly will. FAS has made me a lifetime customer with the way things are run.
 
Clearly most of us won't understand the language here to see any nuance, but economy of cpu load........That's awesome! Perhaps that could that could re up the value of the current hardware specs to extend the product life cycle. I'm guessing it would be more advantageous to sell more of the current units than tool up for a new one? Of course, everybody likes new toys! hmmmm....


Ahh, but if it's a storage issue, then maybe Cliff's new algorithm uses less code?
 
Speaking only as a user so I know nothing actually, I'd say there's less than zero chance of firmware updates for older hardware that's no longer in production. It just makes zero economic sense for the company. As everyone is well aware, there's a constant stream of updates for current hardware, but extending that to older devices just isn't going to happen.

IMO, /$.000002.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom