JRod4928
Power User
As someone who hasn't even tried the VC, was the previous beef (Prior to 5.0 beta) due to poor latency? Or accuracy? Both?
Has FAS commented on the latency improvements anywhere else, other than the funny muppets reference?
Both, generally, but my biggest beef was the latency as you can't really notice artifacts (I guess what you mean by "accuracy") with overdrive/distortion. I rarely use it for clean, so it's not a huge concern if it doesn't sound too good with clean, although I'm going to try the above compressor trick to see if that improves the tone.
Not at all; here or elsewhere, which I still find incredibly odd. I think they probably want to respond and tell me it's all in my head, but there're tons of testimonials as well as my objective data from measuring the VC in 4.1 and then again in 5.0b1. The muppets thing was just a reference to the back and forth between me and one dude who was being a d***** canoe to me for literally no reason (whose later post was outright abusive and was reported, removed, and the user blocked).
Kablesp, welcome to the forum!
I think that's just it, though; it probably wasn't an intentional or deliberate improvement. I think it was a byproduct of other changes, one of which actually made the tuner wonky. Given that they wouldn't intentionally make a utility on the machine worse, it seems to follow that the VC's change was equally unintentional. You're right though - they don't need to tell us everything, and they might be working on it behind the scenes and just want to see if anyone notices lol! To be honest, even though the VC is better, there may be other modules in the Pitch block that are worse; or maybe certain settings within the VC that are worse. I guess my tests are woefully incomplete to declare that the VC is better, wholesale. I only tested it with the settings I use (and one more extreme setting). Hopefully it's not worse in other areas, though, especially ones that more people use than the VC, but I haven't seen much scuttlebutt about the pitch block other than VC-related chatter.
Exactly. Prior to using the Variax and the VC, my band played everything in half-step down tuning. I hated it except for the songs natively recorded like that; to me, a song sounds weird if tuned only slightly different from the recording that I've grown up with. I think if it's a 4th or a 5th off, it's more tolerable since it's different enough that I'm not bothered by it. But if it's a half-step off, something in my brain is like, "Hmm. Something's wrong here..." I don't have perfect pitch or anything, but I think any of us can recognize when a song we've loved and listened to for decades is different. Like, if someone started playing Don't Stop Believin' or Carry On Wayward Son in a different key, we'd know something was off. My 2c, anyway
Totally; I had it pitched down 5 half steps to simulate a 7-string guitar. It sounds fantastic, but it also creates some interesting sounds when I play an open D chord, for instance; it's basically an open A (using the CAGED method), but in the D position. It's inspirational to have an A in that position and other things I can do with the higher strings when the overall sound is down 5 half steps. And with the low latency, it's now possible to play like that and not feel like you're running through sand (or like when you try to really sprint in a dream lol)
I just bought that B stock FM3 after reading through this. I have a new gig and 1/3 of the set is going to be Eb, 5 songs are F standard (CAPO1) not to mention some Drop D (or Drop C# in Eb).The first rule of life: don’t make any decisions based on anything I say or do
Are you the one on TGP that has that new gig where you need all the crazy tunings? I’m stoked you gave this another shot. It is quite remarkable now. I even made a faux bass preset. And it sounds good; not as good as playing a real bass, but using the B7K into a 4x10 cab sounds great. Tool bass tones for days using a 6-string guitar
Yeah, the latency used to be fairly distracting. Overall I find it quite satisfying now. I’d be perfectly happy even if it never got better than it is now.
You still think so, even after 5.0? Whether or not you believe it to be better, the Helix's poly capo, for all its good, sill takes up literally half the DSP of a chip - so on a Stomp you can't really have much else; MAYBE you'll fit and amp/cab or amp +IR, whereas on the FM3, the Virtual Capo takes up around 7% of the DSP; meaning, you can throw the Virtual Capo in just about any preset you want it. The pitch block itself takes up about 12% DSP until you change the type to VC, then it goes down.
I didn’t imply that the helix is an overall better unit (IMO it isn’t) or that it’s capo is comparable cpu wise. This is also not a complaint about latency as that tends to come with the territory. All I’m saying is that when I used the capo feature on the helix stomp (which absolutely stole most of the cpu when engaged) it was more stable sonically than the VC in the FM3 currently is. Even with FW 5b. I hope they can figure something out for it down the road.You still think so, even after 5.0? Whether or not you believe it to be better, the Helix's poly capo, for all its good, sill takes up literally half the DSP of a chip - so on a Stomp you can't really have much else; MAYBE you'll fit and amp/cab or amp +IR, whereas on the FM3, the Virtual Capo takes up around 7% of the DSP; meaning, you can throw the Virtual Capo in just about any preset you want it. The pitch block itself takes up about 12% DSP until you change the type to VC, then it goes down.
Personally, I still think it's better, although the measured latency of both is identical now. I guess having only used the Helix's Poly Capo so far with Helix sounds has turned me off to it, even if the Poly Capo itself is actually better (I don't think it is, especially now). But it's like having a better AC in a crappier car, as far as I'm concerned, even if it were better, and by using that AC, it cut your gas mileage in half.
I take my Helix out every now and again to try to get a good sound, but usually within 15 minutes, it's put away again and I'm back with my Axe Fx or NDSP plugins.
Anyway, this isn't about that. But I appreciate your contribution even though I disagree. Cheers!
Nah, it's cool; I get ya. I was just asking if you'd tried the 5.0 version of it. Because I completely agree that it was not very satisfying before, but now you answered, so I appreciate your view
It doesn't; remember, I have the Axe Fx III as well (same pitch algorithm as the FM9). To my ear, they are identical. By my tests, the latency is identical. Of course, the downside of my objective measurements is that it doesn't/can't measure artifacts and I only tested it with the VC dropped a half step. That said, though, my subjective opinion is that they are equally as good.
Go get yourself a variax haha. Variax + FM9 is a killer combo. Variax + Helix is insanely customizable. You could have so much fun"I didn’t buy the FM3 expecting it would be capable of replacing a drop pedal or using a capo" -- I "partially" did this time around
But honestly, what I need to do for my new band is cover a LOT and alt tunings is just a piece of the puzzle. I had rehearsal last night and brought two guitar, E standard and Eb standard and I could have EASILY handled the Eb with a Drop pedal (which I have incoming for my traditional board OR the FM3 which is also incoming.
I mean, I'm testing Poly Capo from Helix Native at low volume where I can still absolutely hear my guitar strings and the flat tone coming out of the speakers, once I play along with songs I need to learn with the band I'm perfectly fine. This includes latency from the Poly Capo AND from my audio interface / DAW. I really feel like I'm going to be fine going this route. I wonder if many people have completely unrealistic expectations?
I mean, we are already booked solid for the year in this new project.
If someone comes online and says the FM9 virtual capo completely and utterly spanks the FM3 in version 5.x beta then I guess I would consider.
