VP4 vs FM3

ethomas1013 said:
@desertdweller please give us a report of your findings when you test the VP4 in 4CM in comparison to the FM9 in 4CM. I expect the VP4 to preform just as well or better but it would be great to hear a users perspective.
Click to expand...
That’s my expectation too. I’ve had really good results using the Axe FX 2 and the FM9 in 4CM, and I expect the VP4 to be excellent for this too. Is this the first device from Fractal with factory 4CM presets? It’s the first time I’ve noticed them in the manual for sure.
 
desertdweller said:
That’s my expectation too. I’ve had really good results using the Axe FX 2 and the FM9 in 4CM, and I expect the VP4 to be excellent for this too. Is this the first device from Fractal with factory 4CM presets? It’s the first time I’ve noticed them in the manual for sure.
Click to expand...
There have been previous 4CM template factory presets.
 
desertdweller said:
I’m one of the users quoted here, and I can give a little more info on my experience. I have a bunch of Mesa heads, and I’ve used the FM3 with those and a few other brands as well (EVH, Synergy, Victory, and PRS). The FM3 is a stellar unit and it can be used competently in 4CM and will make most people happy. I just noticed the sound of the amps was not quite as good as when I ran my amps with other FX processors, notably the HX Effects in a similar 4CM configuration. I also did not like that I had to run an XLR to 1/4 cable out of output 1 to get 4CM to work correctly.

Moving from the FM3 to an FM9 for the same function all of my concerns dropped. The FM9 sounded better, and I could use standard quarter inch cables for the connections. The FM9 is immaculate as a 4CM option IMO. For the FM3, I can’t fully speak to the converters and I have no scientific tests to show results from, just my ears and experience using a lot of amps and effects processors over the years, I was not fully satisfied running the FM3 as a 4CM effects-only option.

I have a VP4 on order and can’t wait to try it. I am mainly looking to use it in tandem with my amp heads either in the loop or in 4CM mode while my FM9 remains connected to my PC as a utility device for writing and recording. With the recent FM9 updates, especially DynaCabs, it’s really become the most incredible all-in-one writing and recording platform, replacing several of my amps and pedals.
Click to expand...
Curious, how were you monitoring, guitar cabs, monitors, studio monitors?

Did you match the gain and the monitoring SPL between the FM3 and FM9 while testing?

I have a AFX2 and a FM3, and both sound fine 4CM with any number of amps, i.e. Fenders, Mesas, Peaveys, plus many tube preamps including; AS_JCM800, AS_Twin, Kittyhawk Quattro, ADA MP-1, Marshall JMP-1, plus custom MTS tube preamps; Orange OR120, HiWatt DR-102, Matchless Chieftain, Dumble ODS, Fender Deluxe, Vox AC30TB, Marshall Plexi, Friedman HB. With the tube preamps I use the Amp Block for tube power amp sims. Note that of course all amp FX Loops are not created equal, so that's a variable.

I've monitored them in pro environments through Urei, Weslake, Yamaha, Digidesign, and Genelec monitors, as well as a variety of guitar cabs and headphones/IEM's, so I'm really confused why people say the FM3 sucks at 4CM, especially vs the AFX2 which I also have years of experience with which doesn't sound any better IME (I've no experience with FM9/AFX3)?

What you're saying is that there is freq colorization or dynamic changes in the dry path which I find hard to believe assuming the FM3's audio setup is correct (for example my Les Pauls with Duncan JB's in the bridge require the 18db pad to avoid rounding the waveform, so one needs to test this via a DAW!), but as soon as you add FX that pretty much becomes a non-issue anyway. As to the balanced output needed to break a ground loop, that is certainly possible and can be easily corrected by any iso-transformer without requiring a XLR connector as well.

It's interesting that so many folks are ragging on the FM3 for 4CM use, though IME it works fine, so I'm thinking it's related to gain staging and ground loops etc, or perhaps some badly designed amp FX Loops.
 
Last edited:
Mine arrived midday today. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing how it integrates with an FM3 tonight in the context in which I'd prefer to use it. I've been continually getting stuck in my head trying to visualize how the signal chain routing will work without a S/PDIF Input on the FM3 while minimizing the number of conversions happening, and not making too many compromises.

I also have an Axe-Fx III, and I have no trouble at all thinking about how'd use it with that unit. I'll have to see if the lack of a S/PDIF Input on the FM3 is enough of an obstacle for how I want to set everything up to warrant selling it in favor of an FM9, despite the significant size/weight sacrifice I'd make by doing so.
 
vika12 said:
That's fine. For me, the FM3 does everything that I need.
Click to expand...
I'm a FM3 owner who has an VP4 on the way. Not as a replacement, more as a supplement to FM3.

The VP4 has better Reverbs than the FM3 and is likely to have earlier access to any effects or improvements to effects that get created for the FX-III.

I can also be much less concerned about maxing out the CPU on my FM3 because I can offload effects onto the VP4.

In addition to all that, I can use the VP4 in conjunction with a few tube amps I have laying around , like my IRT-Studio.

Someday I'll probably own a FX-III, for now I think the VP4 is a good stepping stone for me going deeper into the Fractal Audio world 🌎
 
I can't see any difference in the printed I/O specs between the AFX3, FM9, and FM3, so I don't believe one is much better than the other for 4CM (and I know my AFX2 and FM3 are not very different)?

They all work fine just as they are assuming you can adjust stuff enough to find your sound, but if you can't the main difference you are most likely hearing is that the tube guitar amp's/preamp's input is seeing a low impedance output from the Axe's outputs 2, 3, 4, rather than a guitar's passive pickup's high impedance, and there is a certain "mojo" obtained by having your guitar's high impedance passive pups connected to V1, so, for those who can't adjust their stuff to get their tube amps to sound satisfactory in 4CM, you can build one of these passive guitar pup simulators which is what I use with my tube preamps in my AFX2's and FM3's FX Loops.

http://www.muzique.com/lab/pickups.htm

If you're really into it you can tune the circuit to match your pickups.

Good luck!
 
I remember some Cliff's posts... ha stated FX8 was the best design and component ever, but it was very expensive! Than the III, and derive from it the FM3, on par with II. I don't know about FM9, but seems like VP4 is FX8-like quality, on top of all actual Fractals.
 
yek said:
Here you go:

"The FM3 isn't expressly designed with 4CM in mind like the Axe-Fx III. It can do it but it's not as easy and may not have the same level of fidelity."

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/i...g-an-fx-only-floor-unit.2273875/post-32955922
Click to expand...
All the Fractal H/W has 600 Ohm low impedance Aux Outs according to the published specs, not a passive guitar pup's various higher impedance's, which is what the typical tube guitar amp's front end is expecting with regards to the sound of a passive guitar direct into a typical tube guitar amp. It's the same issue as using a buffered pedal before the amp, active pups, or putting your vintage Fuzz later in the chain rather than first in the chain.

It's easy enough to test, just set up 4CM and listen with your amp in the Axe's loop vs your passive guitar pups direct into the amp's front end. There's typically a difference, though many people will be fine without the inductor in the circuit by adjusting their amp's tone stack or EQ'ing etc, but for those who aren't the above inductor circuit will get the "mojo" much closer to the sound of being plugged direct, and if you tune the RLC network to match your most used passive pup's resonant peak, you can get the "mojo" even closer.

As to the various Fractal HW's I/O fidelity with regards to the FM3/4CM's other fidelity issues such as S/N, FR, Dist etc, then as always Cliff is the man, though I have no problem using my FM3 4CM as the Noise Gate thoughtfully provided on Input 2 easily tames any noise from the tube gear (tube preamps in my case).

Cheers...
 
Last edited:
Smilzo said:
I remember some Cliff's posts... ha stated FX8 was the best design and component ever, but it was very expensive! Than the III, and derive from it the FM3, on par with II. I don't know about FM9, but seems like VP4 is FX8-like quality, on top of all actual Fractals.
Click to expand...
Cliff has stated that the Axe Fx III circuitry was derived from the FX8 and the FM9 is the same as the Axe Fx III.
 
FractalAudio said:
Correct. The Axe-Fx III and FM9 have essentially the same analog path as the FX8.

The VP4 is similar and offers the same fidelity.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info, Cliff. Much appreciated.

One question, though. Do the differences in fidelity between the FM3 and the other devices only affect the analog outputs or also the main instrument input? In other words, would there even be any difference in fidelity or SNR if the FM3 is connected to an audio interface via S/PDIF?
 
Fract7lovesmeilovefracta7 said:
VP4 = Dual high resolution reverbs. End of story.

FM3, great effects, great amps, but NOT an FX powerhouse, like the VP4 is.

FM3, a little heavy and a little big.
Click to expand...
While the VP4 is a extremely fine and capable product, the FM3 is certainly a "FX Powerhouse" in comparison, even the old OG FM3 as my kitchen sink preset shows (there's a JCM800 tube preamp in the FX Loop)...



As to the FM3's size and weight, I'd love FM3 power in VP4 packaging LOL!
 
Last edited:
TheTrueZoltan! said:
Thanks for the info, Cliff. Much appreciated.

One question, though. Do the differences in fidelity between the FM3 and the other devices only affect the analog outputs or also the main instrument input? In other words, would there even be any difference in fidelity or SNR if the FM3 is connected to an audio interface via S/PDIF?
Click to expand...
The major difference appears to be better ground loop prevention in the AFX3 and FM9 with additional humbuster I/O, this from reviewing the published spec, and not from doing any actual measurements as my FM3 does a great job of 4CM as long as ground loops are handled and the gain staging is correct. Note that the above refers to stereo only, not W/D/W where any analog path differences could presumably be more apparent.
 
Last edited:
There is a departure in the VP4 from internal power supplies and the required (legally) floating chassis safety ground from the flagship FAS models. It makes the VP4 much more compatible with tube amps.. without taking extra measures to deal with ground loops.

if you need amp modeling.. the FM3, FM9, FXIII path is the way forward in my humble opinion. If you are using amps, the VP4 is next level awesome.
 
Last edited:
Have both.

FM3 is better for an all in one amp/board replacement and VP4 is better for using as or with a pedalboard and real amp. Both of which are their main intended use. Who’d have guessed.

VP4
  • Smaller and can easily mount to pedalboard
  • Simpler/Easier to navigate
  • Footswitch for each effect directly
  • Can be powered from typical pedalboard power supplies
FM3
  • Full signal chain with amp and IR
  • Headphone and XLR outs
  • IEC power for standalone use
  • More controls for full rig replacement.
 
DJD100 said:
While the VP4 is a extremely fine and capable product, the FM3 is certainly a "FX Powerhouse" in comparison, even the old OG FM3 as my kitchen sink preset shows (there's a JCM800 tube preamp in the FX Loop)...



As to the FM3's size and weight, I'd love FM3 power in VP4 packaging LOL!
Click to expand...
What are you using the mixer block for here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom