Producer question about the so called Axe-PC Plugin

pifos_2

Member
Hey guys,

Ok I am completely sold on the sound from the Axe-fx.

Now the thing is that I am not a gigging musicians anymore and I work only in the studio. I read a lot of old stuff from 2 years ago about the development of the Axe plugin.

Before I spent 1700 euros on the hardware (know it's worth it but still), I'd like to know if the plugin will ever come out of not. Cause if the plugin comes out, I'll just have to sell the Axe-FX and buy the plugin...

I don't know if the developer is checking this forum sometimes, but some infos would be welcome!

Cheers,
Nicolas.
 
It has never been officially announced, however I doubt and kinda hope it doesn't come out. #1 it would take large amounts of cpu resources that even today would push processors to the limits, #2 the big one, piracy. Its so bad nowadays, there's no doubt in my mind that if Cliff was to put it out, it would easily surpass every other guitar plugin on the torrent lists. Others might have more up to date info, but I don't think it would make an appearance anytime soon. If it even has an appearance. :|
 
It has never been officially announced, however I doubt and kinda hope it doesn't come out. #1 it would take large amounts of cpu resources that even today would push processors to the limits, #2 the big one, piracy. Its so bad nowadays, there's no doubt in my mind that if Cliff was to put it out, it would easily surpass every other guitar plugin on the torrent lists. Others might have more up to date info, but I don't think it would make an appearance anytime soon. If it even has an appearance. :|

Would push todays processors to the limits? Er are you sure about that.
 
Would push todays processors to the limits? Er are you sure about that.

Without trying to quote verbatim. Yep. The processor in the AxeFx is different than what you find in a pc or laptop. They might be 'faster' but they can't computer as many calculations as the AxeFX processor can in the same time frame. The chip in the AxeFx is better at certain functions than a Intel/AMD processor.
 
Cliff posted his results running it on an Intel i7. I don't remember the details, but the load was substantial. Consider the fact that the Axe PC forum section where this was posted no longer exists.
 
Here is what the Man said:

Modern desktop CPU's boast all kinds of impressive GFLOP numbers, and they can achieve peak performance fairly close to those numbers under optimum conditions, i.e. "off-line" processing of vectored data.

Unfortunately, the actual performance is only a small fraction of the advertised value when processing real-time data (of which audio is inherently).

We've ported the Axe-Fx code to the Intel x86 architecture and on my 2.66 GHz Core i7 (quad core) machine the CPU usage is nearly identical to an Ultra. The i7 boasts something crazy like 50 GFLOPs but it's actual performance for real-time audio is only several GFLOPs.

Dedicated DSP chips always run close to their theoretical performance because that's their whole point of existence. They are specifically designed to process real-time data as opposed to a general purpose CPU which is designed for non-real-time multitasking.

Which can be found here:

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showpost.php?p=8612512&postcount=13
 
Somebody needs to invent a DAW that is not based on faulty PCs and far from perfect Macs. One that runs its own plug-ins, and does not crash on you ever. So like a new dedicated unit meant for a DAW. But then I guess theres Pro Tools HD.
 
Somebody needs to invent a DAW that is not based on faulty PCs and far from perfect Macs. One that runs its own plug-ins, and does not crash on you ever. So like a new dedicated unit meant for a DAW. But then I guess theres Pro Tools HD.

My AxeFx works well with my DAW now. All though improvements could be made I don't see a reason to create a dedicated unit just for DAW's. Especially just for one DAW.
 
Somebody needs to invent a DAW that is not based on faulty PCs and far from perfect Macs. One that runs its own plug-ins, and does not crash on you ever. So like a new dedicated unit meant for a DAW. But then I guess theres Pro Tools HD.

Oh... they have: http://www.izcorp.com/radar.php

radar-v.jpg
 
Personally (and this is just me talking) I did the plug in thing for years and it's so liberating to have my PC freed up completely for tasks that need to be run on a P and not have my tone effected by performance hits or CPU spikes.

I thought that the AxeFX plugin would be a great thing and it may be if they decide to release it. But after playing the real thing I wouldn't trade it for a SW based version for anything.
 
The OP has one post. And only to get information on a plugin that is clearly in the pipeline, but no release date.

Let it go. We don't have anything to do with this, and especially a question that will not be answered by anyone with authority to address it.

Ron
 
Hi Nicolas
Doesn't answer your question, but:
I no longer gig, just home studio. The Ultra has made my off the road Home studio experience fantastic. It translates so well and gives me many different sounds (amps) to record with. My interest has increased where as I thought it would decrease without the limelight.
Just my experience
Frank
 
This axe-pc thing seems like wishful thinking of the masses, it's 2+ years in the waiting, imagine if this was the standard amount of time you would have to wait in the emergency room with a broken leg. You would fall over dead ten times over, but for the A-PC it's like no big deal.

Last I checked people are not dying because a software product hasn't been released.
 
Somebody needs to invent a DAW that is not based on faulty PCs and far from perfect Macs. One that runs its own plug-ins, and does not crash on you ever. So like a new dedicated unit meant for a DAW. But then I guess theres Pro Tools HD.



After I read the first post I immediately thought of the Radar too, especially since it uses the BeOS for the operating system. My friend has one and I've worked on it doing its OS upgrades and network connectivity, and I always thought the use of the BeOS was interesting...

I remember reading many years ago somewhere that 'if you want to really see what you hardware can do with audio/video, try the BeOS', so I downloaded an evaluation and was completely blown away by how efficiently it handled multiple video/audio data streams (this was on a Pentium/Pentium II machine; I can't recall exactly which).

At that time, if you ran a single Winamp lo-res video in Windows (I was running '98 at the time), even if you opened a desktop folder the video would stutter...'98 could never stream anything without stuttering if you performed any other tasks.

But the BeOS on the same hardware was a freak show. I recall opening up a couple of videos, and a few audio streams, all at the same time, while starting Control Panel items, folders, programs just to beat on the machine. None of the streams stuttered, ever...you could just tell that something under the OS hood was doing an efficient job of moving large amounts of data, controlling hardware, multi-tasking, threading, etc.

I was so floored I had to demo it for a few other techs/muscians, all of whom were truly amazed at watching multiple video streams that never, ever would stutter. I'd never seen smoother multi-media performance on a PC platform, and certainly didn't think my hardware was actually capable of the performance it was delivering.

It seemed like you had an instant, exponential increase in your PC's processing power and bus speed; it was that dramatic I found.

I did make the BeOS keel over and start stuttering/slowing, but I had some absurd amount of video/audio streams playing back, far more than you'd ever use in practise. It was interesting to watch the OS 'take it' as I clicked on .avi and .wav files over and over until it fell over the cliff. It took a lot...

It's too bad the BeOS didn't get traction. With todays hardware it would be amazing, and to have seen it 'done right' a long time ago I get a sense that, all these years later, the mainstream OS flavors still don't run your hardware as well as they could. Multimedia efficiency was a design goal of the BeOS, and I have to say again it was eye-opening at how well it worked on the hardware of the time.
 
Last edited:
Great post about BeOS. I was getting into all the nonlinear video stuff about the same time and remember reading about it, but I never had a chance to really dig into it.

I'm still running WinXP for the same exact reason though; the amount of overhead for Win7 is ridiculous and IMO doesn't add anything to the function of the hardware. I hate sacrificing ram and clock cycles for basically nothing when it comes down to it.
 
I'm still running WinXP for the same exact reason though; the amount of overhead for Win7 is ridiculous and IMO doesn't add anything to the function of the hardware. I hate sacrificing ram and clock cycles for basically nothing when it comes down to it.
If your hardware and software support it, Win2k might be better. I seem to recall it working better for me on computers with fewer resources. I'm mostly a Mac guy, though, so perhaps my PC advice should be taken lightly.
 
Last edited:
If your hardware and software support it, Win2k might be better. I seem to recall it working better for me on computers with fewer resources. I'm mostly a Mac guy, though, so perhaps my PC advice should be taken lightly.

+1! - I made an account just to support this, what a good start!

I run Win2K, but was wondering if the LED connection on the Axe will work still, I had some peripherals with LEDs that would not open when connected to my computer. Maybe it's a driver problem with Win2k... though. Not sure about Axe-PC, not really interested. My Ultra is fantastic, and the weight of the device really means something.

Wolfy
 
I'm still running WinXP for the same exact reason though; the amount of overhead for Win7 is ridiculous and IMO doesn't add anything to the function of the hardware. I hate sacrificing ram and clock cycles for basically nothing when it comes down to it.

same here.
up-to-date CPU & RAM with 'older' OS = killer! :)
 
Back
Top Bottom