The FM3 or FM9 for my needs?

Goober

New Member
I am hoping to catch the eye of an FM9 user who is familiar with the FM3.

My only hesitation with the FM3, is the processor limit. Would running a Drive pedal, Amp, Cab sim on High, Delay, Chorus and Reverb on High get near max?
This scenario is for live as most of the time this unit would be for recording with Reverb handled by my DAW. I will be recording with either SPIF or USB.

I guess my real question is would the FM3 comfortably cover my needs, or should I wait for FM9?

Cheers
Goober
 
Last edited:
I guess my real question is would the FM3 comfortably cover my needs...
IMHO Not.
I have had FM3 for 2 days and I know how much CPU limit it has. Using the Reverb block kills FM3. You don't have to think about any higher quality than the economy.
Wait for FM9.

PS. I will probably write about my impressions with FM3 tomorrow.
 
Run the reverb on "economy" mode live and the FM3 will be fine - the differences are subtle between the verb modes, especially in a live setting. Having said that, a preset with 2 Amps, 2 ultra high quality verbs, delay chorus and a drive barely touches the sides on the FM9 so if you want more power the Fm9 will deliver in spades.
 
I upgraded from my FM3 to an FM9. Sold the FM3/FC6 combo pretty quickly too.

Along with not having to fight the CPU every time you tweak a setting as you do with the FM3, the two AMP blocks are glorious.
Just the tip of the iceberg there.
 
If CPU limitations are your main concern you have answered your own question. That said I ran with an FM3 for a year and never really worried about CPU limitations to the point where I had buyers remorse.

For me the only reason to run with an FM3 is if you really need compact portability and are not worried about CPU intense presets.
 
I created the preset you described above. I used the Ultra-Res Cab setting and tried different Reverb quality settings.

If I left the Reverb on Economy it's ~62% CPU
Reverb on 'High' it's ~76%
Reverb on 'Ultra High' it's ~82% and red lining the CPU.
(I left the Cab in 'Ultra Res' the entire time)

Everyone has their own needs, but I'll share that - I checked out the FM9 (a friend has one) and it was too big for what I needed.
I'm a singer/guitar player and don't need much.

The FAS Reverb is incredible...and I've never taken it out of 'economy' mode.
The IRs sound killer....and I've kept them in 'standard' mode

My gig preset has everything you mentioned above, with the addition of a looper, a graphic eq and a pitch block....but I am using economy reverb and standard IR. My preset is ~62%

The FM3 is just awesome for a small gigging tool. I have ZERO regrets.

I'll also share that I have a Quad Cortex in front of me right now, and have been playing with the 14 day trial of the 'Nolly' plug in.
Whenever I think I have a unique tone from one of these other units, I go back to my FM3 and - yup, I can create the same tone easily.
(I also have an Axe 3 and AX8 - because, well....I have a problem)
 
youd be fine.

my main patch was wah-comp-chorus-phaser-drive-amp-reverb-cab-delay-enhancer and just fine. I never adjusted the cab block and used spring reverb (not sure if thats less intensive but like..normally an amp has spring reverb so). I only purchased an fm9 to be able to carry one thing into a show now a days and it can pack in a back for travel. Love my AF3 rack rig, but it gets a little tedious unpacking and patching every night as our in ear rack doesnt have the space. I need more switches than my FM3, but thats my go to if i gotta pack ultra light and its a in and out type deal.
 
I upgraded from my FM3 to an FM9. Sold the FM3/FC6 combo pretty quickly too.

Along with not having to fight the CPU every time you tweak a setting as you do with the FM3, the two AMP blocks are glorious.
Just the tip of the iceberg there.
This is key - "... not having to fight the CPU every time you tweak a setting ...". Could I get a satisfactory sound from a cheaper option? Maybe. But I don't want to be bothered to worry about it every time I want to add something. I just want it to be able to do it. That's the reason I had a BigSky with my AX8, and one of the reasons I got the FM9 instead of the FM3.
 
Another former FM3 (and AX8) user here and agree with choosing the FM9. While my FM3 was good some 75% of the time, I ended up using a 2 button MIDI switcher. The access to MIDI for scene and preset change meant space saving by having the FM3 standalone plus 2 expression was gone.
Absolutely pleased with my FM9 and now 3 expression pedals. The added CPU, blocks, and I/O is the icing on the cake.
 
I'm finding more and more that I'm hitting processor limits on the FM3 and have to lower quality to stay out of the red. The weird thing is I'm not really a heavy effects user but I try to maximize as many scene slots as I can and I think this is the problem and why I'm on the FM9 list.
 
Thank you for your posts, most informative.
I have gone the whole hog and ordered the Axe fx iii. Im sure the fm9 would have been enough, but an opportunity came up that was too good to pass by.
My only experience with fractal, was the original mk 1 standard. That unit blew my mind, so the iii is gonna be something else 🎸😎
 
Thank you for your posts, most informative.
I have gone the whole hog and ordered the Axe fx iii. Im sure the fm9 would have been enough, but an opportunity came up that was too good to pass by.
My only experience with fractal, was the original mk 1 standard. That unit blew my mind, so the iii is gonna be something else 🎸😎
You did what I did, and that’s after I’ve owned at least 7 Fractal devices. When you start looking at FAS gear, the path becomes clear.

Presets/CPU a primary concern? Turn on the road marked “Axe Fx.” It’s the Autobahn of Fractalonia.

Portability the major driving factor? Continue down FM Freeway until you get to the Y in the road. If large presets, multiple amp blocks, and more foot switches are an acceptable trade for some stage real estate and a little portability hit, go left on exit FM9. If portability (or cost) is the main thing, a few switches are ok, and you need the least that will get you the tones, hang a right onto exit FM3.

All roads lead to good places. Getting there comes down to what “there” means for you.
 
Hopefully this helps decide:

Here are the reasons why for the FM9 it suits me more than an FM3:

1. i usually get the best clean sounds with one amp model and the best distorted sounds with another.

**The ability to switch between my clean and distorted amps without interrupting the sound

2. There are certain legendary guitar sounds which are achieved for example with the combination
of a Marshall and a boogie table playing at the same time

Having that option is nice!!!

3.The Bass Player of my band have a Big amp , as the fm9 has two amp block
the bass player would only have to bring the bass for home rehearsals.

4. With the Fm3 it always happened to me that I wanted a little more DSP ,especially when it have the reverb block
As the reverb consumes a lot of dsp, there were people who had a separate reverb pedal

I don't want to carry a reverb pedal

5.
In Fm3, the parameter of diffusion in the delay block was removed ,which is one of the parameters that I like the most when setting a delay

I also do not think that the update that came to the ax_fx3 of the new reverb and the addition of the pitch parameter to the reverbs reaches the fm3, either i dont think the Pitch Block update will reach fm3. (Due to the limitation of DSP)

The FM9 has more DSP power this makes it a better candidate to inherit more updates from fractal's flagship product

6.
Also another reason why fm9 is better for me

is that in my particular case it will be my gear to do everything

Record at home and perform live!!!


Something to Keep on mind:

But in the end if you just need a device to play live and let's say you use a traditional signal chain.

In that situation the FM3 can do the job and the 3 footswitches for that is enough.
(you can configure 8 scenes and the tuner with the 3 switches)
 
Okay, I have a couple of questions too as I'm on the fence between getting an FM3 or FM9...

What is it about the reverbs in the FM3 that uses so much DSP, and yet the delays presumably don't? The obvious work around there is to run
a short delay instead of a reverb if it makes that much saving on the DSP?

I was told the 'scenes' feature in the FM3 can't save different parameters on the blocks, only on/off state. Steve Sterlacci in his most recent FM9 video says you can have different parameters in the scenes - so is that just on the FM9 and not on the FM3?
 
Okay, I have a couple of questions too as I'm on the fence between getting an FM3 or FM9...

What is it about the reverbs in the FM3 that uses so much DSP, and yet the delays presumably don't? The obvious work around there is to run
a short delay instead of a reverb if it makes that much saving on the DSP?

I was told the 'scenes' feature in the FM3 can't save different parameters on the blocks, only on/off state. Steve Sterlacci in his most recent FM9 video says you can have different parameters in the scenes - so is that just on the FM9 and not on the FM3?
Scenes do the same thing across the Fractal line - primarily on/off states and channel choice. That said, you can add some parameter tweakage per scene via Scene Controllers, which gives you four controllers you can set to a different percentage per scene....
 
Okay, I have a couple of questions too as I'm on the fence between getting an FM3 or FM9...

What is it about the reverbs in the FM3 that uses so much DSP, and yet the delays presumably don't? The obvious work around there is to run
a short delay instead of a reverb if it makes that much saving on the DSP?

I was told the 'scenes' feature in the FM3 can't save different parameters on the blocks, only on/off state. Steve Sterlacci in his most recent FM9 video says you can have different parameters in the scenes - so is that just on the FM9 and not on the FM3?
Simply put the Verbs are way more CPU intensive when compared to the Delays. The FM9 has a dedicated CPU to handle that the FM3 does not.
 
I'd recommend the FM3 since it is in stock now, then upgrade to the FM9 when you can -- if you feel the need. It could be awhile due to the worsening of the current global semiconductor shortage, and think of all the music you could be making instead of worrying about CPU!
 
IMHO Not.
I have had FM3 for 2 days and I know how much CPU limit it has. Using the Reverb block kills FM3. You don't have to think about any higher quality than the economy.
Wait for FM9.

PS. I will probably write about my impressions with FM3 tomorrow.
Depends on the use case. For recording using high quality on the reverb block is justified. If using live then economy is fine.
 
I'd recommend the FM3 since it is in stock now, then upgrade to the FM9 when you can -- if you feel the need. It could be awhile due to the worsening of the current global semiconductor shortage, and think of all the music you could be making instead of worrying about CPU!
That is a fair point, I was hoping to put it off a short while and have the choice in the new year of an FM9 but if the waiting is going to drag on, then it has to be an FM3. Sooner or later I have to make the leap from Helix to Fractal. I may just get the FM3 and run it alongside my Helix, to really test how inferior the Fractal is :D
 
Back
Top Bottom