[not possible] Okay, I'll say it... a second Amp block!

[mr_fender]

IIRC, the MIN LATENCY oversampling option on the III allows you to use the simpler oversampling method that is already used by the FM3. Dual amp blocks would require even further reduction of quality on the FM3 and Cliff said that wasn't going to happen.

 

[FractalAudio]

IIRC, the MIN LATENCY oversampling option on the III allows you to use the simpler oversampling method that is already used by the FM3. Dual amp blocks would require even further reduction of quality on the FM3 and Cliff said that wasn't going to happen.

The Axe-Fx III has two oversampling modes: Best Quality and Min Latency. One is not "simpler" than the other.

The CPU usage is the same for either mode. Min. Latency uses a minimum-phase kernel which minimizes the latency of the block at the expense of phase distortion.*

The FM3 and FM9 use Best Quality mode all the time.

There simply isn't enough CPU available to run two amp blocks on the FM3.

*One of the reason I hate latency tests (and the inevitable "OMGAWD the XXXXX absolutely slays everything else") is that none of these tests test phase distortion.

 

[JTI]

 

[FractalAudio]

I'm unaware of any Axe-FX III comparisons that suffered because somebody turned down the quality setting, so it doesn't seem like offering that setting has caused FAS any harm.

Making that feature available on the FM3 might permit a 2nd amp block, I'm not sure. I'm just saying there's a precedent for having a variable amp quality setting on FAS modelers.

There is no "Quality" setting. There is an Oversampling Mode which selects between a linear phase and a minimum phase kernel. CPU usage is the same in either case.

 

[DLC86]

I'm unaware of any Axe-FX III comparisons that suffered because somebody turned down the quality setting, so it doesn't seem like offering that setting has caused FAS any harm.

Making that feature available on the FM3 might permit a 2nd amp block, I'm not sure. I'm just saying there's a precedent for having a variable amp quality setting on FAS modelers.

Last year I wrote this post on TGF, might be interesting for you to read...

https://thegearforum.com/threads/modelers-and-aliasing.1815/post-59756

So the real question (which I don't really care about) is: why doesn't fractal allow 4 amp blocks on the axe fx at fm3/fm9 quality?

 

[GlennO]

Last year I wrote this post on TGF, might be interesting for you to read...

https://thegearforum.com/threads/modelers-and-aliasing.1815/post-59756

So the real question (which I don't really care about) is: why doesn't fractal allow 4 amp blocks on the axe fx at fm3/fm9 quality?

Well, yeah, that's one way to look at it .

There's no free lunch. Dual amps on the FM3 could be done, given a sufficient willingness to sacrifice quality. There are always sacrifices that must be made when designing devices and, as your measurements show, the FAS devices in different circumstances make varying sacrifices. But I think Cliff has made it pretty clear on the FM3 the quality would cross a threshold he doesn't want to cross.