• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

2 amp / 2 Cab Limit on Axe-Fx III ? Why ?

trancegodz

Power User
I personally would prefer discussing things like can we get a switch that would toggle economy/high quality mode where users could explicitly opt to decrease oversampling to run more amp instances. For example.

That makes sense and may be one possible solution. I wouldn't want the quality of the amp block to be less just so we could use 3 amps blocks. I skimmed through the poll for 3 amps and this thread. I've hit the CPU limit using only one amp block so I won't likely be using two amp blocks, much less three. It would be nice to have if it were possible though. I'd set up an Eric Johnson 3 amp type preset. The Axe FXIII is all about higher quality of everything. My guess is that if Cliff can figure out a way to do it and not lower the quality he will. He always listens to his customers and implements new things that are logical, useful (and possible) all the time. I'll be happy whatever happens.
 

Clockwork Creep

Power User
Here's a sellin point for ya:
When using Axe FX 2 and two blocks, the quality decreases. That doesn't happen in Axe FX 3.
Also, the X/Y switching is now A/B/C/D switching. So now you don't need another block just to get a lead tone. The gap is claimed to be virtually non existant in Axe FX 3. So it's really not worth doing that "Switch between blocks" trick to avoid the audio gap.
 

chris

Legend!
The gap is claimed to be virtually non existant in Axe FX 3. So it's really not worth doing that "Switch between blocks" trick to avoid the audio gap.
my comment just continues the discussion... but some people still feel the gap renders channel switching completely unusable. i don't think that personally. but some do. that is why many are pushing for more amp blocks.

we can all have our own opinions. but some expectations are a bit outside of reality.

the struggle between what people think is easy to accomplish and not knowing how difficult it actually is to accomplish those things is the main reason for this dissonance among users.

some of us speak from experience, and the creator even chimes in, yet certain things still "should be easy to do." *shrug* it's tough.
 

Clockwork Creep

Power User
my comment just continues the discussion... but some people still feel the gap renders channel switching completely unusable. i don't think that personally. but some do. that is why many are pushing for more amp blocks.

we can all have our own opinions. but some expectations are a bit outside of reality.

the struggle between what people think is easy to accomplish and not knowing how difficult it actually is to accomplish those things is the main reason for this dissonance among users.

some of us speak from experience, and the creator even chimes in, yet certain things still "should be easy to do." *shrug* it's tough.
I used to think that the gap made the X/Y switching unusable.
But it's really just bigger when USB is connected.
When it's done via midi, it seems to be smaller? Well, it's not so big that would bother me.
Wouldn't record with it, but during live I don't notice it most of the time...
 

chris

Legend!
I used to think that the gap made the X/Y switching unusable.
But it's really just bigger when USB is connected.
When it's done via midi, it seems to be smaller? Well, it's not so big that would bother me.
Wouldn't record with it, but during live I don't notice it most of the time...
same here. that said, from the years of using real amps, i've gotten used to changing slightly before i need it and rarely holding a note across a tone/channel change.

i think that's just the reality of audio gear. but many people want to hold a note/chord and change effortlessly among tones with no artifacts, mutes, or anything. i just don't think that's possible ever.

a popular argument against that claim is that some low-priced gear can do this no issue. but they are doing much less processor-intensive things in general, and therefore the change is actually much easier for that gear to make happen.

it's this sort of "non-knowing" that makes the discussion difficult.

if it could, it would. it can't, and i believe there's a good reason for it.
 

vangrieg

Fractal Fanatic
Whether the gap is noticeable or not of course depends on what you’re playing. When you need one tone to flow into another it’s hard not to notice it, IMO.

Then it’s more noticeable when using IEMs.

And also, for me it’s more noticeable when scene switching is automated (which is something I do a lot). When you step on a switch yourself, it’s probably subconsciously expected to have something to disrupt audio, when things change “by themselves” it just feels like something is wrong.

Once it started bothering me, it’s impossible to “unhear”.
 

chris

Legend!
Whether the gap is noticeable or not of course depends on what you’re playing. When you need one tone to flow into another it’s hard not to notice it, IMO.

Then it’s more noticeable when using IEMs.

And also, for me it’s more noticeable when scene switching is automated (which is something I do a lot). When you step on a switch yourself, it’s probably subconsciously expected to have something to disrupt audio, when things change “by themselves” it just feels like something is wrong.

Once it started bothering me, it’s impossible to “unhear”.
Could you have it automate the change a 16th note earlier? Or similar?
 

vangrieg

Fractal Fanatic
I wouldn't want the quality of the amp block to be less just so we could use 3 amps blocks

I don’t see why quality would go down unless you actually use all the blocks. That’s how it works in the II at least, and blocks that aren’t added to a preset don’t consume any resources. And Cliff wrote “when three are used”.
 

vangrieg

Fractal Fanatic
Could you have it automate the change a 16th note earlier? Or similar?

I tried that, doesn’t help. When there’s a lot of short delay and/or reverb it’s not that bad but when the sound is dry it’s noticeable.

What I’m doing is using two amp blocks in parallel without channel switching, and modifying sound for solos by PEQ and drive blocks.
 

chris

Legend!
I tried that, doesn’t help. When there’s a lot of short delay and/or reverb it’s not that bad but when the sound is dry it’s noticeable.

What I’m doing is using two amp blocks in parallel without channel switching, and modifying sound for solos by PEQ and drive blocks.
this isn't a challenge at all, please believe me. but if you have the capability to record any example of what you're playing and the Scene/whatever changes, i'm just curious to hear what it sounds like. it's in effort to improve the gear. i know what a scene change sounds like, for sure. but it'd be cool to hear someone else's context.
 

vangrieg

Fractal Fanatic
this isn't a challenge at all, please believe me. but if you have the capability to record any example of what you're playing and the Scene/whatever changes, i'm just curious to hear what it sounds like. it's in effort to improve the gear. i know what a scene change sounds like, for sure. but it'd be cool to hear someone else's context.

I won’t be near my Axe-FX until March 17 at least, I’m on a trip now. There’s nothing specific about my presets though, or the sequences of scenes, it’s about how I perceive that while playing through IEMs.
 

chris

Legend!
I won’t be near my Axe-FX until March 17 at least, I’m on a trip now. There’s nothing specific about my presets though, or the sequences of scenes, it’s about how I perceive that while playing through IEMs.
ok cool, just curious.
 

CorpClegg

New Member
I just ordered my Axe FX II. I've been watching Axe FX for years waiting for the moment when it can replace what I do with my current $300 laptop + USB audio interface live Rig. There were only 2 things remaining that I still cant' do with the Axe easily (AFAIK, I may learn otherwise as I get more accustomed to the hardware). I knew this going in, maybe a firm will update will get me to 100% one day.

I have a "Royal Blood" type rig where I run a bass rig, and a stereo guitar rig simultaneously where it's not really that the guitar is stereo, it's that the 2nd guitar is double tracked. Convincing double tracking means the second guitar must have random varying delay (ADT) and have a different amp to get distinct voicing.

At the moment it seems I cannot yet:
  • run simultaneously bass amp + guitar amp 1 + guitar amp 2 (3 simultaneous amps)
  • provide true random LFO driving delay for guitar amp 2 to simulate double tracking

I've seen a couple threads of people discussing asking for both, so maybe one day that firmware update will come.

In the mean time, I'll have to see what compromises I can make. I think I can use some effects to give a distinct voicing rather than a different amp.

Is a single Amp block true stereo processing?
 

yek

Legend!
I just ordered my Axe FX II.

You mean: III?

At the moment it seems I cannot yet:
  • run simultaneously bass amp + guitar amp 1 + guitar amp 2 (3 simultaneous amps)

You can run two Amp blocks for the guitars, and use the Blackglass drive block for bass.

  • provide true random LFO driving delay for guitar amp 2 to simulate double tracking

Lots of threads on this topic. Try the "Mimiq" trick in Cooper Carter's Petrucci 2020 preset for the Axe-Fx III.

Is a single Amp block true stereo processing?

Single Amp block = mono. Put the stereo effects after the Amp block.

Dual Amp blocks can handle an incoming stereo signal.
 

CorpClegg

New Member
Yup, typo, I ordered a III of course.

My primary instrument is bass and I use a modelled Orange AD200. So I'll want an amp block for that.

I'll take a look at the Mimiq trick you mentioned, thanks for the suggestion!

Stereo effects after the amp block I don't think is going to achieve what I'm doing currently. It sounds like the Axe FX III can support a maximum of two audio channels of amp sim at the moment.

Here's what I normally do with my live VST-based rig (not GTRs are not real instruments, they are pitch shifted/harmonized from the bass).
Bass --> Bass effects --> Bass Amp/Cab --> OUT1
GTR1 -> gtr1 effects --> Gtr1 Amp/Cab --> OUT2
GTR2 -> gtr2 effects --> Gtr2 Amp/Cab --> OUT3

The goal is for GT1 and GTR2 to have very different voicings. A common example is GTR1 might have a medium crunch, and GTR2 to have heavy distortion. Using a single guitar amp, then adding distortion effects after the amp is probably not going to achieve the right sound.

In some cases, I even run 4 amps simaltaneously on my VST rig simply because it sounds better and I have enough CPU to do it. Example of what I'm talking about:
manbox_signal_chain.png
 
Top Bottom