97% CPU and Getting Static

Arcane

Arcane

New Member
Hello, I just received my new AXE FX 2 XL+ and I have a couple of questions and complaints.

Before I start complaining, just let me say, I was using a Digitech 2101 Tube Preamp. It is a great processor and has great, buttery, Real Tube tones, but so far I am very impressed with the tones coming out of the Axe FX.

The first thing I noticed using the AXE FX was how quickly the CPU gets used up.
Secondly, I noticed that even at 97% usage of the CPU I get static when playing.

Why is the CPU so limited? I would expect for over $2,000 I could add a couple Amps and Cabs and a few pedals to make the tone I want and not be artificially limited by the CPU.

Why is the Axe FX 2 making static Noises at %97 CPU usage? Shouldn't it only do that once I pass 100%?

I have added an image of the chain I am using. I managed to make it 96% CPU usage by using a different Drive pedal. I wanted to use the T808 Mod but it puts the CPU at 97% which is where the static occurs. I would also like to add a Flanger and Phaser to this chain, but that is obviously impossible.

Is there any way to do a work around?

Thanks for the help. Just to be clear, I am loving the options that the Axe FX 2 has, and the tones as well. I just need MORE POWERRRRR Captian.
 

Attachments

  • Axe Fx.jpg
    Axe Fx.jpg
    73.2 KB · Views: 157
Anything over 90% is not recommended. Running two cabs and a tone match block can use a lot of CPU. Are your cab blocks stereo? Is your Reverb on high quality?
 
the CPU is not "so limited." the Amp modeling is very detailed and uses a lot of the CPU. the Axe-Fx II has enough CPU to host 2 of these very detailed Amp Blocks and many other effects. there are ways to reduce CPU usage of various blocks.

the CPU also handles running the LCD screen, USB if connected, as well as processing audio. so no, you can't use 100% CPU for blocks, because CPU needs to be left over to actually run everything. most of us stick with about 90% as the maximum.

welcome to the Axe-Fx II. many people over the last 10 years of the Axe-Fx have expressed similar things to what you've said, so do know that things are designed a certain way and we've all had to learn how the unit works.

you can definitely add 2 amp blocks, 2 cabs, and a whole bunch of other blocks. but do know that some blocks use more CPU than others, and there is a limit.
 
Hi Moke, yes the Cabs are Stereo Ultra Res, the Reverb is on Normal.

I will play around with making the Effect Type of the Cabs Normal or lower and see how badly it affects the sound.

Thanks.
 
Thank you for the input chris, I will continue to play around with it. Hopefully I can figure out a way to add everything I want in the chain and not compromise the tone too much.
 
Most use the tone match Block in place of the Cabs. I like to include the cab block and use the Tone match block as a corrective EQ. 2 stereo Ultra Rez cab blocks are processing four IRs. Since you are using a tone match block, you could probably just use one IR and end up with the same result.?
 
Arcane said:
Thank you for the input chris, I will continue to play around with it. Hopefully I can figure out a way to add everything I want in the chain and not compromise the tone too much.
Click to expand...
i play live and i've used Normal res cabs always. i've never felt i was missing out on anything. it allows many more blocks. also Normal quality Reverb and a small-number Echo Density helps and people say my reverb is the best they've ever heard. *shrug*
 
Two cab blocks, a reverb block and a delay block? Those are CPU hogs alright. Even more depending on what models you use. I started out using 2 cab blocks myself but I scaled it back to one. It's stereo anyway, so I might as well use one. Why bother using two Marshall cabs when a single stereo Marshall cab will suffice? I like using lots of effects so I almost always run into the dreaded CPU boundary. Is it limiting and frustrating? Hell yeah! On the other hand the AX-8 is a lot worse. But in all fairness, it's still lightyears ahead of the HD Pod I used to use.

And in a way it's not so bad as you learn to cut down the fat down from your presets. And become very creative. Which you can be because every effect is top notch, and the incredibly flexible routing, scenes, global blocks and X&Y switching allows you to become very creative at circumventing the CPU restrictions. So far I've managed to cram all my needs for every song into a single preset every time except one. Methinks that's not so bad, right?
 
Yeah, the CPU limit is annoyingly frustrating. I recall how it shocked me to run into hardware limits for the first time.

You can sort of get used to living with it over time, but I'd love a hardware update, actually.
 
Nuke the extra cab. Use tonematch and existing cab tweaks to accomplish the same thing. Lots of tutorials to show how to shape cab tone.
 
You could also use CabLab to mix the IRs you use so you can get rid of one cab block altogether and still have essentially four IRs, just some of them pre-mixed.
 
I use waaay more complex patches than what you have there and I'm sitting on 86%. Some of the wins for me are changing the Reverb type to Spring and tweaking that rather than selecting a heavy CPU Reverb type that sounds nice by default. That alone can save sometimes up to 10% CPU. Also changing reverb to normal quality as mentioned already.

You will find that as you learn to construct your patches you get them to be more efficient and better sounding, it isn't like a pedal board where you can throw in unlimited pedals (in that scenario your real world limitation would be tone suck or something); the Axe FX has unlimited sounds but the real world limit is CPU which is fair enough for any computer. I think even if Cliff released it with 4 CPUs then there will still be ways to build a patch that can max those out if the patch wasn't constructed efficiently.

It's a learning curve, and its not because the CPU is not powerful enough, both CPUs are already doing a huge amount of processing. Don't be put off though, there is a lot of good advice here and you will be building your best patches soon!
 
Don’t feel the need to do absolutely everything in one single patch. That’s an easy way to fall into a CPU rabbit hole. I set my presets up like multiple individual rigs rather than one giant one; a clean tone with a few different scenes of effects I use with cleans, same with crunch, same with distortion, etc.

And as stated above, if you do indeed want to do everything in one patch there are many methods to maximize efficiency and squeeze some extra CPU out. Quality settings and minimizing block redundancies goes a long way.
 
Arcane said:
Hi Moke, yes the Cabs are Stereo Ultra Res, the Reverb is on Normal.

I will play around with making the Effect Type of the Cabs Normal or lower and see how badly it affects the sound.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
All these fancy stereo effects, dual stereo cabs, and a TM block=CPU death. The TM block is summed the signal to mono anyway.
Here's what I would do. Start a new preset Record the patch in a DAW, loop it, and Tonematch the recorded tone, save new IR as user cab and then set up the stereo cab you'd be surprised u may now not even need high res stuff.
 
the easiest way to reduce the cpu in this patch would be to do the tonematch with both cab blocks and the eq removed. then export the tonematch as a user cab and replace the tonematch block with a cab block and load the user cab from the export. sorry if others have already suggested this, couldn't be bothered to read the whole thread
 
It’s overkill. Your dream rig could always have unnecessary things. Streamline, simplify. My main preset for my piezo/midi equipped guitar runs at 64% CPU usage. It has one row for mag pickups (vol block-gate-peq-amp-cab-delay), one row for piezo (vol-gate-comp-filter-cab-geq-rotary-reverb) and finally the FXLoop block in the end to add my Roland guitar synth into the patch. That's 15 blocks taking up 64% CPU. So decide and pick better on the IR side. I stopped using Tmatch block and started relying on my ears and maybe a GEQ after the single CAB block (stereo mode works wonders).Screen Shot 2018-01-25 at 1.59.26 PM.png
 
Ultra-Res IRs, a GEQ, and a Tone Match? Yikes.

Tone Match is generally supposed to replace the cab.

If you're using 4 IRs, consider getting CabLab and mix multiple IRs together to make a single IR.
 
Why are you tone matching and running what? 4 cab models before the TM? That does not even make any sense. What did you tone match? If it includes a cab you don't need *any* of the cabs they are redundant if you tone match a chain with a cab the TM iwill get *all* of the cab sound without any inline cab. And any parallel cabs are going to get summed by the tone match (IIRC).

Customer buys pistol.
Customer shoots hole in own foot.
Customer goes to manufacturer says "this gun is a POS it put a hole in my foot!"

I have patches with a stupid amount of FX on them and have never been frustrated by the CPU. Ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom