About the Axe-Fx II XL

So...CPU and memory reserved for spillover of a delay block. I'm not sure why you'd restrict it to mono with left/right switching, but maybe that's just by way of explanation. IMO, true spillover would require the effect's entire capabilities to spill over.

Youd also be unable to spill over any other effects that process the tail of the original delay unless you reserved more memory and CPU to duplicate those. The delay's tone would change when you went to the new preset. Now we're getting mighty close to duplicating the processor and the memory and reserving them for spillover.
 
Rex said:
Youd also be unable to spill over any other effects that process the tail of the original delay unless you reserved more memory and CPU to duplicate those. The delay's tone would change when you went to the new preset/QUOTE]

Wouldn't that happen with the current spillover function? I have a trem after my lead tone delay. If I have a duplicate delay block in the next preset but no trem, it'd sound different.
Click to expand...
 
Chris@KatsuKuriMedia said:
Wouldn't that happen with the current spillover function? I have a trem after my lead tone delay. If I have a duplicate delay block in the next preset but no trem, it'd sound different.
Click to expand...
You're totally right. To make your spillover perfect, you also need to add that trem to the next preset. You can see how always-available spillover that works for every situation requires twice the processor power and twice the memory.

The advantage we have is that the Axe can spill over anything, and you only have to take away just enough horsepower from the next preset as you need.
 
Couldn't Cliff just create some sort of expansion board like the 2101 had with the extra S-Dsic? I know the Axe works entirely different, but for those of you have haven't ever really worked with a 2101 for any length of time, honest when I tell you...it's one of the most powerful processors I've ever used and does switching and spillover like nothing I've ever tried. Surely something can be created as an add-on without going the whole TigerSHARC route? Something to hold an algorithm just for switching and spillover for $200-$300? I don't think anyone would complain at that price. Cliff, is there no solution possible in that price range? Any way to borrow the S-Disc approach? I know the Digi is nowhere near what you've done with the Axe, but man...they were on to something with that thing.

I did my first show with my Axe last night. I've had it since August I believe. It's taken me that long to get it where I want it. I, my soundman and all the people in the place were not disappointed as I got some really insane compliments. My AxeII sounded fantastic. However, the one thing that is going to take some getting used to that I heavily rely on is spillover as well as totally instant patch changes that don't have a trace of a delay/glitch. I know scenes may help me to eliminate the slight gap I'm getting, but as much as it pains me to say this having spent what I spent on my AxeII and the pedal board for it....I'd spend a few hundred more if there was a chance of losing the gap and having spillover.

I keep on bringing up the Digitech and know it's not the same animal, but they got that part right and we're talking about a dinosaur piece vs the god processor of 2014. Isn't there any way to do this where it doesn't cost an arm and a leg? With 64 gig memory sticks being the size of my thumb these days, there's no way we can take advantage of anything like that? I don't know anything about this....so please forgive me for my ignorance. I sure wish I could come up with something that would do this for us. Though I may buy another AxeII as a spare or one for my studio, I'd really not like to get one for the sake of spillover.
 
Danny Danzi said:
Couldn't Cliff just create some sort of expansion board like the 2101 had with the extra S-Dsic?
Click to expand...
The 2101's expansion board worked for spillover because it had a second processor identical to the built-in one, so it doubled the processing power of the device. If you want to do that with the Axe-Fx, you'll need two more TigerSHARCs. Last time I checked, you could buy two bare processors for $760 (if you buy 100 of them at a time). That's just the raw processor; no memory, no software, and no circuitry to tie it into the system.

It also worked because the 2101's motherboard was built to accept a second processor board.


Danny Danzi said:
...for those of you have haven't ever really worked with a 2101 for any length of time, honest when I tell you...it's one of the most powerful processors I've ever used...
Click to expand...
TBH, the TigerSHARC is more powerful than the S-Disc by at least an order of magnitude.
 
Rex said:
So...CPU and memory reserved for spillover of a delay block. I'm not sure why you'd restrict it to mono with left/right switching, but maybe that's just by way of explanation.
Click to expand...

I used mono in the example because that CPU and memory already seems wasted in mono mode now. It doesn't use less CPU or have more delay time than stereo mode, it just ignores the right delay.
 
Bakerman said:
I used mono in the example because that CPU and memory already seems wasted in mono mode now. It doesn't use less CPU or have more delay time than stereo mode, it just ignores the right delay.
Click to expand...
understood.
 
I think the only reliable way of gapless switching is using parallel routes and morphing from one into the other using an expression pedal. This way delay and reverb spillover works like a charm.
 
Rex said:
TBH, the TigerSHARC is more powerful than the S-Disc by at least an order of magnitude.
Click to expand...

Oh I know Rex. I didn't mean to sound like the 2101 was close in power to the Axe.....I just meant to say, for as prehistoric as it was/is, it worked well. Things being made so much smaller and more powerful these days (like my 64 gig thumbstick example) knowing nothing about what goes on in a processor, I'm sure you can understand how I could find it difficult to understand how we can't come up with *something* that would work and be acceptable price wise. I so wish I knew more about this stuff....when someone tells me something can't be done, that's when I go on a mission to show that it can. :)
 
Danny Danzi said:
Oh I know Rex. I didn't mean to sound like the 2101 was close in power to the Axe.....I just meant to say, for as prehistoric as it was/is, it worked well.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was a solid piece of equipment.


Danny Danzi said:
Things being made so much smaller and more powerful these days (like my 64 gig thumbstick example) knowing nothing about what goes on in a processor, I'm sure you can understand how I could find it difficult to understand how we can't come up with *something* that would work and be acceptable price wise. I
Click to expand...
i can totally understand. The real gotcha here is that, unlike most pieces of gear, the processors alone make up a third of the purchase price. By the time you add in programming, a new daughter board and its associated circuitry, you're close to the price of a second Axe II, with a whole second processor that sits idle when you aren't using spillover. Better to spend the money on an actual second Axe II. That way you get spillover, plus two more amps you can run at the same time, plus a whole pile of additional effects you can run, plus a backup, plus a second rig if you want to use it that way.
 
Bakerman said:
Unless it was designed to allow the same options you get with 2 separate units...
Click to expand...

Since this thread has gone somewhat to fantasy island :) ...

The ability to plug in an expansion board to double the power and implement true spillover would be a hellova option. Even if the board price was 70% the cost of a new unit.

The saving in space and rig maintenance might be an attractive alternative vs. two units.
 
Rex said:
The 2101's expansion board worked for spillover because it had a second processor identical to the built-in one, so it doubled the processing power of the device. If you want to do that with the Axe-Fx, you'll need two more TigerSHARCs.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't you just need one more TigerSHARC, since the AxeFX II only uses one of its DSPs for FX? It'd still be a shame to have such a powerful DSP mostly just sitting there idle, though.

Actually, wait, no... you'd potentially need several more DSPs... it'd be "the maximum # times you change presets in a song" more DSPs, because in the degenerate case you could have different 5-minute long delays every time you change presets.
 
Last edited:
TheOtherDave said:
Wouldn't you just need one more TigerSHARC, since the AxeFX II only uses one of its DSPs for FX? It'd still be a shame to have such a powerful DSP mostly just sitting there idle, though.
Click to expand...
If your first preset has a delay going through an AC-30 and your second preset uses a Plexi, you'll need that extra processor.
 
Last edited:
Rex said:
If your first preset has a delay going through an A-30 and your second preset uses a Plexi, you'll need that extra processor.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Or in a more unusual example, one of my favorite presets has a clean sound going straight through and then a parallel path with 100% delay running through a distorted amp, so that the main notes are clean, but the echoes are distorted. It's a very cool sound, but the only way for spillover to work on a preset like that is to double the amp sim processing as well as the FX processing, because the echoes themselves are running through an amp block.

Anybody who says "spillover is easy!" hasn't fully considered the flexibility of the Axe-FX. If you want to neglect that flexibility, then we can talk about bastardized versions of spillover--but then everybody's requirements become wildly different, and I don't see why one person's bastardized version of spillover would necessarily be preferable to the bastardized version that already exists.

If you have spillover troubles, you might spend some time messing around with scenes and scene modifiers--they pretty much solved all my spillover problems.
 
One way would be to have a "true spillover mode". The preset CPU and blocks are limited to 1/2 of the current limit (e.g. 1 amp, 1 cab, 1 dly, 1 rev, etc). When you change presets in true spillover mode, the axe would remember the last preset and let it keep playing. I guess it would get messy with controllers and housekeeping stuff.

I'm not sure you'd want to have that limitation though: How much can you get in a preset with a 45% CPU limit? It would be kind of like the looper compromise. We get short stereo loops with undo or decent length mono with no undo.
 
randolfo said:
One way would be to have a "true spillover mode". The preset CPU and blocks are limited to 1/2 of the current limit... I guess it would get messy with controllers and housekeeping stuff.
Click to expand...
Cool idea, but as you say, the housekeeping would get ugly, unless you enforced those limits across all presets, which would give you a half-powered Axe-Fx with true spillover. Which takes us right back where we started. :(
 
Rex said:
Cool idea, but as you say, the housekeeping would get ugly, unless you enforced those limits across all presets, which would give you a half-powered Axe-Fx with true spillover. Which takes us right back where we started. :(
Click to expand...

I dunno Rex, it could be kinda cool to try. Like for example, what if what randolfo mentioned was limited to effects that used less processing power? For example (I hate to keep using the 2101, but you gotta forgive me...it's been my go to piece since it came out and I have several of them over here lol) the 2101 has weak effects and then powerful ones that use loads of processing power. For live use (for most people) you're not going to tell a major difference in how a weak verb or delay sounds compared to the most powerful one.

Like for example, the 2101 has big verb and gigaverb. Neither one is impressive live when you end up in a mono pa in some club, know what I mean? I always used multi-FX verb....and it worked good enough for me. It wouldn't be a bad idea to maybe try something like this if it were possible. Maybe we could have something where we can use all the common effects we'd need in a tone and we'd have to make sure we have half cpu left over for patch changes? Sort of like the 2101....one S-Disc for a patch, the other for the change/spillover. The weakest cpu FX in the Ax obliterate the best ones in the 2101...and I always liked the 2101 effects to be honest. But with the knowledge and power we have today...I'd be willing to bet there is some kind of solution. I wouldn't mind trying an AxeFx that maybe had a "half power" mode or something. Be great for live stuff for most of us. Those with super touring and the like could just afford another AxeFx...but we that may be still paying off the one we bought...lol....it may not be a bad solution if it's possible, ya know?
 
I get what you're saying, but I don't agree. Throw in a half-powered mode to allow spillover, then just sit back and wait for the grumbling to start. A lot of people use presets that eat up over half of the CPU (among other things, that gives them perfect spillover within a preset). When you turn on half-power mode, what happens to presets that are running over 50%? Now you have to make sure you don't switch to those, because they'll be corrupt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom