• 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.

AITR

Twister

Member
The only possibility would be to change the User 2 bank to a User FR bank. So you would give up 1024 User IR slots in exchange for 32 FullRes user slots.
I personally would welcome this as a solution. No whining, just the opinion of someone who doesn't use a lot third party IRs and and would love to have the FullRes functionality.
 

Jambi

Inspired
We are ok they have twice presets slot so . But same Ir user slot than us so ?
Yeah, I believe so. As a MkII user, I’ve only used about 100 User slots, so I’m in the same boat as a lot of other folks I’ve been seeing on this thread. This may change though since I have 10s of thousands of IRs stored on my computer collecting dust
 

LiamH

Inspired
For all of you studio buffs out there: How many ambient mics do you use? Maybe a room and one in the back?
Not even that. If I'm recording more than one instrument (which is often the case) the bleed makes everything sound ambient enough. The rest of the time I'm generally more worried about removing ambience than adding it. Most rooms I record in are too small for the ambience to be terribly pleasant sounding, especially at the bottom end. My holy grail would be a room big enough that primary room modes are all sub-audio in frequency. That would be a much bigger live room than I can afford just now.

You'd think it would just be bass that's the problem, but unfortunately guitar amps do seem to excite sub-harmonics in the room when cranked up.

There are good reasons for keeping the recording in the virtual world. The real one is generally quite badly compromised. I do quite love the idea of these long IRs to simulate playing in a nicer sounding space than I am really in. But it's only going to work properly on headphones, or in a relatively dead sounding room at any reasonable SPL.

Liam
 

TravisG406

Experienced
I've been using Slate VSX by sending my presets to out 2 only and monitoring through the plugin in my daw, pumped to capture these and have the VSX rooms in my AxeFX with no latency!!
 

TSJMajesty

Power User
But when you spent +2k last year you can understand that some people are grinding teeth believing they don’t need another purchase for a long time .
They don't. And anyone who buys this type of gear and does not understand that the tech they now possess will someday be surpassed (and they don't know when), is either very naive, ignorant, or just dumb. And new tech doesn't make yours any less-than; It still does what it did, which is more that what it did when you bought it. So just be thankful for that! I certainly am.
 

My name is mud

Power User
I m joking /trolling most of the time , I don’t have tried everything yet on the unit and I use it daily . I know it’s already a huge piece of gear even if everything stops now. But yeah one year after 😬. … you own one since a few month if I m not wrong, maybe you understand a little bit what I mean .
 

Dave Merrill

Fractal Fanatic
I personally would welcome this as a solution. No whining, just the opinion of someone who doesn't use a lot third party IRs and and would love to have the FullRes functionality.
TBH, it's really hard for me to judge how important this would be for me without hearing direct comparisons, or ideally, playing through both.

I personally don't use IEMs, and I'm not in headphones, and if I'm recording, I'm not dependent on the Axe for spacial placement.

Is this still important to me? Is it worth trading half my user cab storage for 32 new-gen IRs I've never heard, and that aren't available yet from anyone?

DO NOT think I'm ragging on Cliff or Fractal! I have enormous respect and gratitude for what they've created here. I'm simply asking the logical questions as they apply to me.
 

TSJMajesty

Power User
I m joking /trolling most of the time , I don’t have tried everything yet on the unit and I use it daily . I know it’s already a huge piece of gear even if everything stops now. But yeah one year after 😬. … you own one since a few month if I m not wrong, maybe you understand a little bit what I mean .
I do, but my attitude towards progress remains as I stated. Going on 9 months now. And I happened to buy in at a good time in the development cycle, but I wasn't the least bit concerned about it either.
I'm just thrilled at what it can do, and as I've stated elsewhere, if it never received another update, I wouldn't care. It would take something absolutely massive for me to want to upgrade. I've proven that to myself in that I keep things a long long time before I buy something to replace them.
We have definitely become a society that feels they need the latest/greatest new gizmo. I'm not that guy. (Costs too much damn money.)
 

BroKV

Member
I do, but my attitude towards progress remains as I stated. Going on 9 months now. And I happened to buy in at a good time in the development cycle, but I wasn't the least bit concerned about it either.
I'm just thrilled at what it can do, and as I've stated elsewhere, if it never received another update, I wouldn't care. It would take something absolutely massive for me to want to upgrade. I've proven that to myself in that I keep things a long long time before I buy something to replace them.
We have definitely become a society that feels they need the latest/greatest new gizmo. I'm not that guy. (Costs too much damn money.)
I am that guy 😬
 

LiamH

Inspired
But I thought UltraRes IR's are 8K samples or about 170 ms long. Is there some kind of file compression or other trickery that allows for all that extra sample data to be stored in the same slots as 2K long IRs? Ancient Chinese secret perhaps?
At a wild guess FFT, or fast fourier transform, taking the time based data into the frequency/phase domain (and vice versa) with much higher efficiency than a "simple" full fat fourier transform. It's pretty much the basis of IR technology, and much more mathematically sound than most data compression techniques.

Ancient German secret of CF Gauss (proper dude of the highest acclaim), in 1805, but capitalised on in the USA by Cooley and Tukey from IBM in the USA in 1965. (I just had to Google the history, because much of the mind blowing digital stuff came from Bell Labs around the same period). Our digital lives are incredibly dependent on the work of Lagrange, Euler and Fourier. I wish they could have heard what it sounds like for audio, or looks like for images/video. They did the maths about 1-2 centuries before anyone figured out just how powerful it could be (possible exception of Euler, he held quite a bit of the world up for the last 200 years too.)

Liam
 

km 202257

Member
@FractalAudio
Question: If FullRes IRs are implemented on MK I with the 1024 User IRs replaced with 32 FullRes IRs, does it eliminate the possibility of additional speaker impedance curve (factory or user banks, whichever) to MK I?
Are there any other tradeoffs where other possible functionality will no longer be implemented on MK I by FullRes update?

I voted for having FullRes to MK I in my previous post, but for me user speaker impedance curve (,for which I believe many expressed wishes,) has the higher priority to be honest. SIC enhancement can improve the experience in both home/studio/live use, whereas FullRes is only for home/studio.
If FullRes update on MK I sacrifices the possibility of added factory/user speaker impedance curve, then I wanna skip the FullRes.

Looks like enthusiasm is going on here, but this tradeoff is one thing MK I users should consider before voting whether to have FullRes, I think.
 
Top Bottom