• 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

Jarick

Jarick

Experienced
FractalAudio said:
Here's an example of how producers commonly do it:
https://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/AITR_Toad.mp3

The first clip is a regular IR. The second is the same IR with a stereo set of room mic IRs mixed in at -6dB.
Click to expand...

The second clip sounds a lot more natural. It smooths out the presence nicely.

iaresee said:
Something's Always Wrong? I haven't listened to TTWS in...a long time. I'll have to rectify that.
Click to expand...

Doesn't ring a bell with any TTWS song right now but I love that band. They're good to bad song ratio is incredible.
 
JoKeR III

JoKeR III

Fractal Fanatic
I've been playing around with the room parameters in the Cab block as well as a couple of Reverbs in an attempt to somehow emulate what the FullRes IR does. I've come close enough to see the benefit; it's one of those things you don't know is missing but when you hear it and play with it awhile, it's something that is hard to do without.

As far as whether or not to implement on the Mk1, it's a new feature that can be added without completely removing an existing feature (User IRs) or affecting the overall performance. I haven't heard an explanation of how reducing the User IR storage from 2048 to 1024 slots impacts their workflow or use case.

I understand the convenience of storing IRs on the unit, as well as needing them stored for use in existing presets, but why the need for more than 1024? How often do users actually access both User banks? Do people really even have 1024 IRs that they must have access to on the Axe III? If so, please explain how you use them or the scenarios you need them for. I'm legitimately curious, I love learning new things and different approaches to creating tones and using my gear.
 
Jarick

Jarick

Experienced
sskkmm said:
Their new album has some good tones and tracks on it for sure...and I love that they have a new album in 2021. :)
Click to expand...

Listening right now, it's a really beautiful album. Glen's voice is perfect for the music and he sounds like hasn't aged in 25 years somehow. They know exactly how to turn longing and wistfulness into songs.
 
JoKeR III

JoKeR III

Fractal Fanatic
FractalAudio said:
Here's an example of how producers commonly do it:
https://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/AITR_Toad.mp3

The first clip is a regular IR. The second is the same IR with a stereo set of room mic IRs mixed in at -6dB.
Click to expand...
To my ears it adds an element to the tone that sounds like it is part of a full band recording. Some may like it, others may not, but having a feature that can make an isolated track sound like part of a band playing in the same room is really cool.
 
Roland

Roland

Experienced
Jarick said:
The second clip sounds a lot more natural. It smooths out the presence nicely.
Click to expand...
It was as though I’d cleaned my spectacles, and a cloudy layer had gone. Every firmware development which has enthused me over the last 12 years has done so because something which was “wrong” or confusing with the sound had been taken away. I started reading this thread thinking that longer IRs might benefit recordings, and now I’m thinking “I want that in my live sound”.
 
Omri Bazelet

Omri Bazelet

Inspired
I'm actually more interested to see how the fullres will react of capturing high gain characteristics
One of the things that a great 2×12 / 4×12 does is to have that certain rumble and oomph.
And FullRes feels much more open and natural. So....
 
Bruce4mayor

Bruce4mayor

Inspired
My question is if this isn't implemented on the Mk1 will that create 2 versions of firmware for the Axefx 3 to be maintained or of this the beginning of the end of updates on the Mk1?
(Btw, I would think the Mk1 would be able to run the code just fine, just never able to store or utilize the Irs)
 
deathbyguitar

deathbyguitar

Power User
Bruce4mayor said:
My question is if this isn't implemented on the Mk1 will that create 2 versions of firmware for the Axefx 3 to be maintained or of this the beginning of the end of updates on the Mk1?
(Btw, I would think the Mk1 would be able to run the code just fine, just never able to store or utilize the Irs)
Click to expand...

Even if this feature is only on the mark 2 units, The mark 1 units would absolutely still get firmware updates for years to come. Fractal has a long, long history of supporting their products. The Axe-FX standard was updated right alongside the Ultra until they were both discontinued. Same thing with the Axe-FX II Mark 1 and 2 alongside the XL and XL+ units.

Us mark 1 owners will just have to live with some limitations. No biggie. But from my understanding, all updates pertaining to anp modeling and other big stuff will reach both units and even the FM series.

Also, I see a lot of people preemptively clearing their User 2 cabs preemptively when we have no idea if the feature will make it into Mark 1 units. Don't you think you might be setting yourself up for potential disappointment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom