• 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

flash6

Member
Before applying the upgrade:
1) Use FracTool to list all the links between User CABs and User Presets in a Excel file
2) Highlight the CABS at User Bank 2 that are linked to a preset
3) Move them to Bank 1 and re-link the preset

Coming soon:
Use the Axe-Edit "Save Preset + CAB bundle" feature to save you presets together with the CABs
I fooled around with this a bit. It looks like muted cabs are omitted from the Excel file. True? Or am I missing something?
 

skategeezer

Inspired
The hardware is locked at 48kHz, but IR length will be increased to 1330 ms
Thanks for the response. I do recall now 48kHz being the standard or limit. I also recall a few very funny threads on that very thing in the past.
I look forward to experimenting with longer length IR's in the AX3 MK2.
I have other equipment that can load 500ms IR's and those IR's are good for some uses but not all. Also depends on what the IR capture contains beyond 200ms. In my experience it can vary depending on the vendor and your ears/taste etc. I will be interested to hear the ones that Fractal provides as factory full-length IR's.

It is also worth pointing out that outside of this subject the one setting that has helped save me time is the auto trim setting in Axe Edit.
I find I do not need to adjust the align setting in the cab block as much to resolve phase issues when mixing IR's from different vendor or factory ones as well.
 
Last edited:

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
Is an IR made with a distant room mic still considered far-field even though it has room reflections?
No because it has reflections. A far-field measurement is only the response of the transducer.

There's a couple ways to do far-field measurements:
1. Suspend the speaker and mic in air far enough above the ground so that the ground reflection arrives after the direct signal.
2. Use a ground plane measurement technique outdoors or in a space large enough that any reflections arrive after the direct signal.

A room mic is completely different and it will have the room reflections, which are desirable and give the mix "space". It will also have the response of the mic "baked in".
 

Erock93

Member
I'm not sure how much extra work it would be,
But what if 2 separate firmwares were released (16.06HighRes) + (16.06NON) ,
The first having IR slots reduced for the high res , and the second just keeping up with regular firmware updates and not losing out on IR slots, than you'd have the choice ?
 

DougB415

Inspired
I'm not sure how much extra work it would be,
But what if 2 separate firmwares were released (16.06HighRes) + (16.06NON) ,
The first having IR slots reduced for the high res , and the second just keeping up with regular firmware updates and not losing out on IR slots, than you'd have the choice ?
They'd have to maintain this dual identity moving forward for every FW release. I doubt this is feasible.
 

sean.e

Inspired
They'd have to maintain this dual identity moving forward for every FW release. I doubt this is feasible.
I imagine they already have similar compilation configurations to support FM3 / FM9 / Ax3 from a common codebase. Just innocent speculation -- not prescriptive advice...
 

mr_fender

Axe-Master
To me it doesn't sound like having an amp in the room but room miking an amp that's in a room.

How exactly is that any different. Your ears are effectively a pair of stereo room mics when you are playing an amp in a room. The example clips have the room sound dialed in pretty heavy for demonstration purposes. You can very easily adjust the mix of room sound to direct sound by simply reducing the level of the FullRes cab in the cab block. It's really no different than balancing mic levels between a close mic and a room mic when recording with mics.
 
I'd give up half my user preset slots on my MkI Axe 3 just to have the capability.......
Indeed. I don't know how anyone else operates, but for me, the Axe-FX III has so much processing power that I've been able to reduce my presets from one-per-sound to one-per-rig, i.e. for any given show, I'm (typically) only using one preset (with scenes and IA buttons giving me access to the different sounds within).

So, the number of presets I need for different situations is only a handful. And then IRs, I don't know how anyone could possibly need 1024, let alone 2048. Again, maybe my needs are simple, but for consistency of tone, I mimic a real-life setup where maybe you have a cabinet setup for cleans and a cabinet setup for heavy stuff, but that's about it. There's so much built-in cabinet selection in the Axe-FX III, I haven't even loaded any user cabs (I had on the II).

So, I'd throw another vote in the "bring FullRes to Mk.1" pile, I literally won't even notice the missing IR or patch space.
 
Last edited:

squealie

Inspired
I thought Cliff's OP recording was very cool. I'm a dumb guitar player, slash recordist, slash AV tech, slash IT guy.

I hope that AXE-FX 3 doesnt get obsolesced because we wanted reverb. This isn't the 'nonlinear speaker' thing that some have been hammering about for 10 years. Or is it?

I trust Fractal to steer our beloved box in the right direction... but I feel like y'all need to cool your jets.
 

steadystate

Fractal Fanatic
No because it has reflections. A far-field measurement is only the response of the transducer.

There's a couple ways to do far-field measurements:
1. Suspend the speaker and mic in air far enough above the ground so that the ground reflection arrives after the direct signal.
2. Use a ground plane measurement technique outdoors or in a space large enough that any reflections arrive after the direct signal.

A room mic is completely different and it will have the room reflections, which are desirable and give the mix "space". It will also have the response of the mic "baked in".
Thanks. It just seemed to me that, alongside the room reflections and the mic response, the contribution from the speaker and cab would be more analogous to far-field than close miced. I thought a room mic IR might be considered informally analogous to a far-field response contaminated with room reflections and mic response.
 
Top Bottom