Closed All parameters from Axe II

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

luke

Guest
Maybe this is stupid, but why do away with any of the allowable parameters of the II, if the III had 4x the horsepower?

At no time in the foreseeable future will the III run out of power, and if that day ever comes, make decisions on what to eliminate then.
 
Because the point of the III is to improve the modeling, not just to have a II with a bigger screen.

Hard to move forward if you can’t sometimes let go of the past.
 
but why do away with any of the allowable parameters of the II
Im with you. It would be nice to have been able to load them up anyway - even if they are going to sound a bit different in the III, it would be a good starting point to go ahead and tweak your preset further.
Here, here, I may have read somewhere that there is a petition going to get Fractal (or someone) to send Algrenadine over a III (Author of Fractool)
For me - he should have been up there with the sacred few Europeans who got the III early or even Beta it. His individual contribution to us Fractal believers has been immense.
 
Maybe this is stupid, but why do away with any of the allowable parameters of the II, if the III had 4x the horsepower?

At no time in the foreseeable future will the III run out of power, and if that day ever comes, make decisions on what to eliminate then.

Maybe it was a design choice. Maybe he made changes that made that particular control unnecessary?
 
Maybe this is stupid, but why do away with any of the allowable parameters of the II, if the III had 4x the horsepower?

At no time in the foreseeable future will the III run out of power, and if that day ever comes, make decisions on what to eliminate then.

Like what?
 
Your question is not stupid.

In general, I think the louder cry is for fewer parameters to create a more streamlined experience. You'l hear most people these days saying, "I rarely if at all need to use advanced parameters to achieve the sound in my head." In this context, I see removals as a positive.
I have yet to find any sound or capability that I cannot easily achieve using the latest gen firmware.

Also, recognize that CPU conservation is a battle that is won a single cycle at a time. I think we all know any headroom won't go to waste.
 
Last edited:
I have yet to find any sound or capability that I cannot easily achieve using the latest gen firmware.

At what time can I expect you to drop by then?

I'm constantly in the advanced parameters for higher gain tones. As I said before, I find anything post Quantum to be fizzy and not as tight and refined as say 18.09. I'm slowly getting there, but the lack of access to certain parameters seem like a reason this is more difficult than I had hoped.

People who do not want to use them are free to ignore them right?
 
Your question is not stupid.

In general, I think the louder cry is for fewer parameters to create a more streamlined experience. You'l hear most people these days saying, "I rarely if at all need to use advanced parameters to achieve the sound in my head." In this context, I see removals as a positive.
I have yet to find any sound or capability that I cannot easily achieve using the latest gen firmware.

Also, recognize that CPU conservation is a battle that is won a single cycle at a time. I think we all know any headroom won't go to waste.

I have never said "I rarely if at all need to use advanced parameters to achieve the sound in my head." If you don't want to use advanced parameters, don't go to that page. Why take them away form people who do use them?
 
Why take them away form people who do use them?

I think that there is more than one reason.

1) FAS strives for excellence. When, because of processing insight, a parameter or feature no longer reaches their standard, it's out. E.g. microphone modeling or certain amp params. Even at the cost of compatibility.

2) Processing headroom, as M@ has pointed out.

3) Support. Everything that's in the box has to be supported through official channels, even if it's outdated in the eyes of FAS. From issues to requests (like more mic models). Removal of functionality => less required support => more means for development etc.
 
I have noticed that some people have this concept that the code in the Axe Fx III started from the code in the Axe Fx II.

They refer to things as "removed" or "missing".

I believe this is a bad assumption. I think that the III is a new platform.

They are NOT removed if they never existed in the III whether or not they were there in II.

The code is not necessarily already written...
 
Examples:

The Character parameters in the Axe II’s Amp block have been replaced by the more powerful and more flexible Pre-EQ parameters in the Axe III. It’s okay that they’re gone.

There are more flexible ways to influence pick attack. We don’t need a separate Pick Attack parameter that, to my ears, always sounded a bit unnatural or forced.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom