Announcing the New FM9 Amp Modeler/FX Processor

I’m gonna sell my axe 3 and fc12 when this comes out in Europe and get this.

I’d be interested to see what gain you’d get from the Axe 3 over this if it’s that much more powerful than the FM3.
 
If you check out Brett Kingsmans video of the Fm9 he clicks into Eb tuning while playing and it sounded very good to me. I can’t say for sure but it sounded better than the fm3 pitch block
I go at it from a different direction. Having followed EVH's example from an early age, all my "standard" tuned guitars are actually tuned a half step down. As a result, I like the way the guitar behaves when it's juuust a little looser. If I need to be in E I'll use the pitch block to bring me up a half step.

The FM9 pitch block and the FM3 pitch block are the same pitch block. Whatever difference you're hearing is likely due to he compression and encoding inherent in YouTube.

Fractal Audio Blocks Guide

See p. 63.
 
looks awesome! If I wasn't happy with the portability and sounds of the FM3, I'd be all over this. Seems to bridge the gap between the AF3 and FM3, so should be just right for many out there :)
 
I guess since these are already shipping, the people joining the waitlist today should receive an invite in a couple weeks, no?
 
So is that the same as the III?
No. The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs.

The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core.

If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:
Axe-Fx III: 100%
FM9: 50%
FM3: 25%

So why not use the TI DSPs in everything? Power. The TI DSPs use more power and generate more heat requiring active cooling. They are also more complicated to use requiring dedicated clock generation units, multiple power supplies with specific sequencing requirements, etc., etc.
 
No. The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs.

The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core.

If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:
Axe-Fx III: 100%
FM9: 50%
FM3: 25%

So why not use the TI DSPs in everything? Power. The TI DSPs use more power and generate more heat requiring active cooling. They are also more complicated to use requiring dedicated clock generation units, multiple power supplies with specific sequencing requirements, etc., etc.
The fm9 clearly fills the gap between both gen3 devices
 
No. The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs.

The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core.

If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:
Axe-Fx III: 100%
FM9: 50%
FM3: 25%

So why not use the TI DSPs in everything? Power. The TI DSPs use more power and generate more heat requiring active cooling. They are also more complicated to use requiring dedicated clock generation units, multiple power supplies with specific sequencing requirements, etc., etc.

Would it be too early to ask when FM9's will be getting overseas, specifically to G66?

Or is it something you'd rather keep under wraps for now?
 
Back
Top Bottom