• 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.

Axe-Fx II "Quantum" Rev 4.01 Public Beta

musicman0001

Inspired
I don't understand how you (or anybody) justify being disappointed about the impending obsolescence. The Mark I and Mark II hardware is dated. And I don't mean any disrespect whatsoever. Just because you bought it 5 years ago or last week doesn't entitle any of us to further firmware revisions. I'd be happy with new amps only. Then again, we have so many to choose from already.
Either you have not read my full post or you can not imagine that I really liked the FW and the goodies that came with these and will stop soon...like anticipation of new toys ;) and now santa stops giving me presents ;)

In no way I am dissapointed in Cliff nor FAS nor the product!
 

bdrepko

Power User
OK, so you are an XL user so there may be a chance that he wouldn't have to remove it from those firmware updates.

And as for the "ME ME" generation comment, I think that's a bit silly since the old firmware versions were packed back into the latest versions as a consolation to the few who preferred those old sounds. Basically the MKI/II user's limited resources are being extinguished in order to accommodate a handful of people. I have no need for those old versions, how is that being anymore selfish than someone who wants them? And more to the point if there are no chances of updates with those old firmware versions than there is nothing to lose because they can't upgrade anyway.

As far as "wanting something without having to pay" I have no problem buying an XL if I find a need to do so. I was an early adopter of the AxeFXII and was on the wait-list pretty early. I've gotten more out of it than I paid for it and if something new comes out with the XL that I absolutely have to have then I'll upgrade, but it isn't like I decided to buy the first run because it was cheaper; it was because that was all that was available at the time. If I had the choice I would have bought the XL.
Its a good thing some of these people weren't on the titanic. "Even though there are 6 seats left on the lifeboat, I have to have a place to put my luggage".
 

Lifestalker

Inspired
Either you have not read my full post or you can not imagine that I really liked the FW and the goodies that came with these and will stop soon...like anticipation of new toys ;) and now santa stops giving me presents ;)

In no way I am dissapointed in Cliff nor FAS nor the product!
I read your full post. That's the problem with forums. Replies are interpreted by the reader. And often out of context. Unfortunately.
 

shasha

Fractal Fanatic
How on earth did you decipher any of that from Cliff's comment? What he meant was pretty clear in his statement. While it is possible to have 2 different firmware versions, one for MK I/Ii users, and one for XL/XL+ users, it would be far to much work for them to consider doing it.
nothing mentioned about how far you can roll back etc....
So this was something that I didn't know. That does make a difference; I just assumed that since there were two different sets of code that he could keep the legacy versions with the XL and have them stripped in the MKI/II version.

Oh well, I guess that I'll just sit back and see what happens at this point. Either we get some more updates or we don't and to be really honest if this was it I couldn't complain. There's like one or two amps that I may be interested in if he adds them later on.
 

lqdsnddist

Axe-Master
How on earth did you decipher any of that from Cliff's comment? What he meant was pretty clear in his statement. While it is possible to have 2 different firmware versions, one for MK I/Ii users, and one for XL/XL+ users, it would be far to much work for them to consider doing it.
nothing mentioned about how far you can roll back etc....

I deciphered that from OTHER statements and discussions regarding the modeling, because I've read (and comprehend) pretty much every single post that comes out on this forum on a daily basis. It was explained that because Quantum is a different underlying modeling technology, it is no longer possible to go back to pre-quantum modeling with just the twist of a knob. As such, its not possible to have the option to have something like FW18 as an option along side Q 2.01 et al.

Cliff does make MORE than just one statement on these forums you know......
 

lqdsnddist

Axe-Master
Purely speculation here on my part, but just because Cliff has once said "its too much work" to do something like have two two sets of FW (for XL and mkII units) does not mean its never going to happen. In my years of Fractal ownership I've pretty much found that Cliff and Co. pretty much don't have the words "its too much work" in their vocabulary.

This is a man who will go and totally change things like the "mix laws" on the delay block at 3am on a Saturday night just because a user mentioned something Saturday afternoon . This is a man who already had an unmatched and class-leading product from its first version, and who could of easily sat back and just counted the money rolling in, and yet who who never let well enough alone, never felt it was "good enough", to the tune of what, 70 some updates and refinements ?

So yes, maybe two firmwares would be too much work, for most anyone else, or any other company. Maybe it just doesn't make good business sense to spend development time/resources making two versions so those with an updated product can still receive support, but maybe, just maybe, Mr. Chase will surprise everyone (which wouldn't be so surprising at all really) and say he just came in on Saturday and spent 17 hours coding an additional version like it was no big thing....

Sometimes I think Cliff has to say things are not possible, just to challenge himself to make it possible, because there isn't anyone else in this industry otherwise raising the bar.
 

zenaxe

Fractal Fanatic
@FractalAudio : Axe III wishlist item: boot from user upgradeable SSD. ;)

As for Marks being 'dated' hardware, no... memory is literally their only issue. They have more processor than literally any nonFAS device, they have high end A/D, and signal path components. This is not like cellphones or some other tech in its geometric growth phase. They are VERY similar to the XL and XL+ in terms of core capability... there is just the memory which is now the Achilles heel.. only as strong as the weakest link and all that.
 

zenaxe

Fractal Fanatic
Oh well, I guess that I'll just sit back and see what happens at this point. Either we get some more updates or we don't and to be really honest if this was it I couldn't complain. There's like one or two amps that I may be interested in if he adds them later on.
Yeah, you know I could deal with frozen Algos and new amps/Fx. I think it was stated there IS memory for models left. New amps would make me jealous if my unit was frozen. :(

FWIW, I know people are getting worked up/passionate but I think most of us realize it's a First World Problem. I find the speculation kind of interesting.
 

barhrecords

Axe-Master
Finally got a chance to try the Legato 100, I'm guessing I'm not bonding with it because to me it's just a flubby mush, like the worst parts of the JCM 800 tone (the farting on the low notes when really pushed) without any of the good parts. I'm surprised because I love the Cali Leggy model, but I guess this is a totally different animal.

Any tips on getting a nice lead tone from the Legato ?
It's really dark by default even with my brightest guitar.

I left the basic amp settings close to default but used a 5-band GEQ after the amp block. Mostly high mid boosting.

I also tried out the 808 in front to see what the improved diode clipping was like.

The distortion has a cool vocal quality to it. It feels like playing a D style but it has it's own personality.

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/fw4-01b-new-legacy-100-amp.120135/
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
It's really dark by default even with my brightest guitar.

I left the basic amp settings close to default but used a 5-band GEQ after the amp block. Mostly high mid boosting.

I also tried out the 808 in front to see what the improved diode clipping was like.

The distortion has a cool vocal quality to it. It feels like playing a D style but it has it's own personality.

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/fw4-01b-new-legacy-100-amp.120135/
It is a very dark amp. Part of this is due to the tapers on the tone pots. With everything at noon the tone stack looks like a highshelf with a good amount of high frequency cut. The tone stack is a Baxandall which is more common in hi-fi gear than guitar amps. It lends a unique character to the tone. I don't have the amp anymore but I think I made note of where SV sets the tone and presence controls. I'll see if I can find it.

Edit: found my notes:
SV's personal settings are:
Drive: 7.5
Bass: 6
Mid: 4
Treble: 8
Presence: 8
I had to increase the Mid control on the model to about 5 to match the amp which indicates the mid pot on the amp was greater than spec. This is not unusual. Typical consumer-grade pots have pretty poor tolerance in both end-to-end resistance and resistance at the midpoint.
 

jeppekristoffer

Power User
It is a very dark amp. Part of this is due to the tapers on the tone pots. With everything at noon the tone stack looks like a highshelf with a good amount of high frequency cut. The tone stack is a Baxandall which is more common in hi-fi gear than guitar amps. It lends a unique character to the tone. I don't have the amp anymore but I think I made note of where SV sets the tone and presence controls. I'll see if I can find it.

Edit: found my notes:
SV's personal settings are:
Drive: 7.5
Bass: 6
Mid: 4
Treble: 8
Presence: 8
I had to increase the Mid control on the model to about 5 to match the amp which indicates the mid pot on the amp was greater than spec. This is not unusual. Typical consumer-grade pots have pretty poor tolerance in both end-to-end resistance and resistance at the midpoint.
Does this mean that we could get the Baxandall tone stack as a tone stack option in this last Mk I/II firmware? Pleease?
 
Top Bottom