Axe Fx II vs FM3 (Quantum 8 vs Cygnus X-3 Audio Comparison)

I upgraded from the AX8 to the FM3 but never had them side by side. Honestly, with the AX8 getting great tones was never really an issue. What most intrigued by about the FM3 was the more compact size. I've enjoyed Fractal's commitment to updates as well but format is what appeals to me most at this point, if Fractal releases a smaller footprint 3 switch unit I'd likely "upgrade" to that.
 
Last edited:
Update!
Just added another round of comparison to the original post, this time it's a Strat through a JTM45, breaking up but not cranked.
Please check it out and share you opinions! :)
I'll add the same links here for convinience:

Strat A

Strat B
 
Wizi said:
I could be wrong but from how I read it, he was referencing the new reverb algorithm, right?
Click to expand...

The guy he's responding to just uses reverbs as a "for example", but his overall question refers to the algorithms of the units as a whole. I presume Cliff is addressing the whole post and not just the word "reverb".
 
RifferMcDuck said:
The guy he's responding to just uses reverbs as a "for example", but his overall question refers to the algorithms of the units as a whole. I presume Cliff is addressing the whole post and not just the word "reverb".
Click to expand...
The III and the FM9 do not sound/feel identical in regard to the amp models. They are close, but not exactly the same. I don't know the exact source of this difference as I perceive it.
 
Well the time has come and the FM3 has been returned to its owner!
Now I can finally reveal the answers and share my thoughts!

In terms of sound, I do think the FM3 sounds better.
There’s more low end, it seems to “go through the amp” in a more loose/dynamic/deep way rather than getting squashed, this to me was the biggest difference.
There’s also more high end, the amp seems to sparkle/sizzle a little more.
The Axe Fx II was slightly more boxy sounding, less open, and was a bit “congested” in the low mids.

In terms of feel, the FM3 felt a bit more “spongy”, like there’s more “give and take”, more depth, more like a real amp.
The Axe Fx II felt more “immediate” and in your face.
I preferred the FM3 at higher volumes, but interestingly the punchiness of the Axe Fx II seems a bit nicer when playing at lower volumes.

Overall you can hear the progression that happened over the years, and I’m sure it would’ve sounded even better if my custom IRs were made with the FM3 presets in mind.

Ultimately, I’ve decided not to upgrade.
The Axe Fx III (which is the model I’m actually interested in) costs over $2800 here (not the US), and even if I manage to sell my Axe Fx II, I’d still be out on $1000 or even more.
So while I’ve experienced and noticed the difference, for me personally it’s not drastic enough to justify the upgrade cost/hassle, and I’m still very happy with my Axe Fx II.

All clips labeled A were the Axe Fx II, and all clips labeled B were the FM3.

I do find it entertaining that everyone who simply submitted their guesses without any silly excuses and accusations simply got it right!
While other people were so afraid to get things wrong or even god forbid blindly prefer the Axe Fx II clips, that they refused to answer whatsoever, and yet at the same time kept claiming “the difference is huge and obvious”.

Please note that any new comments posted after this comment will be regarded as biased and dishonest, even if you claim you “knew beforehand” or “didn’t look”.

This was very fun, thanks to everyone who participated!
 
It's amazing!!! Having used the Axe-FX II once for rent, and now owning the FM3, I named the clips correctly. Because I won't forget the feeling of the Axe-FX II.
 
Wizi said:
In terms of sound, I do think the FM3 sounds better.
There’s more low end, it seems to “go through the amp” in a more loose/dynamic/deep way rather than getting squashed, this to me was the biggest difference.
There’s also more high end, the amp seems to sparkle/sizzle a little more.
The Axe Fx II was slightly more boxy sounding, less open, and was a bit “congested” in the low mids.

In terms of feel, the FM3 felt a bit more “spongy”, like there’s more “give and take”, more depth, more like a real amp.
Click to expand...
...and that's with your extremely limited source material on a dime'd amp model, so just imagine the differences between generations if you were to try comparing clean through edge of breakup through pushed mid-gain, via different playing styles, guitars/pups, fingers/picks, ranges on the fretboard, guitar control settings etc.
 
DJD100 said:
...and that's with your extremely limited source material on a dime'd amp model, so just imagine the differences between generations if you were to try comparing clean through edge of breakup through pushed mid-gain, via different playing styles, guitars/pups, fingers/picks, ranges on the fretboard, guitar control settings etc.
Click to expand...
I did, I obviously didn’t have time to record and post everything I tried.
The conclusion is still the same.
 
Wizi said:
Well the time has come and the FM3 has been returned to its owner!
Now I can finally reveal the answers and share my thoughts!

In terms of sound, I do think the FM3 sounds better.
There’s more low end, it seems to “go through the amp” in a more loose/dynamic/deep way rather than getting squashed, this to me was the biggest difference.
There’s also more high end, the amp seems to sparkle/sizzle a little more.
The Axe Fx II was slightly more boxy sounding, less open, and was a bit “congested” in the low mids.

In terms of feel, the FM3 felt a bit more “spongy”, like there’s more “give and take”, more depth, more like a real amp.
The Axe Fx II felt more “immediate” and in your face.
I preferred the FM3 at higher volumes, but interestingly the punchiness of the Axe Fx II seems a bit nicer when playing at lower volumes.

Overall you can hear the progression that happened over the years, and I’m sure it would’ve sounded even better if my custom IRs were made with the FM3 presets in mind.

Ultimately, I’ve decided not to upgrade.
The Axe Fx III (which is the model I’m actually interested in) costs over $2800 here (not the US), and even if I manage to sell my Axe Fx II, I’d still be out on $1000 or even more.
So while I’ve experienced and noticed the difference, for me personally it’s not drastic enough to justify the upgrade cost/hassle, and I’m still very happy with my Axe Fx II.

All clips labeled A were the Axe Fx II, and all clips labeled B were the FM3.

I do find it entertaining that everyone who simply submitted their guesses without any silly excuses and accusations simply got it right!
While other people were so afraid to get things wrong or even god forbid blindly prefer the Axe Fx II clips, that they refused to answer whatsoever, and yet at the same time kept claiming “the difference is huge and obvious”.

Please note that any new comments posted after this comment will be regarded as biased and dishonest, even if you claim you “knew beforehand” or “didn’t look”.

This was very fun, thanks to everyone who participated!
Click to expand...

This was fun, thanks for doing it. I was in the "too afraid to answer lest I get ripped apart by the community when I'm wrong" camp. Nothing gets people riled up more than a comparison lol
 
Wizi said:
I

It doesn’t have the features I need
Click to expand...
What features do you need?

If you can live with the FM3's I/O and a max of seven foot switches including four outboard (that's fourteen functions with tap and hold without changing layouts), then it's easy to extend the FM3 with outboard gear. For example, I currently use mine with a UA OX Stomp which provides cabs/speakers/multiple mics/room mics, reverb, and a additional delay (not using it's compressor or EQ), with a savings of around 30% CPU.

My B-Rig is a relatively maxed out Axe II (and tube preamps), so extended with the OX Stomp the FM3 (original non-turbo) is doing the same job.

That said, the FM9 and AFX3 of of course are much stronger.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom