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

W

Wizi

Member
Hey everyone!
I've had my Axe Fx II XL+ since 2017, and recently I've been considering an upgrade to an Axe Fx III.
I was very curios about the amp block improvements that have been accumulated over those 7 years, but I couldn't find any source online that compared the sound of Quantum 8 to Cygnus X-3.
So I borrowed my friend's FM3 and created a comparison myself!
My Axe Fx is on FW Quantum 8.02, the FM3 is on FW 8.00.
(Yes I know my Axe Fx II can be updated to Ares, but I never updated it, and I think it's even more interesting to compare Quantum since it's older!)

For this test I kept it very simple, only using a filter block before the amp, an amp block, and a cab block with an IR I made myself.
The amp was a 1987X Treble Channel, with everything on 10, except the input trim which was set to 0.1 for rhythm and 0.5 for lead.
On the Axe Fx II, I left all of the advanced settings stock.
On the FM3, I've disabled cabinet resonance, speaker drive, speaker compression, speaker thump, and set speaker compliance to 50%.
I've also set the speaker impedance curve manually to match the Axe Fx II, since the 1987X default was slightly different on the FM3.
I've made these changes because to me it sounded like they were affecting the cab more than the amp, skewing the comparison.
I've also had to decrease the FM3 gain (before the amp) by 2 dB because it was slightly hotter.

For the recording process, I first recorded the Axe Fx II, with both a DI signal and an amped signal via USB.
Then I sent the exact same DI to the FM3 and recorded it via USB.
So we're hearing the exact same performance, without any extra conversions.
I've then further matched the volumes of both recordings as best as I could.
I've kept the tones completely dry to not mask any potential difference in sound.

Now for the fun part, I'm not going to label the recordings yet!
I'd love to hear which clip sounds better to you, which one you think is the new/old unit, how substantial is the difference to you (if there is any!), and your thoughts in general.
I have the FM3 for the whole weekend, so I might post more comparisons over the next couple of days.
If you have any suggestions or feedback I'd love to hear it!
After I return the FM3 I'll reveal the which clip is which.

*If you don’t want to influence the audience with your preferences/guesses, feel free to PM me!

Here are the clips:

Rhythm A

Rhythm B

Lead A

Lead B


UPDATE: Round 2!
Some people (including myself) wanted to hear some more tones, so here they are!
This time it's a Strat on the neck and middle pickup, going through the JTM45 treble channel, through my own IR.
Both units had all the "Tone" page controls set the same, and the speaker impedance matched as well.
This time I used all the extra speaker features that the FM3 has, and on the Axe Fx 2 I used the closest equivalent which is the Motor Drive.
Again I did my best to match the gain levels and volume levels, exact the DI performance and digital recording method.
Would love to hear your thoughts again! :)

Strat A

Strat B
 
Last edited:
Im trying to follow how speaker thump/compression off makes it a fairer comparison.

If you want to actually hear what the fm3 can do, use the parameters available no?

Seems to me like the fm3 was reduced to compare to the axe2 to give the axe2 a leg up.

I suggest another comparison - dial in the absolute best 1987x tone you can on each unit with the same IR you used here. I’d be much more interested in that one, personally. I would also keep input trim at 1.00 and use the amp master for saturation like in the real world.
 
Budda said:
Im trying to follow how speaker thump/compression off makes it a fairer comparison.

If you want to actually hear what the fm3 can do, use the parameters available no?

Seems to me like the fm3 was reduced to compare to the axe2 to give the axe2 a leg up.

I suggest another comparison - dial in the absolute best 1987x tone you can on each unit with the same IR you used here. I’d be much more interested in that one, personally. I would also keep input trim at 1.00 and use the amp master for saturation like in the real world.
Click to expand...
Hi Budda!
I totally understand your concern. so let me explain :)
I've tried messing around with the speaker algorithms, I've decided to disable them in order to give the FM3 the best chance.
Speaker Drive made the IR very dark, basically making it sound duller and worse, it didn't add anything substantial to the dynamics or gain structure of the amp.
Speaker Thump added some low end but was fairly subtle even at 10, so I've decided to keep it at 0.
Cab Resonance I felt wasn't too relevant because I was using a custom IR.
Speaker Compression was a bit tricky, I usually use it on my Axe Fx II, but the algorithm in the FM3 is different and I couldn't get them to behave similarity no matter which one of them I tweaked, so I've decided to disable both of them.

Keep in mind that I made the IR with my Axe Fx preset and it's very specific, so removing high end and adding low end with the FM3 speaker functions will throw the IR off balance!

Regarding the 1987X, it doesn't have a master volume so of course I didn't use it :)
I don't see any reason to not use the input trim, it's there for a reason and is very useful.
I do believe that on the 1987X it doesn't really matter if I use the input trim or the preamp gain, since it doesn't have the bright cap engaged, but on amps like the 1959SLP it matters a lot because it changes the tone dramatically!

But with all that said, I mentioned before that I'm open to suggestions!
So if you want me upload another clip with some of the new features enabled, I'd be happy to, I still have the same DI's of course.
 
Re speaker drive, does what it says and most people arent after making their speakers distort heh.

Did you try some thump + drive (talking 1.5) along with the preamp section of the cab block at all? The eq there may be useful too.

Gonna check out the clips when i can!
 
Budda said:
Re speaker drive, does what it says and most people arent after making their speakers distort heh.

Did you try some thump + drive (talking 1.5) along with the preamp section of the cab block at all? The eq there may be useful too.

Gonna check out the clips when i can!
Click to expand...
I'm messing with a different preset now of an almost cranked Plexi 50W 6550 model.
I've added 100% cab resonance (4x12 brit greenback, since that's what my IR is based on), still with the curve manually matched, and set Speaker Breakup to Hard.
I find that setting the Speaker Compliance to 0 makes the tone brighter, so I can smooth it out now with Speaker Drive on 2-3, and add back some Speaker Thump around 2-4.

I am still struggling with Speaker Compression however!
I'm guessing not many of you are familiar with the Motor Drive on FW Quantum 8 since it's so old, but when setting the Time Constant to 20ms-40ms it gives this immediacy and punch to the amp dynamics, really helps to convey the feeling that the amp is cranked and working hard, and "everything is loud" no matter what you're playing.
But with the Speaker Compression on the FM3 it seems to be doing the opposite, makes everything more saggy and spongey, less in your face. Which is a cool effect on it's own! Just not what I'm used to in my Axe Fx presets.
 
Thanks for your pretty rigorous comparison. I agree that removing other extras like speaker effects means you are comparing amp modeling alone. (Although also adding those in would be interesting.)

Wizi said:
I'm guessing not many of you are familiar with the Motor Drive on FW Quantum 8 since it's so old
Click to expand...
Don't recall it :).

But to compare the amp modeling alone, did your first recordings have whatever relevant Quantum speaker effects turned off? Or is there a neutral setting for motor drive?

I have a sense of my vote of which is which between A and B, but if other things are affecting it, it might be difficult.
 
yyz67 said:
Thanks for your pretty rigorous comparison. I agree that removing other extras like speaker effects means you are comparing amp modeling alone. (Although also adding those in would be interesting.)


Don't recall it :).

But to compare the amp modeling alone, did your first recordings have whatever relevant Quantum speaker effects turned off? Or is there a neutral setting for motor drive?

I have a sense of my vote of which is which between A and B, but if other things are affecting it, it might be difficult.
Click to expand...
Thanks!
On Quantum 8 we have Speaker Drive (very different from the current version), and Motor Drive.
They're all off by default, and they were off in the clips posted here as well.
Like you said, I was trying to avoid new features that more than anything affect the frequency response of the IR, because that will easily overshadow any other subtle difference in the "core" amp algorithm.
I'm sure they're much more useful when you're working with stock cabs rather than custom made IRs that were tailored for a specific am/preset.
 
Hard to tell from those clips TBH, if it were open or full barre chords or an edge of breakup amp I'd have a better chance.
 
I've still got my Axe II XL. It still sounds great, but the III is noticeably better. Better dynamics, better detail and clarity, tighter low end, etc. The III is also easier to dial in compared to the II. I often had to tweak a few things in the II to sort of "shine up" my tones. In the III, I mostly just use the authentic controls on the real amp and it just sounds right. Add to that the vastly improved UI, screen, I/O, and USB capabilities of the III and it's a no brainer.
 
Andrew Male said:
Hard to tell from those clips TBH, if it were open or full barre chords or an edge of breakup amp I'd have a better chance.
Click to expand...
I agree from the perspective of being able to hear more subtle dynamic differences. Maybe also ranging from softer to harder playing and some more intervals / chords (also soft, med, hard).

Though I think I hear enough of something different to have a guess.
 
mr_fender said:
I've still got my Axe II XL. It still sounds great, but the III is noticeably better. Better dynamics, better detail and clarity, tighter low end, etc. The III is also easier to dial in compared to the II. I often had to tweak a few things in the II to sort of "shine up" my tones. In the III, I mostly just use the authentic controls on the real amp and it just sounds right. Add to that the vastly improved UI, screen, I/O, and USB capabilities of the III and it's a no brainer.
Click to expand...
This. ^^^^
 
Andrew Male said:
Hard to tell from those clips TBH, if it were open or full barre chords or an edge of breakup amp I'd have a better chance.
Click to expand...
A cranked Marshall is my most used and sough after tone, so that’s what I’m interested in testing!
Which clip did you prefer? :)

With that said, I’ll try to add a Start clip tomorrow probably with a JTM45 or a 59 bassman.

mr_fender said:
I've still got my Axe II XL. It still sounds great, but the III is noticeably better. Better dynamics, better detail and clarity, tighter low end, etc. The III is also easier to dial in compared to the II. I often had to tweak a few things in the II to sort of "shine up" my tones. In the III, I mostly just use the authentic controls on the real amp and it just sounds right. Add to that the vastly improved UI, screen, I/O, and USB capabilities of the III and it's a no brainer.
Click to expand...

Lkdog said:
This. ^^^^
Click to expand...
Which one is which then? ;)
 
Lkdog said:
Been Fractal owner since beginning. Have had all of the units.
It's not really even close.
Click to expand...
So which clip sounded better to you? :)

mr_fender said:
Tougher to tell from a clip, but the difference in feel and the way it responds to pick attack or guitar volume changes is noticeably better in the III in person.
Click to expand...

Admin M@ said:
Put the guitar in my hands and I'll tell you in 10 seconds.
Click to expand...
I don’t doubt you guys for a second, but I’m in the field of making records! I record guitars in the studio for myself and for others, and so the listeners don’t get to hold my guitar :)
Which clip sounded better to you?
I’d love to know! It’s all subjective anyway!
 
Admin M@ said:
Put the guitar in my hands and I'll tell you in 10 seconds.
Click to expand...
This has always been my point when comparing anything with recordings.
I remember listening to an EL84 tube comparison. You really couldn't tel them apart. Yet I had the tubes and already new sonically how they differed.
 
2204JCM said:
This has always been my point when comparing anything with recordings.
I remember listening to an EL84 tube comparison. You really couldn't tel them apart. Yet I had the tubes and already new sonically how they differed.
Click to expand...
Do you feel the same about this comparison?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom