Axe-Fx III Firmware 22.01 Release

Greg Ferguson said:
It’s private and public beta releases for the FX3 only. Skipping private testing releases would not accurately reflect the true output. Adding in the releases for the other two platforms would more accurately reflect the overall company output. I should actually add in the Edit releases and USB and Windows drivers. They’re incredibly good developers, very prolific, and people have no clue.
Click to expand...
OK, that explains the numbers. Personally I would try to measure "true output" in terms of shipped features instead of released versions, which would entail filtering out pulled betas/releases and v2/v3/etc betas which mainly fixed minor bugs introduced by the previous beta. Not that it matters to me as the output is massive regardless how you measure it, and I'd say every decent developer should figure that out very quickly once they become a Fractal owner :)
 
It's amazing how much the craving for new firmware subsides when you are gigging regularly and just want to play. While I do appreciate the firmware updates, especially the Dynacabs, I really like just having a rig that sounds great at every rehearsal and gig, and gives me consistent tones in recording. I don't miss toob amps at all any more.
 
Calibix said:
How so? Some of the updates are one or two line bug fixes. He has a valid point.
Click to expand...
"Some". Should we quantify that amount?

An occasional entry in the release note saying it was a bug fix to something previously introduced by a previous update doesn’t reflect the actual effort involved in finding and fixing the problem. Item line count in a release note ≠ the time and effort spent devising a way to isolate the bug then stomp it out. Even removing those few releases, even removing the beta and final-candidate releases, still puts Fractal way ahead.

I think it's important to recognize the effort and not try to denigrate their work; Nothing is more insulting and discouraging to developers than when people say "Oh, yeah, well, that didn't matter or count because…." They still put in the work and time.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
I think it's important to recognize the effort and not try to denigrate their work; Nothing is more insulting and discouraging to developers than when people say "Oh, yeah, well, that didn't matter or count because…." They still put in the work and time.
Click to expand...
Can't tell you how many times I've turned in a report to my boss who conveniently overlooks the 99 things I did right, and must respond with the 1 thing wrong. Number one way to motivate someone to care less.
 
InsideOut said:
Can't tell you how many times I've turned in a report to my boss who conveniently overlooks the 99 things I did right, and must respond with the 1 thing wrong. Number one way to motivate someone to care less.
Click to expand...
My favorite is that no matter how much stuff you build that meets user and business needs and is even sane inside, there are 67,347 other things that need to be done. Whee!
 
Last edited:
Greg Ferguson said:
That’s a very inaccurate assessment of the process.
Click to expand...
Greg Ferguson said:
"Some". Should we quantify that amount?

An occasional entry in the release note saying it was a bug fix to something previously introduced by a previous update doesn’t reflect the actual effort involved in finding and fixing the problem. Item line count in a release note ≠ the time and effort spent devising a way to isolate the bug then stomp it out. Even removing those few releases, even removing the beta and final-candidate releases, still puts Fractal way ahead.

I think it's important to recognize the effort and not try to denigrate their work; Nothing is more insulting and discouraging to developers than when people say "Oh, yeah, well, that didn't matter or count because…." They still put in the work and time.
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood what I'm trying to say. I wasn't making a statement about the release process, just a remark that as you're talking about accurately measuring output then the contents of the releases seems like a better approximation than of the number of releases - not that the size of the error bars of the result matters much in the first place.
As an example, 21.04 was released about 3 hours after 21.03 to fix the tuner offsets bug introduced in 21.03. In comparison, bigger releases adding lots of new things represent higher amounts of effort and end user impact and any other relevant quantities I can think of. Certainly the details of how to weigh different releases and different types of improvements against each other would be their own can of worms; just counting the added fx/amp types and number of modelling changes etc would be far from perfect as well... And I agree that the conclusion that Fractal is way ahead doesn't change regardless of how you measure it, which was the sentiment in my previous post as well. Of course it also doesn't mean that smaller updates or simpler bugfix releases should be appreciated less.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
"Some". Should we quantify that amount?

An occasional entry in the release note saying it was a bug fix to something previously introduced by a previous update doesn’t reflect the actual effort involved in finding and fixing the problem. Item line count in a release note ≠ the time and effort spent devising a way to isolate the bug then stomp it out. Even removing those few releases, even removing the beta and final-candidate releases, still puts Fractal way ahead.

I think it's important to recognize the effort and not try to denigrate their work; Nothing is more insulting and discouraging to developers than when people say "Oh, yeah, well, that didn't matter or count because…." They still put in the work and time.
Click to expand...
It is quantifiable. People track labor all the time.

I'm not denigrating their work at all. I'm simply stating that some updates in the manner you've presented don't weight the updates. It's not wrong, its not right, its just the way you chose to present it. But I don't count some typos fixes the same as a major release like Dyna-Cabs. YMMV

Happy Fractal user here, not looking back.
 
Genghis said:
It's amazing how much the craving for new firmware subsides when you are gigging regularly and just want to play. While I do appreciate the firmware updates, especially the Dynacabs, I really like just having a rig that sounds great at every rehearsal and gig, and gives me consistent tones in recording. I don't miss toob amps at all any more.
Click to expand...
This is the Truth. A few firmwares ago amps got really easy to dial in, and I’m a happy camper.

It is fun to wonder what’s coming next, some of the recent inventions such as dynacabs are astounding and were totally unexpected to me.

But at the end of the day, you plug your guitar into it and make music that hopefully brightens at least one person’s day. It makes nice noises and makes me feel happy 😃
 
tysonlt said:
This is the Truth. A few firmwares ago amps got really easy to dial in, and I’m a happy camper.

It is fun to wonder what’s coming next, some of the recent inventions such as dynacabs are astounding and were totally unexpected to me.

But at the end of the day, you plug your guitar into it and make music that hopefully brightens at least one person’s day. It makes nice noises and makes me feel happy 😃
Click to expand...
Absolutely this!
Actually we do have the best sounding and with Dyna cabs the most flexible Unit ever.
No need to wait for a new firmware, just play guitar!

Imagine where all our hero’s like EVH, Lukather, Page, Slash etc. we’re today if they are always waited for new amps, guitars, effects etc.
we probably wouldn’t have a single album from them.
 
FusionFanatic said:
There it is again”… “Is the IV coming out soon?” add nauseam. Geez, really?
Who the hell wants to buy a new modeler every year and tweak for months? Not me.
What happened to the good old days of buying gear (with no updates) and working with what you got… oh, and practicing?
Sure… Fractal is a game changer, this is one of several reasons I jumped on board in 2007, and I’m on my 3rd generation. But personally, I don’t want to tweak my sounds every week or two with new updates. I know some do… but if you don’t have enough to work with now, and still can’t dial up some righteous tones… well, I don’t know what to say. I’m sure something new will get added. Have patience, maybe create something inspiring with your tone generator (aka Fractal) while letting FAS do what they’ve done since the beginning. That’s what I’ll do. YMMV
Click to expand...
With a philosophy such as this, one has to wonder, what made you upgrade from all those earlier versions?
 
Rock Chalk said:
With a philosophy such as this, one has to wonder, what made you upgrade from all those earlier versions?
Click to expand...
Significant improvements in tone in next generation. I used rack gear since the 90’s… way before FAS, so I tried the Ultra and was happy for years. I bought the 2 weeks before the 3 came out (bummer for me) but the huge hype about it got me to go for the 3. I’ve been with FAS for 15 yrs, so that’s not bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom