Axe-Fx III Firmware Release Version 16.04

Hopefully the Axe 4 will have the capability to run whatever goodies the user chooses without over taxing the cpu.
 
Hopefully the Axe 4 will have the capability to run whatever goodies the user chooses without over taxing the cpu.
Is this really an issue today? Yes I have to get a little strategic with a crazy kitchen sink preset but following some basic cpu saving strategies, I can keep it below 80%.

I’m not saying I haven’t created redlined presets but you can make little tweaks or small trade offs and get it reasonable. I’ve never felt like this equipment was holding me back.
 
Is this really an issue today?
Ummm, if you want to run two-amp presets with totally separate signal paths then yes, it is an issue today….. that’s what I meant by “whatever goodies the user chooses”. Hopefully the Axe 4 will have the capability to run everything it has without going over.
 
This will never be true, whether it’s an AFX4, 5, 6, 7-Ultra, whatever. One guess why that is.
+1 - Not sure Axefx ever was, or will be, designed to run all options at once - there's just too many possibilities for that, though, I am amazed at the volume of goodies that can be crammed into 1 preset. To get a massive kitchen sink preset with literally everything in it, spdif multuple units together.
 
Ummm, if you want to run two-amp presets with totally separate signal paths then yes, it is an issue today….. that’s what I meant by “whatever goodies the user chooses”. Hopefully the Axe 4 will have the capability to run everything it has without going over.
How many real world two amp rigs duplicate pitch, modulation, and reverb using discreet signal chains on both amps?

Most real world two amp, 3 amp, or 4 amp rigs use a common set of effects before the amp switching, at least those rigs that I have been able to analyze in person or via rig rundowns of one sort or another.

I'm all for creating new sounds, but lots of times when people ask me to troubleshoot a problematic preset, they are duplicating effect blocks with the exact same settings and it gives no audible benefit.

YMMV
 
Wow…some pretty limited thinking on some of these replies concerning how this world-class competitor-smashing modeler should be used.

As you were fellas……lol.
 
Wow…some pretty limited thinking on some of these replies concerning how this world-class competitor-smashing modeler should be used.

As you were fellas……lol.
limited?, realistic perhaps - as I said above, there already is unlimited simultaneous processing available - you just need to string together multiple Axefx units - have at 'er! - but, with just 1, Axe3 does smash any competition for running variations within one patch.
 
Last edited:
In a live setting much of that separation and nuance will be lost to the audience. FOH systems often don't maintain stereo image worth a crap for people in different listening locations in the venue. In a recording setting, just split things into multiple tracks using the same DI. You can stack as many amps as you want that way.
 
Ummm, if you want to run two-amp presets with totally separate signal paths then yes, it is an issue today….. that’s what I meant by “whatever goodies the user chooses”. Hopefully the Axe 4 will have the capability to run everything it has without going over.
You can set up two "reasonable and quite glorious" two-amp presets with totally separate signal paths in the III right now. If you really need two kitchen sink signal paths, you could just buy another III. An Axe FX IV that could do all that in one box would probably end up costing the same.
 
You can set up two "reasonable and quite glorious" two-amp presets with totally separate signal paths in the III right now. If you really need two kitchen sink signal paths, you could just buy another III. An Axe FX IV that could do all that in one box would probably end up costing the same.
Not to nitpick, but it wouldn't cost the same. Lol More? Yes. But no where near $4500ish.
 
The Bugatti Veyron is a world-class competitor-smashing vehicle, but I wouldn't try to fly one to the moon. Nor would I want to go rock crawling in Moab with it. The best of everything has its limits.
Yep, and I’d be pretty disappointed knowing my new Veyron could go 267, but Bugatti decided to gear it to only hit 225…..

I was going to leave it alone but you just had to suck me back in, didn’t you?……lol……..it’s all good though.:)
 
Yep, and I’d be pretty disappointed knowing my new Veyron could go 267, but Bugatti decided to gear it to only hit 225…..

I was going to leave it alone but you just had to suck me back in, didn’t you?……lol……..it’s all good though.:)
Bugatti wouldn't stop you from running it at 267, but they put the red lines on the tach/speedometer to let you know when your approaching the limit and can expect some possible "shudder" - - but it won't go 300 as some enthusiasts want even though Bugatti could probably produce one at a $loss that goes 300 for the few that want it - and purchasing a 2nd one doesn't really get you to 300 either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon
Bugatti wouldn't stop you from running it at 267, but they put the red lines on the tach/speedometer to let you know when your approaching the limit and can expect some possible "shudder" - - but it won't go 300 as some enthusiasts want even though Bugatti could probably produce one at a $loss that goes 300 for the few that want it - and purchasing a 2nd one doesn't really get you to 300 either.
No one’s looking for 300 here, just the 267, I promise officer. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom