If everyone on this forum will all allow, I would like to give my perspective on this brouhaha that seems to have developed with some of the comments I have seen with the AFX III Mk I, M II, Mk II Turbo, FW 17, and FullRes support.
Before I give this view of things, I would like to give some background and caveats so that I my perspective isn't outright dismissed as a "fan boy" or "shill":
@FractalAudio & co. give a level of support that's second to none in the industry and they always look to push things forward both in their firmware and hardware.
- I am a proud Axe-FX II Mark II owner since 2013 (the XL version was released I believe 90 days after I purchased my unit).
- I own both iterations of Cab Lab.
- I am a vendor who has supported the Fractal ecosystem as vendor of cab IR files and presets that highlight non-traditional amp pairings with those IRs since 2016 (First on Fractal's site then on my own site since 2017).
- I am a proud owner of a AFX III Mk I since October 2019
- I have been using amp simulations including, Digitech GSP-21, VSTs since 1995, Johnson Amplification JM-150, Line 6 Helix, Atomic Bass Box & Fire-Box, as well as casually using other units in sessions such as the Kemper and others over the years.
If Cliff says the only way he could get FullRes to be supported on the AFX III Mk I is via the scratchpad, you can bank on the fact that it's not a money grab.
He and I have had spirited conversations regarding longer length IR files over the years when I was proposing that 500 ms IR files sounded more real than shorter length IR files.
The fact that he has come around and even supported longer length IR files than that for certain applications because he has taken in the feedback from the AITR critics should be applauded and yet some use that opportunity to bash him.
To me it's a sad state of affairs that people do this.
When you create a product there are always two conflicting pressures at play:
This is not a cash grab offering the Turbo or having the Mark II be able to load more FullRes files than the Mark I, it's just the reality of hardware and firmware progress.
- Pushing the envelope to see what you can do to make your product better.
- Preserving value for those that invested in your current and past products.
There is a healthy market and appetite for the Mark I if you feel the need to have more horsepower and more FullRes storage, so you can always sell your Mark I and upgrade to the Mk II or Turbo if you absolutely need more FullRes slots and processor speed.
If you really don't need it, be content with your Mark I as it really is an incredible sounding unit and can do things that no other modeler on the market can do.
If you look at other forums and see how the competitive units are supported with Firmware updates, routing, ability to fine tune effects, etc., then you will see the grass really is not greener in other ecosystems. Many manufacturers are content to keep putting out the same unit and not being able to implement eureka moments every couple of months because their hardware is frozen in time on their flagship units. I don't mean that as a slight against those competitors either, because everyone has different goals as businesses.
It's easy to Monday morning quarterback a business if you have never been in this space doing it yourself. It's an adventure and you have to be really thick skinned, because there will always be critics who are not where you are making things happen.
Once you know how much goes into making a hardware product like this or even software like my fellow IR producers do, then you understand the decisions one has to make as a business while pursuing what you feel is "the good" while knowing there is always going to be a population of people who will not be happy with that pursuit of "the good" because you didn't come up with it 2 or 5 years ago, or worse, those people who ascribe a negative slant to your pursuit of "the good" for one reason or another.
Hats off to you Cliff for pushing the envelope and never resting on "good enough".
I noticed this too, with a MkII.Ok axe edit is (really) less smooth than before
going to a preset to another takes a noticeable delay to make all the blocks appears correctly .
for the rest i notice nothing wrong yet
Also with a MkIII noticed this too, with a MkII.
Of course. But when I bought the Ax FXIII Mark I with 1.10 firmware, I was not at all satisfied. Now (firmware 16) this equipment sounds professional. And I appreciate it very much. It is a pity that, as you can see, it will not get better. And this is only 2 years after the purchase.
The problem is, is it worth buying something from Fractal in the future?
If everyone on this forum will all allow, I would like to give my perspective on this brouhaha that seems to have developed with some of the comments I have seen with the AFX III Mk I, M II, Mk II Turbo, FW 17, and FullRes support.
Before I give this view of things, I would like to give some background and caveats so that I my perspective isn't outright dismissed as a "fan boy" or "shill":
@FractalAudio & co. give a level of support that's second to none in the industry and they always look to push things forward both in their firmware and hardware.
- I am a proud Axe-FX II Mark II owner since 2013 (the XL version was released I believe 90 days after I purchased my unit).
- I own both iterations of Cab Lab.
- I am a vendor who has supported the Fractal ecosystem as vendor of cab IR files and presets that highlight non-traditional amp pairings with those IRs since 2016 (First on Fractal's site then on my own site since 2017).
- I am a proud owner of a AFX III Mk I since October 2019
- I have been using amp simulations including, Digitech GSP-21, VSTs since 1995, Johnson Amplification JM-150, Line 6 Helix, Atomic Bass Box & Fire-Box, as well as casually using other units in sessions such as the Kemper and others over the years.
If Cliff says the only way he could get FullRes to be supported on the AFX III Mk I is via the scratchpad, you can bank on the fact that it's not a money grab.
He and I have had spirited conversations regarding longer length IR files over the years when I was proposing that 500 ms IR files sounded more real than shorter length IR files.
The fact that he has come around and even supported longer length IR files than that for certain applications because he has taken in the feedback from the AITR critics should be applauded and yet some use that opportunity to bash him.
To me it's a sad state of affairs that people do this.
When you create a product there are always two conflicting pressures at play:
This is not a cash grab offering the Turbo or having the Mark II be able to load more FullRes files than the Mark I, it's just the reality of hardware and firmware progress.
- Pushing the envelope to see what you can do to make your product better.
- Preserving value for those that invested in your current and past products.
There is a healthy market and appetite for the Mark I if you feel the need to have more horsepower and more FullRes storage, so you can always sell your Mark I and upgrade to the Mk II or Turbo if you absolutely need more FullRes slots and processor speed.
If you really don't need it, be content with your Mark I as it really is an incredible sounding unit and can do things that no other modeler on the market can do.
If you look at other forums and see how the competitive units are supported with Firmware updates, routing, ability to fine tune effects, etc., then you will see the grass really is not greener in other ecosystems. Many manufacturers are content to keep putting out the same unit and not being able to implement eureka moments every couple of months because their hardware is frozen in time on their flagship units. I don't mean that as a slight against those competitors either, because everyone has different goals as businesses.
It's easy to Monday morning quarterback a business if you have never been in this space doing it yourself. It's an adventure and you have to be really thick skinned, because there will always be critics who are not where you are making things happen.
Once you know how much goes into making a hardware product like this or even software like my fellow IR producers do, then you understand the decisions one has to make as a business while pursuing what you feel is "the good" while knowing there is always going to be a population of people who will not be happy with that pursuit of "the good" because you didn't come up with it 2 or 5 years ago, or worse, those people who ascribe a negative slant to your pursuit of "the good" for one reason or another.
Hats off to you Cliff for pushing the envelope and never resting on "good enough".
Not going to quote your whole post - I 100% agree with what you wrote.Hats off to you Cliff for pushing the envelope and never resting on "good enough".
If everyone on this forum will all allow, I would like to give my perspective on this brouhaha that seems to have developed with some of the comments I have seen with the AFX III Mk I, M II, Mk II Turbo, FW 17, and FullRes support.
Before I give this view of things, I would like to give some background and caveats so that I my perspective isn't outright dismissed as a "fan boy" or "shill":
@FractalAudio & co. give a level of support that's second to none in the industry and they always look to push things forward both in their firmware and hardware.
- I am a proud Axe-FX II Mark II owner since 2013 (the XL version was released I believe 90 days after I purchased my unit).
- I own both iterations of Cab Lab.
- I am a vendor who has supported the Fractal ecosystem as vendor of cab IR files and presets that highlight non-traditional amp pairings with those IRs since 2016 (First on Fractal's site then on my own site since 2017).
- I am a proud owner of a AFX III Mk I since October 2019
- I have been using amp simulations including, Digitech GSP-21, VSTs since 1995, Johnson Amplification JM-150, Line 6 Helix, Atomic Bass Box & Fire-Box, as well as casually using other units in sessions such as the Kemper and others over the years.
If Cliff says the only way he could get FullRes to be supported on the AFX III Mk I is via the scratchpad, you can bank on the fact that it's not a money grab.
He and I have had spirited conversations regarding longer length IR files over the years when I was proposing that 500 ms IR files sounded more real than shorter length IR files.
The fact that he has come around and even supported longer length IR files than that for certain applications because he has taken in the feedback from the AITR critics should be applauded and yet some use that opportunity to bash him.
To me it's a sad state of affairs that people do this.
When you create a product there are always two conflicting pressures at play:
This is not a cash grab offering the Turbo or having the Mark II be able to load more FullRes files than the Mark I, it's just the reality of hardware and firmware progress.
- Pushing the envelope to see what you can do to make your product better.
- Preserving value for those that invested in your current and past products.
There is a healthy market and appetite for the Mark I if you feel the need to have more horsepower and more FullRes storage, so you can always sell your Mark I and upgrade to the Mk II or Turbo if you absolutely need more FullRes slots and processor speed.
If you really don't need it, be content with your Mark I as it really is an incredible sounding unit and can do things that no other modeler on the market can do.
If you look at other forums and see how the competitive units are supported with Firmware updates, routing, ability to fine tune effects, etc., then you will see the grass really is not greener in other ecosystems. Many manufacturers are content to keep putting out the same unit and not being able to implement eureka moments every couple of months because their hardware is frozen in time on their flagship units. I don't mean that as a slight against those competitors either, because everyone has different goals as businesses.
It's easy to Monday morning quarterback a business if you have never been in this space doing it yourself. It's an adventure and you have to be really thick skinned, because there will always be critics who are not where you are making things happen.
Once you know how much goes into making a hardware product like this or even software like my fellow IR producers do, then you understand the decisions one has to make as a business while pursuing what you feel is "the good" while knowing there is always going to be a population of people who will not be happy with that pursuit of "the good" because you didn't come up with it 2 or 5 years ago, or worse, those people who ascribe a negative slant to your pursuit of "the good" for one reason or another.
Hats off to you Cliff for pushing the envelope and never resting on "good enough".
Fixed for next release.
If you are honestly that confused maybe the modeler technology isn't for you. I develop software for a living and I can say that what you are asking adds so much overhead its not even funny. You have to maintain two artifacts, test them independently, the way it is now, they can certify the same software for most of M1 and M2 and then only have to deal with the differences on each respective device.It matters to me... a confused customer! For example, right now i don't know if i should update the USB FW from 1.08 to 1.10. All it says is "includes changes for Mk2" i have Mk1, so do i need it or not?
With regards to the new 17.00 FW... if i have a Mk1 and not interested in FullresIR...should i update from 16.05? What's in it for a Mk1 unit? Do i need that USB FW 1.10(intended for Mk2) update too? Do i need AxeEdit 1.10 (released today for all the Mk2/Fullres hoopla) or should i stay on 1.09.02?
If anything, i expect a helpful answer like "yes, AxeFx3 MK1 users benefit from all recent updates" or "no, new updates are intended for new units and not necessary for legacy products" ... no need to antagonize with "internet people"
TS9 Tube Screamer I think.What is the VS9 modeling?
Theres also a pedal called Valve screamer vs 10, it could be that imo. Not sureTS9 Tube Screamer I think.
It seems to me the fastest way to answer your questions is to call or email the support people. One call could cover it, or a short email conversation.It matters to me... a confused customer! For example, right now i don't know if i should update the USB FW from 1.08 to 1.10. All it says is "includes changes for Mk2" i have Mk1, so do i need it or not?
With regards to the new 17.00 FW... if i have a Mk1 and not interested in FullresIR...should i update from 16.05? What's in it for a Mk1 unit? Do i need that USB FW 1.10(intended for Mk2) update too? Do i need AxeEdit 1.10 (released today for all the Mk2/Fullres hoopla) or should i stay on 1.09.02?
If anything, i expect a helpful answer like "yes, AxeFx3 MK1 users benefit from all recent updates" or "no, new updates are intended for new units and not necessary for legacy products" ... no need to antagonize with "internet people"
Of course. But when I bought the Ax FXIII Mark I with 1.10 firmware, I was not at all satisfied. Now (firmware 16) this equipment sounds professional. And I appreciate it very much. It is a pity that, as you can see, it will not get better. And this is only 2 years after the purchase.
The problem is, is it worth buying something from Fractal in the future?
For me personally, even if it didn't get any better I'd still be very happy indeed.Of course it will get better. All the updates in 17.00 except for the User FR bank are available to all versions. You're being silly.
Thanks for your insights.I've just tried FULLRES with headphones using preset 031 Angle Severe Scene 1... MOTHER OF CHUGS!!!
I've must say that the first time I tried them with my studio monitors I wasn't impressed at all, but in retrospective it may have been user error trying to load them with Fractal-bot. I'm a Mark I user, and now loaded them with Axe-Edit to the scratchpad slots and let me tell you: It sounds JUST like having my cab besides me bleeding thru the headphones. The feeling is unbelievable, minus the SPL and the thump you'd get in your body having a cab blasting right beside you.
May you be right.Hope Cliff finds a way to save them to MK I memory, I have to say now I'm a believer thru and thru. Also, It will be a crime if it doesn't find its way to the FM3/FM9 because I'm absolutely confident this would be THE BOMB for IEM users.
Dude what’s the base preset you’re using? Sounds killer!
It's about memory only because that's the only difference between mk1 & mk2 that enables it on the latter.It's strange that it's about memory size ONLY.
You do not understand me.It's about memory only because that's the only difference between mk1 & mk2 that enables it on the latter.
If you bought a new car and your garage was full with your two other cars (I imagine) you wouldn't think it was strange that you can't fit your 3rd car in there.