Axe-Fx III Firmware Version 11.00 Public Beta

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jason Scott said:
I'm not on tour, but I often have several recording projects I'm in the middle of working on at any given point, so sonic continuity can be important.
Click to expand...

Write down or take a screenshot or picture of your current speaker settings and you can manually input them later.

One of my main tones is a Plexi amp that I've customized all the advanced parameters on. Whenever an update resets parameters or requires resetting the amp block to get the benefit, I have to manually re-do all that. If I don't have time to do that, I stick with the old firmware until I do.

Cliff's post had 50 likes and there are a handful of people saying they like the old more. The average user would be happier with the new stuff and because the Axe is already so complex, things that can simplify for the vast majority are usually worthwhile.

Something else you may want to try... if you take the new curves and tweak the parameters, you can get sounds that were not possible before and you might find something you like even more than the original curve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon
I think they should be all updated and default to the new values as 97% of the users want that, and the old curves selectable by preference. Until the V12 firmware which by then peeps should have gotten their biz in order and we can move on. The old curves are embarrassing now in comparison and should eventually be removed, but people will need some time to adapt. FW12 is a sufficient time, and if they still want the old ones, turn just two resonance knobs and get them back

I honestly don't know why we want to stay on windows 3.1 when XP is available, but hey if it's that big of a deal give 'em the option?
 
FractalAudio said:
I've changed the name of the Amp block parameter to "Speaker Impedance Model" for the next release in an attempt to reduce confusion.
Click to expand...

That will help.

I also think this should be moved to the Speaker tab. A lot of the current confusion wouldn't have happened in the first place if this control was on the Speaker tab and people could see the curve go flat when they moved back to the Null setting.
 
giantslayer said:
That will help.

I also think this should be moved to the Speaker tab. A lot of the current confusion wouldn't have happened in the first place if this control was on the Speaker tab and people could see the curve go flat when they moved back to the Null setting.
Click to expand...

Ha! More like all this confusion would be avoided if he had labelled it 'flavor' so no one would know what it really did, but we would know it changed the flavor, talk done!

Matter of fact a lot of earlier modelers did (and still do!) that.....roland anyone? LOLL
 
jon said:
Ha! More like all this confusion would be avoided if he had labelled it 'flavor' so no one would know what it really did, but we would know it changed the flavor, talk done!

Matter of fact a lot of earlier modelers did (and still do!) that.....roland anyone? LOLL
Click to expand...

lol, cryptic labeling is definitely not Cliff's style. I know just enough of the tech stuff to appreciate knowing what the parameters really do.
 
randyvanmartini said:
I’m usually of the ‘onward and upward’ crowd, and no, I haven’t tried a bunch of existing presets like Jason has, but man, for whatever reason, my go-to preset just has ‘something’ that gets lost when I move from the old curve for the amps. Each amp and cab has its own signal path clear to the outputs where they are hard panned, and when I select any of the new curves, it affects the depth of the stereo effect. Weird I know, but that’s what I’m hearing.
Click to expand...

So, took screenshots of the speaker page of each amp in the old preset, chose one of the new curves for each amp in the new preset, changed values on both speaker pages to reflect screenshots, gave a small bump to the presence control of each amp, and BOOM.....sounds identical to the old!

This is great, I'm ready to roll, although I'm glad I don't have 100 presets to do this for. :)
 
At the end of the day, there's going to be a group of folks that are upset. Those that have to go in and manually update their old presets to the new settings. Or those that have to go in and manually update their old presets to their previous settings (if they're not happy with the changes and managed to document their old settings).

Pick your poison I guess lol.
 
Just keep making it better. I remember how silly it was having all those versions of pre-quantum modeling on the II. It was like fw 8, 9, 9.01, 9.02, 10 etc..... it was just rather silly and after a while next to no one is going to want older stuff....

I mean, we could probably have the III run a legacy emulation of the Ultra modeling, but who really wants that ? I bought a III because I wanted the best, the newest, the cutting edge, didn’t you?

there has not been a single update where I felt the III went backwards. Just keeps on sounding better and better.
 
FractalAudio said:
The more I think about this the more I think existing presets should get automatically updated to use an appropriate impedance model. Yes, existing presets will change but probably for the better.

Anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

There have been some very good arguments to have an option to keep the original settings for presets if you choose.

I can also see the point for automatically updating everything.

The beta didn’t change anything until you changed it. That made sense to me. One Marshall preset I tried sounded way better. One of my clean presets did not.

I am expecting to have to re-dial in many if not all of my presets when the new firmware comes out. I’ve had to do adjustments to my presets for almost every firmware update that has ever happened with the Axe FXII and Axe FXIII. Not fun, but it always sounds better in the end.

I’ll make it work and be happy with what ever you decide.
 
giantslayer said:
Write down or take a screenshot or picture of your current speaker settings and you can manually input them later.

One of my main tones is a Plexi amp that I've customized all the advanced parameters on. Whenever an update resets parameters or requires resetting the amp block to get the benefit, I have to manually re-do all that. If I don't have time to do that, I stick with the old firmware until I do.

Cliff's post had 50 likes and there are a handful of people saying they like the old more. The average user would be happier with the new stuff and because the Axe is already so complex, things that can simplify for the vast majority are usually worthwhile.
Click to expand...
So the choices are, in your view:
1. Skip the update
2. Do a whole lot of manual work to prevent the need for a trivial amount of data to be stored in order to keep your data in those presets where a change is not wanted
 
Morphine said:
At the end of the day, there's going to be a group of folks that are upset. Those that have to go in and manually update their old presets to the new settings. Or those that have to go in and manually update their old presets to their previous settings (if they're not happy with the changes and managed to document their old settings).

Pick your poison I guess lol.
Click to expand...
Ah, but if you didn't FUBAR the preset's existing curve and gave those who want to convert all of them right away a quick easy button to hit, then everyone is minimally inconvenienced and maximally able to use the update in a way that suits their needs....
 
Jason Scott said:
A preset is a configuration of settings that are saved in order to allow one to recall a specific sound.
Click to expand...
You missed: for a specific revision of firmware.

Presets are firmware version specific. They contain the value of the firmware they were last saved with in them as metadata.

There has never been a promise that presets will sound the same across anything but the exact same version of the firmware it was created. Ever in the history of Fractal.
 
I think the whole "stick with the old firmware" argument misses the point that it will also cuts you off from any future update.


DLC86 said:
For anyone who wants to measure the impedance curve of his own cab(s) here's an easy how-to with a free software and no special tools required

https://www.roomeqwizard.com/help/help_en-GB/html/impedancemeasurement.html

I don't know how accurate this method is though
Click to expand...
Will driving the speaker cabinet from the headphone output really work for this? We are trying to measure resonance in the cab, I would guess that the acoustic energy from the headphone out will be insufficient to excite any resonance? Are these resonances even linear in nature, or do they depend in loudness? @FractalAudio, any thoughts on that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom