Axe-Fx III Firmware Version 7.02 Public Beta

2112 said:
@FractalAudio the rotary block input select only selects the left input regardless of the option selected. 7.02 working a treat otherwise.
Click to expand...
I wonder if this is behind someone else's observation of rotary levels dropping that I saw on another post recently. The other post mentioned a 4dB (IIRC) drop in levels through the block after a recent update. Will try to find and link the post.

Found it:
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/axe-fx-iii-firmware-version-7-01.153555/post-1828726
 
The latest firmware peaked my interest in rotary specifically with respect to having it placed at the end of the chain after stereo delays containing a lot of separation. Since I like my rotary very wet it will typically muddy my preceding stereo fx since the wet rotary signal sums to mono. To retain complete stereo separation with a high mix rotary, I tried having two rotary blocks panned left/right processing left/right signals respectively (need to use pan blocks to feed the 2 rotarys for now until the input select issue noted by 2112 above is fixed). Result: Perfect left/right separation with high mix rotary at the end. Works for reverb also, but the added value is questionable given additional cpu needed, unless you have very distinct stereo fx that you want retained exactly thru subsequent rotary/reverbs with high mix. The new rotary input select helps facilitate this type of config. After noodling with this for a while though, I'm not sure if I like what the full stereo separation does to the rotary sound (ie I'm not sure stereo delay into full stereo rotary sounds as good, from a rotary perspective, as stereo delay into a single rotary block with mono rotary wet signal - doesn't sound quite as authentic to me (perhaps the reason why Fractal does not provide a full stereo rotary block)). Of course I can always put the rotary at the beginning of the chain to retain full stereo separation down the line but I tend to want rotary at the end to keep it more "present" to my ear. Anyway - that was my experience for anyone interested.
 
yek said:
I prefer Rotary in front of Amp/Cab, just like most "real" Rotary pedals. This way it's mono but that perfectly alright to me.
Click to expand...
I generally put rotary right after the amp/cab, so it's most like taking a mic'ed amp and piping it through a Leslie.
 
Neither placement is entirely correct if an original Leslie serves as reference. Assigning the Rotary block its own amp and cab blocks get it closer for that purpose.

Using the Rotary block to replicate a rotary pedal totally suffices for my needs, but that’s personal of course.
 
yek said:
Neither placement is entirely correct if an original Leslie serves as reference. Assigning the Rotary block its own amp and cab blocks get it closer for that purpose.
course.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a lot depends on which usage case you are trying to reproduce. The one I am doing is mic'ed guitar through Leslie, which is simulated well with the block arrangement I use.

I suppose one could also simulate the "combo preamp" hookup by leaving out the amp/cab and just putting in a carefully dialed-in EQ in front of the rotary, too.

It's nice that the Axe gives us the choices. My old RP1000 didn't have any routing flexibility at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yek
Joe Bfstplk said:
Yeah, a lot depends on which usage case you are trying to reproduce. The one I am doing is mic'ed guitar through Leslie, which is simulated well with the block arrangement I use.

I suppose one could also simulate the "combo preamp" hookup by leaving out the amp/cab and just putting in a carefully dialed-in EQ in front of the rotary, too.

It's nice that the Axe gives us the choices. My old RP1000 didn't have any routing flexibility at all.
Click to expand...
Being a Hammond B3, Leslie 122 owner, for decades, the proper real world guitar setup would be Guitar/possible pedal/preamp/Leslie. I'm not saying it hasn't been done, but I have never mic'd up a guitar to a Leslie in the 55 years of playing. Not sure what, if any, would be the correct simulated setup on an AXE FX III. I guess if it sounds good, it's correct.
 
Tommy Tempest said:
Being a Hammond B3, Leslie 122 owner, for decades, the proper real world guitar setup would be Guitar/possible pedal/preamp/Leslie. I'm not saying it hasn't been done, but I have never mic'd up a guitar to a Leslie in the 55 years of playing. Not sure what, if any, would be the correct simulated setup on an AXE FX III. I guess if it sounds good, it's correct.
Click to expand...
Frequently in studio, the recorded guitar is piped out an aux from the desk and fed to the Leslie, to be recorded onto a different track (or pair of tracks) to be used in the final mix, or just substituted for the dry track during mixdown.

Havingnever had the $$$$ or moving crew to support using a Leslie in band situations, simulating a common studio approach to getting the sound is what I have been doing since the early '90s. I guarantee the old Quadraverb was easier to move to gigs than a Leslie cab.... ;)
 
Something I noticed yesterday, while editing patches using 7.02 beta. NOTE: this may be due to how I'm editing, but thought I'd ask.
Using AustinBuddy patches.
Modifying them to suit my specific needs.
Using a template provided directly from AustinBuddy (great guy, awesome patches)
Guitar not connected to the input. Nothing connected to the input.
As I was shifting blocks around, disconnecting and reconnecting the blocks, sometimes some or all of the output meters on the AF3 would peg and the AF3 would freeze.
Off/On (cold-boot) would fix it and I could go on.
Something maniacal and stupid I'm doing? Or am I violating 7.02? I have moved stuff around before, but don't recall this happening.

My apologies, if this is a stupid post. Now that I have an FC12, I'm using the AF3 to perform. This product is a dream come true.

Edited to fix grammar...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom