Axe-Fx III hardware failure rate?

Gilmourizing

Gilmourizing

Inspired
We know everything is subject to fail sometime...
Even with the Fractal high standards, this happens occasionally.

We see (occasionally) people that had to send their units back for repair because of hardware failures, but we're not able to know how big is this number compared to all other units working in the market.

It would be really nice if Fractal could share with us some statistics about the Axe III hardware failure rate.

While this is not a number that companies usually like to show, Fractal is known here for being transparent in so many aspects, so I'm optimistic that they'll see this request positively. After all, we see people having issues (occasionally), it's better know what much it is than people start guessing if it's good or bad based on perception.

Also, this number will help us to judge how much we should invest in backups.
 
i don't understand how that number would be useful at all to anyone. if it's 1% then what? if it's 5% is that different? 10%?

that percentage won't tell you anything about your gear. it's wise to always have a backup. even with a .0005% failure rate, yours could be the one that has an issue.

gear is gear. it's the same with any brand really.
 
I was going to suggest a percentage of units also, but that is confidential information too

After witnessing a FedEx truck driver TOSS COMPUTERS OITNOF HIS TRUCK ONTO 51st Street. As well as seeing. UPS driver do the same, most defective devices are probably damaged in shipping. These things are dropped, mishandled, thrown, dumped, and then finally delivered. It is amazing that all units don’t come broken.
 
George Koerich said:
We know everything is subject to fail sometime...
Even with the Fractal high standards, this happens occasionally.
Click to expand...
We know this will happen with every new product: someone will see a few posts about issues with the hardware, and then start a thread worrying about issues with the hardware and asking for hard numbers. :)


George Koerich said:
...it's better know what much it is than people start guessing if it's good or bad based on perception.
Click to expand...
You just started the guessing game. ;)


George Koerich said:
Also, this number will help us to judge how much we should invest in backups.
Click to expand...
You should always have a backup, regardless of the numbers.
 
chris said:
gear is gear. it's the same with any brand really.
Click to expand...

While I agree, there is something that ISN'T the same with 'any brand'... Support. FAS is absolutely top notch for direct support (i.e. failures) and legacy support (i.e. rolling out FW for mature products). I challenge anybody to find stronger backing... anywhere... on anything. Just sayin'

If you're really bent, buy the extended warranty?
 
FAS products are awesome, FAS support is awesome, etc, etc... we know all that. I'm also a loyal customer (Axe FX II, Ax8, Axe Fx III...)

I had Axe II for some years with not a single problem. But Axe III is new... it's a different beast... still being discovered.

While the info might not be in the interest of some, and I respect that, others (like me) would like to know to support the backup or whatever decision.

People have different realities. Believe me, the world is bigger than US and Europe. The hassle for fixing a gear is different depending where you live. There's no right or wrong regarding if this number matters or not.

My point is that maybe the real number, even if below some expectation, might be better than an even worse number based on guessing/perception.

If FAS don't want to show that number, that's ok. They have the right to say it or no, and they're grown enough to make that decision. Plz don't ruin the hope for those who are interested. ;)
 
i'm pretty sure this number will not be shared. and i stand by my thought that it won't matter at all either way.

if it's low, people won't believe it when another report of a hardware failure happens - "i calculated it and that shouldn't have happened, so the number is wrong."

if it seems high, people won't buy the Axe3 because it "fails too much."

the % itself means nothing without knowing the rate of production as well, which i'm pretty sure won't be shared either.

buy the Axe3. if you're a professional, you know you need a backup for all your gear anyway. the number doesn't change anything.
 
Even if it had a 0% failure rate, that still doesn't account for all of the other things that could happen to the unit which is outside of FAS control (lost, stolen, damaged, etc...) Murphy's law will prevail. If I made my living off using it, then I would buy two and be done. Or, just find something cheaper to 'get by' if absolutely necessary and bring that along to gigs. But as others have said, the numbers won't matter. All that matters is how important is it to you to have a backup plan for any piece of gear you rely upon.
 
I imagine they keep data, including infant and runtime component failures.
Fwiw, having accumulated 3 over last 10 years (Ultra, AxeII Mk1, and now AxeIII), with the Ultra seeing the most roadtime....the only issues I had was an eprom firmware update issue with the Ultra back in 2008 or so where fractal sent me a new chip. Also, the Ultra wheel got glitchy last year or so but then cleared itself up on its own.

Pretty reliable as far as I’m concerned.
 
George Koerich said:
We know everything is subject to fail sometime...
Even with the Fractal high standards, this happens occasionally.

We see (occasionally) people that had to send their units back for repair because of hardware failures, but we're not able to know how big is this number compared to all other units working in the market.

It would be really nice if Fractal could share with us some statistics about the Axe III hardware failure rate.

While this is not a number that companies usually like to show, Fractal is known here for being transparent in so many aspects, so I'm optimistic that they'll see this request positively. After all, we see people having issues (occasionally), it's better know what much it is than people start guessing if it's good or bad based on perception.

Also, this number will help us to judge how much we should invest in backups.
Click to expand...

Define failure? One led out? Won’t boot? Your solo sucked?

Seriously, this is not data companies put out even if they have it.

I always say - think of the answer you want to hear? Would <person> ever say that? If not, don’t ask.

Working at Apple, there were sooooo many times I got to use that line ;)
 
lqdsnddist said:
Curious how you’d invest differently in backups if it was say 1% vs 2% or 0.01% ?
Click to expand...
I suppose that, if he were buying for a stable of bands (not just one act), then he could reasonably buy 40 units to cover his 20 bands, and then use the "failure rate" number to decide whether to buy 1, 2, or 3 backup units to have on hand.

(This isn't utterly unheard-of. There's a "musical missionaries" organization that assembles multiple touring groups from mostly-college-aged volunteers around the U.S., and then sends them to various places overseas to play concerts at schools and prisons and parks and whatnot. They might have a dozen or so groups in the field at any given time. They provide a certain amount of the gear. Probably not Fractal-level gear, to be honest. But I mention them to illustrate the general principle: A particular touring group will have its own local items and maybe a backup; if something fails they either go to the backup or improvise until the home office ships/carries a new one to wherever they are.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom