FC-6 great, but gap when channel switching drive block

My way around this is to play the back end of the beat whilst changing which makes it practically unnoticeable in a band context.
 
Adinfinitum said:
. . . Axe3 blows me away. I haven't even loaded my bevy of IR because the included ones work for me. Let's just say it is inspirational.
Click to expand...
When I owned my Axe FX II years ago and even my AX8, I strictly used Ownhammer IRs. I tried many of the included IRs and just couldnt find any that sounded as good. Not sure why, but with the Axe FX III I dont seem to have that problem anymore. The factory cabs sound amazing and quite a few sound just as good as the OH ones. Hey, I'm not going to complain.
 
It's odd because I'm "sensitive" to the gap coming from the Axe Fx II and talking specifically about Amp block X/Y.

So much so that I changed my setup back to a "pedal platform" approach which I've carried over to the Axe Fx III.

I don't notice a gap when changing Drive channels with scenes... For that matter, the gap for changing channels on the Amp block is to my ears no different than changing channels on an analog amp.

Are you hearing the gap when using scenes to change the channel or are you using a switch to just change the channel?
 
Zedhed said:
My way around this is to play the back end of the beat whilst changing which makes it practically unnoticeable in a band context.
Click to expand...


I think the maximum audio dropout is like 35ms right ? If your playing a song, lets say at a pretty fast tempo of 120bpm, that means there is a beat every half a second or every 500ms, correct ? Given 35ms is about 1/14th of half a second, and that the beat is measured in 16th notes, 35ms would be like something smaller than 128th notes! I don't think anyone can play that fast or that accurately to trigger channel changes with that type of timing.

If it takes half as second, then sure, even quarter of a second, but when we are talking about resolution of likely sub 30ms ?? I don't think anyone has that type of timing, and also don't think anyone could really step on a pedal with millisecond timing, to where even if the change was instant, it would make a noticeable difference.

No one in the audience is going to say "hey... he kicked into his solo 20ms too late"
 
FractalAudio said:
Not really counter-intuitive. Mathematically it's the product of the sine wave and the Heaviside step function. Doesn't matter that it's a sine wave at zero degrees. It's still a discontinuity. Discontinuities cause clicks.
Click to expand...

I think the picture Kamil Kisiel has in mind is something like a piecewise-defined graph with sin(x) for non-negative x and just the constant zero for negative x. This is, in fact, a perfectly continuous function (as would be any truncation at a multiple of pi, where sin(x) crosses the x-axis).

The function is not differentiable, however, and that means that its Fourier transform is definitely going to have large support. In particular, there are lots of high harmonics in there near the cut-off point, which is perhaps why we hear a "pop." Anyway, that's my best theory at this time of day.
 
unix-guy said:
Ok... Cool. I'm going to try some very specific tests tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Ok, quoting myself... I did test and in fact I do notice a brief gap when changing Drive block channels.

However, for me, it is so brief that I don't think I'll ever have a problem with it.

Aside from using 2 Drive blocks instead, I don't think I could beat it with an analog rig. From my memory, it is about the same as doing the same type of change with a GCX loop switcher.

Of course, this is all my opinion for my own use case...
 
unix-guy said:
Ok, quoting myself... I did test and in fact I do notice a brief gap when changing Drive block channels.

However, for me, it is so brief that I don't think I'll ever have a problem with it.

Aside from using 2 Drive blocks instead, I don't think I could beat it with an analog rig. From my memory, it is about the same as doing the same type of change with a GCX loop switcher.

Of course, this is all my opinion for my own use case...
Click to expand...

Thanks for confirming. And to be clear, I wasn't complaining, just observing.

I had it in my head that channels were "magic" and effectively like running multiple blocks in parallel so there were no gaps when switching.
 
DrNick said:
I think the picture Kamil Kisiel has in mind is something like a piecewise-defined graph with sin(x) for non-negative x and just the constant zero for negative x. This is, in fact, a perfectly continuous function (as would be any truncation at a multiple of pi, where sin(x) crosses the x-axis).

The function is not differentiable, however, and that means that its Fourier transform is definitely going to have large support. In particular, there are lots of high harmonics in there near the cut-off point, which is perhaps why we hear a "pop." Anyway, that's my best theory at this time of day.
Click to expand...
I meant discontinuous in the sense of the envelope. The envelope is a step function. Anytime a signal is modulated by a discontinuous envelope it will cause a click.
 
Last edited:
fractalz said:
I had it in my head that channels were "magic" and effectively like running multiple blocks in parallel so there were no gaps when switching.
Click to expand...

No, unfortunately not. That's why I avoid using channels whenever I can and try to run more blocks, just like I did with A/B on the II. The gap is smaller on the III, but still there.

unix-guy said:
However, for me, it is so brief that I don't think I'll ever have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

I haven't used analog gear for quite a while, and don't even have it anymore, but I can say that I never noticed those gaps until I started using G-System and then Axe-FX.

I also didn't notice the gap on the Helix, but I didn't play with it much.

This isn't to dispute that the gap exists on analog equipment, but somehow it sounds more prominently to me on the Axe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom