FM3 as home studio centerpiece?

parlopower

Inspired
I just received an email from G66 that my non-headphone FM3 might be available for me in the first week of July. Since a lot of my recording stuff has changed in the last months, I would like to ask a few questions here.

I owned an Axe Fx III before, sold it when the FM3 was announced. Back then, I used a Universal Audio Apollo as audio interface for vocal recording, and the Axe Fx III for guitar recording via USB and also USB reamping. The converters of the Axe fx III are IMO even better than those of the Apollo (which are also not bad at all), so mixing was possible on both and preferred on the III. Downside of that system: When recording songs and you want to swap from vocal recording to guitars, you have to close Cubase, switch off monitors and change the cables from the monitors to the other device, restart etc. etc. It is quite a workflow killer.

Now when I buy a Fractal device again, I want to simplify this and use the Fractal exclusively as audio interface. I will run an analog preamp (probably a Focusrite ISA One) into the line ins and use the Fractal's FX (comp, EQ, delay, reverb) for monitoring FX. No more restarting, swapping devices or cables, etc. So the Fractal device I purchase will be the centerpiece of my studio.

I know that that will work well with the Axe Fx III, since I know that the analog i/o is top quality, AD/DA is top notch, USB reamping is possible, etc.

How is that with the FM3?
  • Is the AD/DA (analog circuitry and converters) comparable quality to the Axe Fx III? (I know the modeling sounds the same.) I would like it to be at least as good as the Apollo's.
  • Does it run solidly enough with a DAW to use it as your main interface? I think e.g. also about latency when playing VSTis with a MIDI keyboard.
  • Is it possible to reamp with the FM3 a DI track while the mix is running? I know the Axe Fx III can, but the Axe Fx II couldn't, you had to solo the track... how is it with the FM3?

The USB reamping during mix playback is a must for me. Apart from that, I just want to make sure that I don't make any quality compromises on what will be the centerpiece of my home studio. I know I would be very happy with the FM3 only for guitar, but since things have changed and it has to be more than just my modeler, I rather spend the 1400€ more on the Axe Fx III than compromising and being unhappy in the long run. What I like About the FM3 is the form factor and of course the lower price makes quite a difference for me.

Any input highly welcome! Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that most of us at this time are making it the centerpiece for our studio and I don't think that was the design as well. It has limited I/O so I wouldn't rely personally on this as a centerpiece. The Axe 3 is more suited for your needs IMO with its processing and I/O capability. Portability is great but geared to live applications. I'm sure you could make it work but in the end I think you would find yourself limited. I can't answer as far as the converters are concerned (equal to Axe3). As far as using it as an interface, 1.04 seems to being it closer to being on par with the Axe 3. Reamping is also not an issue and works fine while everything is running. These are all my opinions, so take them for that. I have both Axe 3 and FM3.
 
Right now, the FM3 has many many recording problems and couldn't possibly function as a standalone interface.

The AXE 2 and 3 were fine for this. Until they get all the bugs out of the FM3 there is no way I could recommend it for recording.
 
Right now, the FM3 has many many recording problems and couldn't possibly function as a standalone interface.

The AXE 2 and 3 were fine for this. Until they get all the bugs out of the FM3 there is no way I could recommend it for recording.
Recording is much better than it has been pre 1.04. I haven't done extensive recording but it was ok last time I did a video on it and re-amping.
 
Right now, the FM3 has many many recording problems and couldn't possibly function as a standalone interface.

The AXE 2 and 3 were fine for this. Until they get all the bugs out of the FM3 there is no way I could recommend it for recording.

Agreed on this...right now it's not quite ready until some of the bugs and issues are worked out.

Even then, I think the Axe 3 would be a better choice strictly for home studio use...you're going to want to use the level knobs to adjust volumes and that's a pain when it's sitting on the floor. With my Axe I never had issues using the audio interface.

But personally I'll be going FM3 + a separate interface, just because I like all the controls at hand.
 
I’ve used the II, III, and FM3 as my interface at different times, and have always preferred a separate interface, something with a built-in DSP mixer.
 
Compared to my Apollo twin, the latency of the fx 3 is a bit more ( Apollo about 4 ms, fx 3 about 15 ms). But it's still fine.
 
Thanks for all the replies to everybody. A few answers to your comments:
  • The i/o config of the FM3 absolutely suffices for me, as all I need is the guitar input and one line input for the mic pre.
  • Having the unit on the floor would not be an issue regarding volume control, I will either put a Presonus HP4 headphones amp or Monitor Station in between, for the cases I need two heradphones when recording other vocalists. Either of them would be on the desk and has volume control for monitors.
  • When you record the dry signal from the mic pre / line in into the DAW, FM3 Edit is basically your DSP mixer

What DOES concern me is what was mentioned regarding recording stability.

Another thought: I still have my Apollo lying around. How well does it work to connect like this:
Recording:
FM3 line out - Apollo line in processed signal
FM3 SPDIF out - SPDIF coax to optical converter - Apollo optical in for DI signal
Reamping:
Apollo line out - FM3 line in as DI signal send
FM3 SPDIF out - SPDIF coax to optical converter - Apollo optical in for reamped signal

I asked about that before somewhere on the forum, but since the FM3 was hardly released I do not remember anybody being able to answer this from own experience. Any of you guys do it like that?
 
You can definitely use this as a main interface, and it delivers excellent audio quality. The biggest issue with using it as an interface is that it is limited as far as I/O, and you'll need it turned on all the time, not just with guitar. I also have an Apollo 8, and couldn't say if its better or not as far as converters. Presumably the latest generation in the FM3 are better. Not a circumstance where I can hear or test what differences might be attributable to converters. The ISA One is also great, love it, works through the line ins perfectly.

When I first got the AX8 a few weeks ago, FW 1.03, I hooked everything up and tried all the I/O, routing, USB etc, and everything worked properly, and without issue. Latency is not an issue using live monitoring, which is what Out 1 is: USB return + the FM3 Amp & FX mix. I had no stability issues running on Macs, a 2014 Macbook Air (High Sierra) and a 2017 iMac (Mojave) into Logic: absolutely rock solid, and with a Nektar Pacer, Nektar Impact Keyboard, and a Behringer X-Touch all doing their USB midi stuff.

USB recording is well thought out: you can record FM3 amp & FX on USB 1/2 and either a DI on USB/34 or the line ins (ISA1), while monitoring via Out 1 as your DAW mains along with the direct monitored FM3 amp & FX. Its in the manual. The DAW time aligns it perfectly, so there is no audible latency, regardless of what the actual latency of the overall system might be (obviously software monitoring of the recording track is OFF): You are playing in real time (well, whatever the FM3 AD/DA latency is) to the Mix. Notably, there is a USB return Volume level in the FM3 that allows you to control the balance of the DAW return in the FM3 monitoring mix. This way you can easily set the recording to an optimal level, and adjust the monitoring balance of the DAW mix to the FM3's direct monitored guitar signal as desired without affecting the tracking level.

I will continue to use the Apollo 8 (adding 8 more tracks via ADAT) as I require multitracking. Adding the FM3 into the routing with it is easy: Monitoring with the Apollo either SPDIF or FM3 Out 1. Record SPDIF or USB. I will use the FM3 as a stand alone interface for working remotely with a laptop.

Also, I don't want to have the FM3 tethered to a computer and cabling all the time: I want it portable and ready to go whenever and wherever at the drop of a hat, and just need a guitar cord, power cord, and XLRs to have it ready to go, even if its just to another room. There's a bit of a learning curve for me to the FM3, it'll be a while before I'm not spending a fair bit of time with FM3 Edit getting presets crafted, but I'll get to a point where I can go for weeks without having much need to edit and can just turn on and play.
 
Last edited:
Multiple parts. There had been recorded track latency issues with previous firmware so this has been my test every time. It's not perfect but with a little adjusted recorded latency setting (in logic pro at least) things were fine once you calculate the round trip latency and add that value. Not sure what DAW you use.
 
Again, thanks to everybody. @artzeal that was a great response. Also thanks for commenting on the ISA One.
I just watched some videos from Greg Summers on Youtube. First I watched that video about USB recording and reamping and it made me happy. But then I saw he has a video "Let's hit that CPU limit". And there he loaded input/output, volume, pitch, comp, drive, amp, cab, delay and reverb - and had the FM3 almost at the CPU limit. So if you want e.g. an edge of breakup sound and have a comp, drive, delay, reverb and maybe just a chorus or flanger added - that's it, unit maxed out. I think that is so far the biggest argument I see against the FM3. Rethinking now...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rex
There's been some optimization to bring CPU load down in the last firmware, plus a more efficient economy reverb mode. I wouldn't worry about it, unless you like tons of effects.

I can do compressor, overdrive, amp, cab, chorus or pitch effect, delay, and reverb and still not hit the limit.
 
Yes I figured that CPU video would be good to do since everyone was asking a lot. They have made some improvements in CPU for FW 1.04 and they will continue to make improvements but I think that video is still a solid baseline. There are creative ways to save CPU though, which I didn't show, especially for reverb blocks which are the biggest CPU hog out there. Just depends on what your patches are like.
 
I think that reducing CPU is kind of a double edged sword. I mean, how do you rationalize CPU utilization going down as they model more stuff and better?
Sure there’s optimizations and all, but still.

I wouldn’t really care if they never reduced CPU again. However, I never want to see an update that increases CPU to the point where my presets don’t work anymore.
 
Keep in mind the available CPU reading doesn't appear to include include the Amp and Cabinet blocks (which are on their own dedicated processor, so available CPU amounts to what effects you are using. FM3 edit shows 11% CPU with an empty preset and 16.4% with both and and cabinet. The economy mode in Reverb (as of 1.04) is an enormous help, as with low density echo you can get most of the reverbs as low as 12%, or about 20% with high echo. And they still sound great, particularly at a low mix percentage 10% or less - I typically like about 3-7% mix reverb on tones where reverb isn't an obvious part of the sound. You can ramp up the reverb to High Quality mode and use 50% of the CPU: which awesome for "its all about the reverb", or when using the FM3 as an outboard processor for a mix down of anything that might need the highest quality reverb possible.

A general purpose pedal board preset that includes multiple variations of Wah, Compressor, Phaser, Drive, Amp & Cab, Chorus, Delay, Flange, Reverb for jam playing when you don't really know what you might do works out OK for CPU, but not nearly as well as having a dedicated stomp switch for each physical device to look down at and decide what's next on the fly. Adding an FC-6 will allow doing the dedicated switch per effect approach.

Realistically, the FM3 is at its best if you plan ahead. Making a preset for each of any major sonic field or song, and setting up 8 scenes to chose from. For song centric layout, one could go; Intro and Outro, 2 Verses, Two Choruses, and a dedicated Rhythm and Solo scenes, For a sonic approach, maybe; Clean, Crunch and Lead (and 4 through 8 for variations) Use the same scene layout concept for each preset, then you'll always know where to go; if you typically have delay on chorus 1 one, but not chorus 2 - well you get the idea. While you can get a lot of basic delay, chorus, phase, trem, effects in a preset, you won't be able to have more than a couple from the CPU intensive Multi-Delay, Plex-Delay, Rotary, Pitch and Reverb available all in the same preset. If that is realistically something that a player wants to do, or if emulating a complex analog pedalboard is de rigeur: forget about the FM3 and get the AXE FX 3 and an FC-12.
 
Last edited:
Ok, I checked my songs so far that could possibly be played live. If I want to make one preset per song and change sounds via scene switching, then the preset with the most blocks would have to include:
Input, output, amp, cab -> that's clear
Compressor, drive, chorus, tremolo, delay, reverb
If the FM3 can do that, and especially with the reverb on the higher quality settings, then it should be fine.

Edit: Just found a table on axefxtutorials.com with CPU usage per block. It is for FW1.02, but there this list of blocks already brings it to 76%. That leaves a bit of CPU for maybe one other block, but not everything will work. Is it much different now with 1.04? This is really just on the edge between "enough" and "too much compromise"...

Edit 2: On the other hand, as long as you don't need spillover and have a second for switching, nothing should speak against using 2 presets to split things across, right?
 
Last edited:
If you need high quality mode reverb in addition to kitchen sink effects in one preset you could add a reverb pedal into the FX loop. Leon got some great sounds from the Poly Digit which is midi switchable, or you could go cheaper with a TC HOF or a Neunaber. Or use delay instead.
 
Right now, the FM3 has many many recording problems and couldn't possibly function as a standalone interface.

The AXE 2 and 3 were fine for this. Until they get all the bugs out of the FM3 there is no way I could recommend it for recording.


Soooo....

I've been using the Axe FX 2 as my audio interface in a DAW for years and had no issues. I don't need any mic preamps or anything fancy at my home studio, as I only do my mixing and guitar recording here.

So what ya'll saying is, that I wouldn't be able to do that with the FM3?
That is, recording through USB with it doesn't work very well, because it has a lack of CPU? Quite a bummer.

If so, I should get myself a dedicated audio interface...

I rarely ever do anything more than Amp block + Cab block in the Axe FX when recording guitar, because I want to have control over my effects when mixing. So, such things as reverbs and delays and the like are VSTs. Can the FM3 deal with that?
Still wish Axe FX was a VST... :c
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom