FM3 Firmware Version 2.00 Public Beta 1

chris said:
is different from

that's all i was getting at.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I should have typed, "Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Based on the post from FAS I'm guessing it won't". I'm generally not a pessimist, but on this one the glass is half empty in my view.

We’ve been given mixed messages from FAS on porting the drive block to the FM3 from the time it was rewritten for the AxeFX III. The initial statement was that it would use too much CPU and push presets over the limit and that the FM3 is not an AxeFX III. That’s a very different message than the hardware can’t run the algorithms. It's nice to have a more realistic statement from FAS that fully reveals the challenges to porting the drive block and I appreciate that.

And that's OK. The Drives as they are sound fantastic! I really love the Tone of Kings model. The FM3 sounds great and there is currently no other floor unit on the market that I would use in it's place.

I'm with @raccoon. I'd rather see improvements to the UI that are specific for a performance based floor unit to take advantage of that large screen.
 
Admin M@ said:
Today I helped to discover that at least one of these presets contains an "illegal" modifier in the delay block, which explains why it was crashing. This vindicates the beta firmware in my opinion, though it may need to be equipped with guard rails to prevent something like this from happening.

May I ask if you converted or edited these using FracTool or any other 3rd party software? @cnaufel -- answer here or send me a PM.
Click to expand...
My presets were getting stuck until I removed my second delay block. It was a block made by @Moke and was supposed to act as a reverb instead of a real reverb block but with less cpu. I think it had a modifier on the diffusion parameter that got removed. Removing the block quickly or resetting it gets rid of the problem.

EDIT: nope, still didn't fix the issue. There's still something else that makes the sound disappear.
 
Last edited:
As exciting as new stuff is, and especially new stuff that you're told you can't have, my presets are already pretty crammed, so I don't mind the lighter drive block version the FM3 seems to have now. Doubt I'd be able to tell the difference anyway, the way I use drives to just push overdriven amps a bit more.

'Tuner on heel down' though would make my life easier and free up a switch.
 
CerealKiller said:
As exciting as new stuff is, and especially new stuff that you're told you can't have, my presets are already pretty crammed, so I don't mind the lighter drive block version the FM3 seems to have now. Doubt I'd be able to tell the difference anyway, the way I use drives to just push overdriven amps a bit more.

'Tuner on heel down' though would make my life easier and free up a switch.
Click to expand...
Totally agree, dont really need more "stuff" just refinements of whats there, stability, user friendliness etc....performance page, no crashes or bugs, tuner heel down would be great. When I want all the drives form the 3 (no one needs all the drives from the 3), I get a 3. simple.
 
ethomas1013 said:
The initial statement was that it would use too much CPU and push presets over the limit and that the FM3 is not an AxeFX III. That’s a very different message than the hardware can’t run the algorithms.

I'm with @raccoon. I'd rather see improvements to the UI that are specific for a performance based floor unit to take advantage of that large screen.
Click to expand...
I interpret it as the hardware can't run the algorithms because the algorithms use too much CPU, but I have been known to be wrong :oops: :)

+1 on improvement to the usability, particularly the performance pages. I would also like to see scene volume increment and decrement as that was a great feature for easily levelling scenes on the fly.
 
FractalAudio said:
That's not going to happen with this firmware. The algorithms are too intensive to run on the hardware at this time. The FM3 is not an Axe-Fx III and some algorithms may NEVER get ported if the hardware can't support them.
Click to expand...
I understand, I was joking. BUT... it would be nice to get the new drives i.e. OCD etc. even if they aren't on the updated algorithms. Possible/probable?
 
blackmoreguitar said:
I interpret it as the hardware can't run the algorithms because the algorithms use too much CPU, but I have been known to be wrong :oops: :)
Click to expand...

TBH "The algorithms are too intensive to run on the hardware at this time" is pretty clear, not open to any interpretation, IMHO.

The FM3 is more powerful than the AX8, but not as powerful as the Axe-FX II was (is), so it's important to rule out any "hopeful" comparation to what the Axe FX III is capable of... The "at this time" part may be the key, as they're are always finding new ways to improve the CPU usage with the algorithms, but the message is pretty clear.

Now, it would be nice to know if the same situation applies to the Pitch Block overhaul (and it's safe to assume it is, as the pitch shift can be really CPU intensive), just to know beforehand what to expect as the Virtual Capo was the one feature I wanted the most and convinced me to sell the AX8 to get the FM3.
 
AJ Vargas said:
TBH "The algorithms are too intensive to run on the hardware at this time" is pretty clear, not open to any interpretation, IMHO.

The FM3 is more powerful than the AX8, but not as powerful as the Axe-FX II was (is), so it's important to rule out any "hopeful" comparation to what the Axe FX III is capable of... The "at this time" part may be the key, as they're are always finding new ways to improve the CPU usage with the algorithms, but the message is pretty clear.

Now, it would be nice to know if the same situation applies to the Pitch Block overhaul (and it's safe to assume it is, as the pitch shift can be really CPU intensive), just to know beforehand what to expect as the Virtual Capo was the one feature I wanted the most and convinced me to sell the AX8 to get the FM3.
Click to expand...

any pitch fx are generally going to be the most Cpu intensive IMO
if the drive block cant go i would not hold my breath for pitch
i think they have spent the last 3 weeks trying to as close as they could
the comment almost at the finish line again to me says we have done all we are able to at this point
 
Randalljax said:
i would not be surprised if we sit in beta for a while each one adding new stuff then giving time to test that
i think for the rest of this month they will be trying to get the FM3 as close as they can so then they can keep
up faster
Click to expand...
Typically, in every software group I've worked in, the "beta" stage has no additional features added, it's only for ferreting out bugs. "alpha", which is the prior stage is where features get added.
 
hnrichardc said:
I've injured the 3rd finger on my left hand, I can't play guitar for 2 months, I really want to try the new firmware, 😢😢
Click to expand...
I once deeply cut my index, middle and little finger on my left hand, all across the pad, resulting in bandages then healing skin that would catch the strings, and it took a couple months for the slices to close up. I worked on slide guitar because my ring finger was still good.
 
unix-guy said:
I don't know... Drive / distortion is pretty CPU intense (at least for some models).
Click to expand...

Just for refrence if you look at the Helix their Poly pitch blocks and virtual capo eats about 40% of a cpu compared to 10% or a drive
obviously modelling is different but
to control latency and warbling And tracking quickly you need A ton of cpu
 
If the new modeling can't be transferred to the FM3, I'd love to see the new models (if possible) using the old modeling tech. Would be better than nothing.

Also would love to see performance page and other usability enhancements, if possible, brought down as well.
 
Randalljax said:
Just for refrence if you look at the Helix their Poly pitch blocks and virtual capo eats about 40% of a cpu compared to 10% or a drive
obviously modelling is different but
to control latency and warbling And tracking quickly you need A ton of cpu
Click to expand...

For reference, on my HX Stomp I could only get a poly pitch block and an amp/cab block in a preset which makes it kind of impractical.
 
guitaryates said:
For reference, on my HX Stomp I could only get a poly pitch block and an amp/cab block in a preset which makes it kind of impractical.
Click to expand...

thats why i think pitch blocks take a lot of cpu, Line 6 said they will improve it
even still it will be like 30% of a stomp at minimum
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom