FM3 Firmware Version 4.00 beta 2

Jeggz said:
Before this firmware Dirty Shirley was kinda “meh” to me.

Now?

I’m really digging it.
Click to expand...
Did the update change the amp blocks? I was under the impression beta 2 only addressed bugs like output 2 and the scribe strips going blank...
 
unix-guy said:
You asked if anyone else was experiencing fan noise. I was saying you were the 3rd person I had noticed in the thread reporting it.

Actually doing a search of the thread, there were a few more before that. First mention at the bottom:

View attachment 84002
Click to expand...
I've noticed the fan noise immediately after upgrading to 4.00 beta 1, sometimes upon startup before the unit has warmed up. Upgrading to beta 2 today and will let you know if this continues.
 
boz52 said:
Has the fan bug been acknowledged by the FAS team??
Click to expand...
me not getting it.
you want cygnus - probably using more processing resources by the engine + ultra res cabs, extra drives, etc., thus heating the device, fan starts to cool it down
or
stay on ares - no fan noise.
 
unix-guy said:
Nobody said it was bad, only that the FC control function is not designed for the Cab.
Click to expand...

Chris said n the last post that "It should not be happening." and you have the same opinion.

I simply disagree with your conclusion. That's the reason that I say "Why it should not be happening? It's not bad that it happens!"

In other words, I think the function is good, is useful. We cannot have 2 amps, but we have 1 amp and 1 cab and we can manage levels of both.
 
Vio said:
you want cygnus - probably using more processing resources by the engine + ultra res cabs, extra drives, etc., thus heating the device, an starts to cool it down
Click to expand...
On 4.00 beta1 we have Cygnus, but fun work normal (= no speeding, no noise). Now, on 4.00 beta 2 fun turn on offen - why? Beta 2 comapre to beta 1 is change only output 2 volume issue fix. But in me opinion something changed also in fun managment algoritm and fun turn on more often
 
jordikt said:
Chris said n the last post that "It should not be happening." and you have the same opinion.

I simply disagree with your conclusion. That's the reason that I say "Why it should not be happening? It's not bad that it happens!"

In other words, I think the function is good, is useful. We cannot have 2 amps, but we have 1 amp and 1 cab and we can manage levels of both.
Click to expand...
The function is called “Amp Level.” It should not be affecting cab level. That’s all I’m saying. The FC not displaying correctly is because it’s not supposed to be affecting cab level.

It would be a wish item to have a Cab level function. Useful or not, it is not behaving as intended.

Amp2 control affecting Cab level is a bug.
 
jordikt said:
Chris said n the last post that "It should not be happening." and you have the same opinion.

I simply disagree with your conclusion. That's the reason that I say "Why it should not be happening? It's not bad that it happens!"

In other words, I think the function is good, is useful. We cannot have 2 amps, but we have 1 amp and 1 cab and we can manage levels of both.
Click to expand...
How would this be consistent when used with the Axe Fx III, for which the FCs are also designed?

As Chris said, the control is "amp" level...

Again, I'm not disagreeing that it could be useful. But that would need to be a different function.
 
chris said:
The function is called “Amp Level.” It should not be affecting cab level. That’s all I’m saying. The FC not displaying correctly is because it’s not supposed to be affecting cab level.

It would be a wish item to have a Cab level function. Useful or not, it is not behaving as intended.

Amp2 control affecting Cab level is a bug.
Click to expand...

My position is that the mistake is in the name, not in the function. You and unix-guy think that the name is correct and the function is wrong.

Maybe if FAS team change the name of "Amp Level" to "Amp+Cab Level" it would be better, of course. And maybe then you would say that the function is correct.
 
unix-guy said:
How would this be consistent when used with the Axe Fx III, for which the FCs are also designed?

As Chris said, the control is "amp" level...

Again, I'm not disagreeing that it could be useful. But that would need to be a different function.
Click to expand...

Axe and FM3 are different products, so for me it have sense that this function affects amp1+amp2 in axe and amp1+cab1 in fm3
 
jordikt said:
My position is that the mistake is in the name, not in the function. You and unix-guy think that the name is correct and the function is wrong.

Maybe if FAS team change the name of "Amp Level" to "Amp+Cab Level" it would be better, of course. And maybe then you would say that the function is correct.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I don't "think" anything.

The manual clearly states the function.

Just because you want something to be true doesn't make it so.

I'd suggest maybe posting a wish so this thread can stay on topic.
 
jordikt said:
My position is that the mistake is in the name, not in the function. You and unix-guy think that the name is correct and the function is wrong.

Maybe if FAS team change the name of "Amp Level" to "Amp+Cab Level" it would be better, of course. And maybe then you would say that the function is correct.
Click to expand...
If the function is correct then why is the FC not displaying it correctly?
 
unix-guy said:
Sorry, but I don't "think" anything.

The manual clearly states the function.

Just because you want something to be true doesn't make it so.

I'd suggest maybe posting a wish so this thread can stay on topic.
Click to expand...
Ok, I keep in silence, sorry :(
Edit:
PS: I don't need the function for cab, I just posted it because I think it's a bug.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom