FM3 Firmware Version 5.00 beta 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zorzella said:
The one thing I was hoping for is that the "Improved CPU performance of the Reverb block" would mean a tiny bit more of a breathing room, CPU-wise. But that did not materialize -- it still hovers around 82%, often triggering a temporary "WARNING"...
Click to expand...
You worried me. I was counting on "savings" on the processor. Although 2-3% of which are usually missing.
 
It seems to me that the adsr does not work properly. It triggers only once or twice. After that it does not trigger again. This behavior is not dependent of the state of the switch retrigger. It is also possible that I do not understand the adsr because it is the first time I'm experimenting with it
 
Andreas01 said:
It seems to me that the adsr does not work properly. It triggers only once or twice. After that it does not trigger again. This behavior is not dependent of the state of the switch retrigger. It is also possible that I do not understand the adsr because it is the first time I'm experimenting with it
Click to expand...
It sounds like you have the threshold set too low.

You need to find the range where it is dynamic. Set it too high and it will never trigger; set it too low and it will trigger and then not re-trigger.
I do this by using my right hand to repeatedly pick an open string while using my left hand on the arrow keys (up/down) to set the threshold in FM3-Edit.
 
@FractalAudio I'm curious if there is some explanation for this effect in the FM3? I've measured today with a completely reset unit with latest 5.0 beta and with comparing a real note from the guitar. Low B - latency around 8.4ms, the higher the frequency, the less latency it has. I thought that the input has a sampling frequency and amount of samples and is not dependent on the frequency. It seems that for those low tunings, it is kinda slow.

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/fm3-latency-depends-on-note-frequency.180451/
 
DJD100 said:
Pitch detector, always working in background most likely?

AFX3 and FM9 likely better in this regard.
Click to expand...
Well, can be, but I'm not sure if it's because of that small little tuner or why? It's definitely annoying when I'm playing at lower volumes through studio monitors or even for high volumes it feels like there's something off for me.
 
Jeggz said:
Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but I’m real curious about this CNFB stuff!
Click to expand...
I own fm3 and sometimes steal axe fx 3 from friend. Surprised at the differences I've noticed today against the new axe fx firmware. Right out the box, may even prefer the fm3 firmware compared to the CNFB thingy. But didn't have too much time with it.
 
Dimi84 said:
I own fm3 and sometimes steal axe fx 3 from friend. Surprised at the differences I've noticed today against the new axe fx firmware. Right out the box, may even prefer the fm3 firmware compared to the CNFB thingy. But didn't have too much time with it.
Click to expand...
I can't hear a difference, tbh. I couldn't hear a difference between Ares and Cygnus. I've felt like it sounded amazing since the day I got it 3.5 years ago.
 
Ugly Bunny said:
I can't hear a difference, tbh. I couldn't hear a difference between Ares and Cygnus. I've felt like it sounded amazing since the day I got it 3.5 years ago.
Click to expand...
I don't know if I'd able to hear the difference in some blind test, but playing through some tones between the 2 units (axe fx 3 loaded with the power amp technology and this fm3 beta, respectively) some of my tones with the vintage Marshalls felt less raspy and smoother. Tones I'm used to dialing with "heavier" and more modern amp sims felt more similar.

Which isn't to say the new tech is bad or anything.

I'm just expecting to probably having to dial in my vintage marshall tones to be raspier. And some times firmware revisions result to some detail changing that may be indeed hard to bring back, for some.. but I doubt it'll be a big issue for me now.
 
CT76 said:
mine did to, but after I tried to load multiple third party cabs to see if that was fixed, it wasn't and edit crashed, now my headphone jack doesn't work. I can plug it into my interface and use my headphones, fingers crossed the actual release fixes it, I am going to try and reinstall

UPDATE AFTER REINSTALLING BETA 5 MY HEADPHONES WORK AGAIN
Click to expand...
I wonder why the Headphones stopped working on the FM3, that is a little concerning.
How do you find the volume through headphones, I have read the output is lower on FM3 compared to other modelers, has this update addressed that. Thanks
 
macman70 said:
I wonder why the Headphones stopped working on the FM3, that is a little concerning.
How do you find the volume through headphones, I have read the output is lower on FM3 compared to other modelers, has this update addressed that. Thanks
Click to expand...
My FM3 has always had way more volume on tap than any of the other modelers I've owned and that's with high impedance headphones. Best headphone amp in a modeler in fact.

It is a bit concerning that output issues seem to crop up on beta firmwares despite this much development on the unit over the years. I remember on 4.0 betas I had issues where output 2 stopped working or would crackle until you power cycled the unit but so far haven't had output issues on fw 5.
 
Thanks for this great information, I am just about to pull the trigger on a FM3 and was just wondering on this. I have never had issues with headphones out on other gear and I feel fine that this will all be good as I want to use FM3 as my interface. I do not want to run it out to my other Audio Interface or a mixer. From what you describe sounds like Headphones out will be fine.
Thanks!!
 
Never had an issue but after fm3 edit crashed it took them out, after reinstalling beta all is good though, no issues
 
Dimi84 said:
I don't know if I'd able to hear the difference in some blind test, but playing through some tones between the 2 units (axe fx 3 loaded with the power amp technology and this fm3 beta, respectively) some of my tones with the vintage Marshalls felt less raspy and smoother. Tones I'm used to dialing with "heavier" and more modern amp sims felt more similar.

Which isn't to say the new tech is bad or anything.

I'm just expecting to probably having to dial in my vintage marshall tones to be raspier. And some times firmware revisions result to some detail changing that may be indeed hard to bring back, for some.. but I doubt it'll be a big issue for me now.
Click to expand...
There's enough difference between the two units in terms of amp block parameters, setup, I/O, etc., that would make the two units sound different regardless if each had identical FW, let alone using two different FWs. But yeah, I've heard a lot of great things about the new CNFB, but a few concerning reports. I don't ever use any Marshalls, so this wouldn't affect me, but it seems to be mostly Marshall players that are noticing the less desirable aspects of the CNFB modeling.
 
Ugly Bunny said:
There's enough difference between the two units in terms of amp block parameters, setup, I/O, etc., that would make the two units sound different regardless if each had identical FW, let alone using two different FWs. But yeah, I've heard a lot of great things about the new CNFB, but a few concerning reports. I don't ever use any Marshalls, so this wouldn't affect me, but it seems to be mostly Marshall players that are noticing the less desirable aspects of the CNFB modeling.
Click to expand...
What are they noticing?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom