FM9 Firmware Version 3.00

[GLiDE BPM]

I would keep my Axe FX III MkII Turbo and sell my FM9 Turbo if I could have an Axe FX III MkII Turbo in a 12 or more button footswitch floor model .......

 

[unix-guy]

I know processing power is not the same as storage space. I was speaking more from a marketing and sku positioning perspective. Seems like the FM9 is the Goldilocks of the fractal line and more preset storage would fit in there nicely.

Also if you are talking about physical space - the FM9 is like twice as big as the FM3 correct? So it is reasonable that it could be housing a slightly bigger hard drive.

And doesn’t the FM9 cost more than the FM3?

I’m not asking for it to match the size or price of the flagship AxeIII. I’m simply saying in comparison to the FM3 - the bigger size, the bigger price, the bigger DSP, etc, would suggest that more preset space would be very logical and appropriate. NOT as much as the III. But another bank to set it apart from the FM3.

There's no hard drive... It isn't about size but most likely cost.

 

[Fireproof]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest you may not know a lot about computer components, am I right?

Not trying to claim to be any kind of expert, just trying to ask a fricking question. I misread Greg’s comment about “smaller space.” In hindsight, right, of course there’s no hard drive in these. I thought he was saying something about “physical space” in the FM3 limiting the size of components. Now that I re-read it, I see that’s not the case. My bad.

 

[Fireproof]

You guys can give me a hard time all you want. But no one has yet answered with any GOOD reason why the FM9 doesn’t 640 or 768 preset slots to be in between the FM3‘s 512 and the AxeIII’s 1024.

And I’m totally cool with “Cliff just decided to do it that way.” Which is totally a valid answer. But you don’t have to act like it’s such a stupid idea or question.

 

[GlennO]

You guys can give me a hard time all you want. But no one has yet answered with any GOOD reason why the FM9 doesn’t 640 or 768 preset slots to be in between the FM3‘s 512 and the AxeIII’s 1024.

"Good" is subjective, but I believe I answered this already. To reiterate: the Axe-FX/FM* device is a poor place to store hundreds of presets.

 

[Fireproof]

"Good" is subjective, but I believe I answered this already. To reiterate: the Axe-FX/FM* device is a poor place to store hundreds of presets.

Yeah but they’ve already broken that line of thinking with 1024 slots in the III.

 

[GlennO]

Yeah but they’ve already broken that line of thinking with 1024 slots in the III.

Sure, but that would be a bad reason, not a good one .

 

[unix-guy]

You guys can give me a hard time all you want. But no one has yet answered with any GOOD reason why the FM9 doesn’t 640 or 768 preset slots to be in between the FM3‘s 512 and the AxeIII’s 1024.

And I’m totally cool with “Cliff just decided to do it that way.” Which is totally a valid answer. But you don’t have to act like it’s such a stupid idea or question.

Actually, I did but you thought I was joking: it's because the available storage supports that many. There is a finite, predefined amount of space allocated for them out of the total physical storage in the unit.

For whatever reason that we don't know, Fractal designed the unit that way. That's the only "good" reason you're going to get.

 

[jetdriver1775]

There’s also a USB port that’s not doing anything. Could be made to allow external preset storage.

 

[GlennO]

There’s also a USB port that’s not doing anything. Could be made to allow external preset storage.

Take a closer look at your FM9 .

 

[unix-guy]

There’s also a USB port that’s not doing anything. Could be made to allow external preset storage.

No, there isn't... That's the FM3 only.

The USB B port is for peripheral devices to connect to a host, so that's not useful to attach storage (because the FM9 is a peripheral).

 

[Greg Ferguson]

a slightly bigger hard drive.

?

There is no hard drive.

These are not general-purpose computers, they're very specialized audio-processing units designed specifically for their task.

 

[Jeronimo]

You guys can give me a hard time all you want. But no one has yet answered with any GOOD reason why the FM9 doesn’t 640 or 768 preset slots to be in between the FM3‘s 512 and the AxeIII’s 1024.

And I’m totally cool with “Cliff just decided to do it that way.” Which is totally a valid answer. But you don’t have to act like it’s such a stupid idea or question.

The “GOOD” reason is that your storage capacity calculation is based on the difference in DSP power between the different units.

Processing power and storage capacity are 2 different things.

 

[jetdriver1775]

No, there isn't... That's the FM3 only.

The USB B port is for peripheral devices to connect to a host, so that's not useful to attach storage (because the FM9 is a peripheral).

That’s right. I have both the FM3 and the FM9. I forgot that they both don’t have a USB A slot.

 

[ChristThePhone]

didn't the FM3 have a USB-A that never got activated to even power external devices?

 

[fremen]

The “GOOD” reason is that your storage capacity calculation is based on the difference in DSP power between the different units.

Processing power and storage capacity are 2 different things.

Plus, the III was released with 512 slots. I still have a 512 slots unit

 

[Fireproof]

The “GOOD” reason is that your storage capacity calculation is based on the difference in DSP power between the different units.

Processing power and storage capacity are 2 different things.

See - that is what I was thinking. And according to the below from the wiki, FM9 has twice the power than the FM3. So isn’t reasonable to think that there IS room to allocate a bit more storage to presets in the FM9 than the FM3?

"The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs. The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core. If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:

• Axe-Fx III: 100%
• FM9: 50%
• FM3: 25%

 

[Fireproof]

Plus, the III was released with 512 slots. I still have a 512 slots unit

I think I remember reading that - and the change was from AxIII Mark 1 to Mark 2, right?

So was there a processor upgrade in Mark 2 that allowed for more storage allocation?

 

[moerker]

Processing power != Memory capacity. Updating a PC CPU won‘t affect RAM or disc size…

Same goes for DSP.

Good reason: because it is designed this way and uses the same memory as the FM3 and Axe FX III Mk. I.

 

[Fireproof]

So what we are talking about is “non-volatile memory” correct?

So when I read things like the FM9 press release below, it makes me think the non-volatile memory in the FM9 is similar to the AxeIII, so therefore, it seems logical that there IS the ability to have more than 512 presets in the FM9, but cliff just chose not to for some reason:

The FM9 also includes the entire Ultra-ResTM cab collection from the Axe-Fx III, with 2,200+ “Factory” cabs including selections from the today’s best producers, plus 1,024 “User” locations for loading your own Impulse Responses (“IRs”).