Fractal Audio FM3 vs AX8 | Raw Amp Comparison

This video pretty much matches my experience. I had the AX8 for a couple of years. I got good sounds out of it after a lot of tweaking. Stock, nothing really sounded that great. Buying Austin Buddy’s preset pack was the first time I liked the sound out of the AX8 and when I figured how to adjust all those parameters. It was hard work and I always kept second guessing my sound.

Once I got the Axe Fx 3, I pretty much just needed a matching cab and a bit of BMT adjustment and it sounded killer. More 3D, felt better under my fingers and all that magic sauce.
 
As much as I enjoyed wgat Frank is doing, and listening to him, comparing default settings of amps in two different machines is completely useless.
I’m pretty sure they can be tweaked to sound identical.

Nobody buys a modeler for how the default settings sound. But because of how good/great they can be made to sound.
 
Last edited:
I am really impressed at how different they sound in this video.
The FM3 sounds amazing and 3-dimensional, the AX8 sounds digital and lifeless in comparison.
A really effective advertising for the FM3.
During the previous comparisons between axe fx 2 and axe fx 3 the difference was much, much smaller.
Maybe the firmware on the FM3 / AXE FX 3 has improved so much since then?
Seems like i need to check the latest axe fx 3 videos...
 
If he did tweak each device to sound its best, people would be saying it's not an accurate test because the settings were different on each unit.

The fact remains that the AX8 is still ahead of the competition. While the difference was much less noticeable at the release of the ARES platform (Axe III), it's also a fact that through the enhancements made in firmware releases, the ARES platform has distanced itself tonally from the AX8.

No one's dogging the AX8. People asked about the difference between the devices and videos are popping up. Take them or leave them but let's be careful about creating a narrative that the AX8 no longer sounds good.
 
+1
if people have a FM3/AX3 they are going to want it to sound way better than an AX8. If someone has an AX8 they want to think it sounds closer to the FM3/AX3. It’s a no win situation. There’s way too much bias imho.
 
Last edited:
JoKeR III said:
If he did tweak each device to sound its best, people would be saying it's not an accurate test because the settings were different on each unit.

The fact remains that the AX8 is still ahead of the competition. While the difference was much less noticeable at the release of the ARES platform (Axe III), it's also a fact that through the enhancements made in firmware releases, the ARES platform has distanced itself tonally from the AX8.

No one's dogging the AX8. People asked about the difference between the devices and videos are popping up. Take them or leave them but let's be careful about creating a narrative that the AX8 no longer sounds good.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
It's kinda ridiculous to keep trying to put distance between yesterday's box and the shiny new one today.

If the Axe Ultra smoked the Standard, and then the II smoked the Ultra,
II Mark II > II
XL > Mark II
III > XL
.....

The Fractal Axe Standard must have sounded pretty bad in hindsight, right?
We all know that's not true so ya, the improvements in sound/feel with each new iteration must be minimal.
 
Donnie B. said:
It's kinda ridiculous to keep trying to put distance between yesterday's box and the shiny new one today.

If the Axe Ultra smoked the Standard, and then the II smoked the Ultra,
II Mark II > II
XL > Mark II
III > XL
.....

The Fractal Axe Standard must have sounded pretty bad in hindsight, right?
We all know that's not true so ya, the improvements in sound/feel with each new iteration must be minimal.
Click to expand...
all versions of the Axe-Fx II used the same amp modeling. there were barely, if any, differences between Axe-Fx II, Mark II, XL and XL+. it was mostly hardware changes among those models.

i do think the Axe2 sounds better than the Ultra/Standard. i do think the Axe3 sounds better than the Axe2. would i still use an Ultra today if that was the only option? definitely.

but the Axe3 definitely sounds and feels better than the Ultra/Standard. i would say there's a "depth" to the Axe3 that isn't there in the Ultra. at the time, the Ultra was the best available. but improvements have happened that make the newer models sound better. better technology and developers learning along the way makes this happen.

maybe the improvements are "minimal" in the big pictures, but comparing to the different devices, they may or may not be substantial to you as a player. i really, really like what the Axe3 and FM3 can do and how they sound. i would still play the older gear. but the newer stuff is definitely better.
 
I have been am AX8 user for four years, and I am now a III user. I agree with those that say, there is something wrong with the AX8 clips. I get that there might be differences between the EQ between amp modeling generations within each model, but it should be random. Some ARES models might have more bass, some might have less, but in this example, the bass seems to drop out completely in all AX8 models. That does not make sense.

Edit: I don't mean to say, Frank did anything on purpose, I suspect a global EQ or a highpass filter in the can block
 
Last edited:
It's really funny how people use the words "Sounds Digital" to describe modern amp models, but fail miserably in blind tests.
I don't think any modern amp models sound "Digital" anymore... Just different shades of similar tones...
 
Clockwork Creep said:
It's really funny how people use the words "Sounds Digital" to describe modern amp models, but fail miserably in blind tests.
I don't think any modern amp models sound "Digital" anymore... Just different shades of similar tones...
Click to expand...
Seen elsewhere on the forum, and it bears repeating: digital doesn't have a sound. No one ever left a movie theater complaining about the crappy digital sound.
 
Tones2 said:
Well some guy posted this on facebook. The volume and tone are not even the same for each. I'm sure the FM3 sounds better, but definitely not this dramatically better. :) And I'm NOT in any way implying any purposeful deception here - I just think there is something that is going unnoticed as a major difference here between the two that is not simply an A / B comparison.
View attachment 64729
Click to expand...
What I expected was that FM3 would sound slightly better than AX8 in gain structure, have more clarity, slightly different dynamics, volume, and stuff like that... Not so much in EQ...
None of these knobs match! Not sure about the pickup selector either.
This would explain everything, really!
 
JoKeR III said:
If he did tweak each device to sound its best, people would be saying it's not an accurate test because the settings were different on each unit.
Click to expand...
Nope. See for example this old comparison video:


When there are differences between the two modellers he tries to tweak parameters a bit to make the comparison more fair. And I see no whining about it in the comments :p

Of course making apple to apple comparison is close to impossible, but matching the most obvious parameters, like EQ and gain, the parameters that everyone adjusts for themselves, makes sense to me.

Nevertheless, thanks for the FM3 presentation and great playing, Frank!
 
Donnie B. said:
Amazing how folks are forgetting how awesome the AX8 can sound.
This video is not a good look for the unit.
Click to expand...

I am not saying the AX8 cannot sound great. The AX8 can sound amazing, i know that because i listened to zillion of clips before buying an axe fx 2.

But the comparison results here are pretty straightforward and the FM3 wins by a far margin on the first listen, so i tried to go a little deeper.
I could think of two main reasons:
  • factory presets being much, much better on the FM3
  • huge amp modeling improvements in the past months on the FM3/AXE FX-3

After listening carefully again using my AudioTechnica ATH-M50X this morning, I thought the biggest difference was in the LOW end, as many of you said.
Seemed that the clips on the AX8 are brutally cut in almost all the presets using a sort of High Pass Filter.

So i have dowloaded a FLAC file from youtube using an online converter and analyzed the spectrum on cubase using SPAN Voxengo, and this absolutely confirmed my guessing. The clips on FM3 have a much more extended low end.
I am sure this can be obtained as well on the AX8 as generating low frequencies has never been a problem using this unit.

Moreover: after watching this video , youtube opened the following comparison by Leon Todd:


The differences here are much, much smaller...almost indistinguishible.
I feel better now :)
 
Last edited:
Rex said:
Seen elsewhere on the forum, and it bears repeating: digital doesn't have a sound. No one ever left a movie theater complaining about the crappy digital sound.
Click to expand...

I would say that the word "digital" is oftenly used only for the lack of a better word in this context (guitar amplification and modeling).
By "digital" we typically mean something with small low end, flat mids and no character, fizzy high end, and a very quick attack. Lifeless.
Instead of wiriting all of this, many often use the word "digital".
Yes, I agree, it's not correct ad there is no "digital" sound. But it's a very commonly used word in this context nevertheless.
 
LancerS said:
The 50 watt Plexi Jump was the biggest contrast for me...would love to hear more of these type of comparative videos-Love my AX8...wondering if I would like the FM3 better. Nice guitar also.
Click to expand...

I like the AX8 50wPJ more than FM3. The JCM was almost there, and so the PVH. Except for those 3, I like more the FM3 sound. But with some tweaks I bet they could sound similar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom