Grasping the Implications of More CPU

D

Dr. Dipwad

Experienced
Hello,

I am looking at the graphs and numbers showing how much more CPU power the Axe-FX III has compared to the Axe-FX II XL+.

It obviously has much more.

However, the software for individual blocks has been improved (which might make some/all blocks heavier). And there is more overhead in general because of the increased complexity of the system.

QUESTION:
Will I find that, compared to the Axe-FX II XL+, I can put more simultaneous active blocks in the same preset?

SPECIFIC EXAMPLE:
In my Axe-FX II XL+, I had a preset with 2 Volume blocks, 2 Amps, 2 Cabs, a Multiband Compressor, 2 Noise Gates, the Effects Loop, a Feedback Send/Return, a couple of Delays, a Reverb, and a lot of real time control including Scene Controllers for crossfading between sounds.

It worked, but as soon as I started trying to add one more thing (a Drive in front of one of the Amp blocks), I started getting the Dreaded CPU Overuse Crackling Sound.

In the Axe-FX III, will I probably be able to fit the Drive in, and maybe some other stuff too, with no problem?

Or does the increased complexity/overhead of the system mean that the "How Many Blocks Per Preset" has remained about the same?
 
Last edited:
can you upload this monster preset, and i might be able to try it out on the III tonight (like 9 hours from now).

but generally, yes. in every preset where i've compared the 2 to the 3, there is substantially more CPU available. as with anything, it depends on the specific blocks added and their settings. and also keep in mind this is the beginning of Ares Modeling. there will most likely be improvements as we go.
 
@chris:

I'm ashamed to say this is not a preset I've backed up to my computer, so I can't upload it.

But in general if the new CPU is not just dedicated to the overall system improvements, audio quality, additional inputs and outputs, etc., but actually provides more space per preset for blocks...? If that's the case, then I think my question has a happy answer.

@Rex: Thanks for the reply. I kinda suspected that was the case, though I didn't want to take it for granted.
 
chris said:
darn. i wanted to try :D
Click to expand...

Well, in fairness, here's roughly what it is: It's two similar parallel paths coming from stereo inputs. During the Multiband Compressor and the FX Loop, it's briefly one path. Then after that it splits in parallel again, to allow the non-delayed signal to run in parallel to each of 2 delays. Then it all comes together again in the Reverb and the Outputs:

2 Inputs (from a stereo offboard effect) -> Vol 1 & Vol 2 -> Amp 1 & Amp 2 -> Cab 1 & Cab 2 -> Gate 1 & Gate 2 -> MBC -> FX Loop -> Delay 1 & 2 -> Reverb -> Output

The delays are Stereo Digital Delays with different timing (eighths and dotted eighths); the Reverb is something pretty big. I think the Amps are something Fender Tweed-ish and an FAS Modern high gain sound. The cabs were selected to taste.

I'm really just using the Volumes as panners so that I can send the Right input exclusively to Amp 1 -> Cab 1-> Gate 1, and the Left Input exclusively to Amp 2 -> Cab 2 -> Gate 2.

It didn't honestly seem like that much, but I wanted the amps to behave like 2 "crossfading channels" (you and I have had THAT discussion before! :D ) so I set the output levels of their respective cabs to be controlled by the Scene Controllers. Likewise the Mix levels of the Delats (some Scenes have the dotted eighths; some have the straight eighths; some have both overlapping).

That's the gist of it.
 
Here's a preset I put together while stress-testing the Axe-Fx III during beta testing. Two Amps, two Drives, two Cabs, and two Reverbs in High-Quality mode. Plus a Filter, two Compressors, two Choruses, a Crossover, and every Input and Output in the box (nine total I/Os). CPU less than 80%.

20180305_163729[1].jpg
 
Rex said:
Here's a preset I put together while stress-testing the Axe-Fx III during beta testing. Two Amps, two Drives, two Cabs, and two Reverbs in High-Quality mode. Plus a Filter, two Compressors, two Choruses, a Crossover, and every Input and Output in the box (nine total I/Os). CPU less than 80%.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Rex.

Given what you've described/photo-documented here, I'm pretty sure I'll be all set once the Axe III is in-hand.

I had been considering getting a Boss RV-500 (or similar) and sticking it in my rack, and run my Axe-FX II outputs into it, and then back out to the Mix. That way, I reasoned I could take at least one Reverb block's worth of CPU usage out of all my presets, so they wouldn't be running so close to 90% all the time.

But I think I'd better get the Axe III first and see if the problem just goes away by virtue of the III's extra CPU capability.
 
Last edited:
@chris and @Rex ...,

A related question: Is there a way to reduce the CPU usage of a block that has 4 channels, by simply not using one of the channels?

Or would the CPU usage be the same whether you used 4 channels or only 1, because only the currently-active channel causes any load on the processor?
 
This would be my "everything" patch - I can can do this on AxeIImk1 but I have to do it accross 2 presets:

1 - PRE-DISTORTION (all mono, 2 controllers on Wah and Pitch):
-Wah,
-Pitch(whammy),
-Comp (studio),
-Phaser,
-Flanger,
-Chorus,
-Delay,
-EQ.

2 - DISTORTION (controllers - 1 on Amp Gain/Vol, 1 on Amp Boost):
-Drive,
-Drive,
-Amp1/Amp2 (in parallel),
-Cab1 (stereo hirez).

3 - POST-DISTORTION (all stereo, 1 controller on delay mix/delay fdbk, delay vol):
-Volume,
-Tremolo,
-Pitch (harmony),
-Flanger,
-Chorus,
-Delay,
-Reverb (HQ),
-Rotary
-EQ

I can get close to this on AxeIImk1 with lowrez mono cab but not really (have it setup in 2 patches) - hoping it will work on the 3

Edit - Oops - forgot Rotary: can't neglect Peter!
 
Last edited:
chris said:
:eek: wow that's a lot of stuff! 21 blocks :O
Click to expand...

Surprisingly, AxeIImk1 will do it with 1 drive, lowrez amp/spring reverb, no pre-delay, no harmony.

Actually, on these type patches, the AxeIImk1 seems to run out of memory before CPU (max'd cpu starts to crackle, max'd memory starts to drop patch info like tempo, controller values)
 
sprint said:
Surprisingly, AxeIImk1 will do it with 1 drive, lowrez amp/spring reverb, no pre-delay, no harmony.

Actually, on these type patches, the AxeIImk1 seems to run out of memory before CPU (max'd cpu starts to crackle, max'd memory starts to drop patch info like tempo, controller values)
Click to expand...
Yep, With my 'Mark I', sometimes the preset file size limit gets me before the CPU does.:(
 
On a more serious note, did Cliff divide up the CPU use in a similar fashion to what he did on the II, with one side devoted to modeling and the other to effects? (At least I think I remember that being written somewhere). If not, I would expect a ridiculous amount of effects power available if not using an amp or cab block.
 
Reminds me when I was a kid, I would go to the store where every pedal was linked for demo, and would turn em ALL on and laugh...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom