One thing I don't understand about some things not being ported from Axe-Fx 3

rich2k4

Inspired
The argument is always that it would take up too much CPU. For example, the drives and the pitch block.

My question is, why not just do it anyways?

Do it anyways and accept that you won't be able to use as many blocks, remove all the presets that go over the cpu limit, and accept that you won't have as many presets.

It was always said that the FM3 is not an Axe FX in a small form factor. So roll with that. Keep the software and algorithms up to date between the two, but just roll with and accept that the FM3 won't be able to do as much because of the CPU.

Line 6 helix and HX Stomp have the same algorithms, but one is not the other and the HX Stomp does less.
 
Last edited:
The argument is always that it would take up too much CPU. For example, the drives and the pitch block.

My question is, why not just do it anyways?

Do it anyways and accept that you won't be able to use as many blocks, remove all the presets that go over the cpu limit, and accept that you won't have as many presets.

It was always said that the FM3 is not an Axe FX in a small form factor. So roll with that. Keep the software and algorithms up to date between the two, but just roll with and accept that the FM3 won't be able to do as much because of the CPU.

Line 6 helix and HX Stomp have the same algorithms, but one is not the other and the HX Stomp does less.

i think it not just the CPU but how the algo runs
the CPU in the FM3 is slower than the keystone so it not a matter or he wont do it more he can’t get it run run properly in it current coding hence the not at this time
 
There's also a problem in the fact that, under this proposed philosophy, CPU-intensive presets fitting in current resources will eventually stop working under future FWs. I think we could agree this will result in unsatisfied users, and an implicit uncertainty about presets being future-proof. A workaround could imply including "economy modes" in all reworked blocks, but without knowing the specifics of the implementation it's not feasible to know if it's possible or not
 
It's not a matter of taking more CPU. The FM3 hardware is incapable of running the new AxeFX III drive block at this time.

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...-00-public-beta-1.167544/page-18#post-2016489

It is unclear whether "at this time" means that further optimization of the processing is needed, or whether the drive block itself wound have to be rewritten (again) in order for the FM3 hardware to be able to run the algorithms.
 
Maybe we can ask @BryantP
you guys have done a great job
at the current firmware. one question are we in a similar boat like the drive block for porting The following ,the Ultra res virtual capo , faster channel switching?
Is it a processor and cpu issue w those items as well , not sure if you can answer just curious
Thanks
 
Back
Top Bottom