Please shrink FM3

I’ve always thought some sort of modular floor design would be great. One “brain” essentially, but you could quickly attach it to the fc of your choice. I’d love the functionality of the axeiii on the fm3 footprint.

Stomp sized “brain” complete with iOS/android Bluetooth connectivity for ui. Each fc would have a dock to put it in. Sometimes you might want the fm3 size. Sometimes f9 or f12. Then at home, just a small stomp size box on the desk.

Sean Meredith-Jones
 
Last edited:
Paulzx said:
Why would anyone want to make the FM3 smaller? It's perfect as it is. It's big enough to be practically usable with its foot switches and it's small enough to be um...small

Any smaller and it would be hard to use!
Click to expand...

This is necessary if you want to cover the target audience with home guitarists who may lack funds on FM3 and FM9, and who love everything compact and not straining. I assume that this audience is large.

If, for example, FRACTAL produces a product similar to VP4 but less by 30% at a price of $ 700, this is a light ticket to the world of better modeling. But the question arises - whether this will damage its own sales when the new product begins to compete with FM3 and FM9. Here you need a study of the audience, it is necessary that sales block potential competition between products. It is necessary to understand the expediency of such a product.

Ideally, the new mini -product should not be weaker than the FM3 MKII Turbo, and better by 25 - 40% more manufacturing. Since it makes no sense to produce a new product without the potential for development. And then he will begin to compete with FM3. And if you make it cheaper and the same as the FM3 Classic or weaker, it will be necessary to limit one AMP, CAB, DRIVE, Noize and Chorus, in order to at least somehow contain new algorithms. I can imagine that such a mini version could appear in the new line with Axe FX4, FM3 II, FM9 II, FM3 mini.

My fantasy on the theme of FM3 mini.
 

Attachments

  • FM3 mini.jpg
    FM3 mini.jpg
    56.2 KB · Views: 53
  • FM3 mini vs FM3 vs VM4 size comparsion.jpg
    FM3 mini vs FM3 vs VM4 size comparsion.jpg
    453 KB · Views: 55
Last edited:
I like the size of the FM3 and wouldn’t want it to be smaller. The foot switches are nicely spaced apart for my hobbit feet and I like how the layout is identical to the FM9. Plus, I can actually read the scribble strips.

I think the logical solution will be presented to us by the FAS Team when they develop it! 😉
 
A smaller size would cause cooling issues -this has been stated by FAS I believe (perhaps with new tech this could be better in the future?).
- To battle cooling, performance has to be lowered. And who wants that?
- ..maybe it can be done with more expensive components. But would it sell if it was the same price of AF3 and not as powerful?
- Smaller size would also leave less room for ins and outs. And who wants that?

I really like equipment to be convenient, space saving, luggage friendly etc. but I would not compromise sound or ins/outs to make this unit smaller than it already is.
 
My only concern is the weight, not the size. It is built like a tank and, well, heavy as a tank. Since I use it mostly as a backup unit or when I go to jams I would like a lightweight version.
 
Me too size 12 and NP with the HX stomp- Fractal is about the sound and I love that but - seems like the market is going small - have to stay in business-
 
FM3 is small enough now to fit in a gig bag pouch. I started leaving the FM9 behind thanks to the FM3 smaller footprint. I really wouldn't want to see FAS cheapen their product line with 400 dollar devices that compromise tone quality just for the me too crowd to get a foot in the door. The FM3 is already cheap enough to get into the ecosystem with a summer job. The world needs Mercedes Benz too and you don't see them putting out a Yugo. FAS is the gold standard in this stuff. Keep it that way. JMO. If it really was just about the footprint, maybe FAS can come up with a smaller unit with some kind of advanced cooling built in so they didn't have to compromise the sound at all. In this case, how would you market a unit at half the size that cost the same or more as the bigger one?
 
Gimme an FM1. Single footswitch. 5 small knobs that are basically the performance page knobs. Supports 1 amp block, 1 cab block. Stereo I/O, possibly MIDI as well.

That's it. No FX, just raw amp / cab modeling. Target market is basically the same as the Boss IR2: integration into existing pedalboards. I'd buy it even if it were $400-$500.
 
Gonwild said:
A smaller size would cause cooling issues -this has been stated by FAS I believe (perhaps with new tech this could be better in the future?).
- To battle cooling, performance has to be lowered. And who wants that?
Click to expand...
Yes on heating/cooling & performance... currently. This is a future problem to solve.

Sean Meredith-Jones
 
Geoff L said:
I have size 12 feet, please don't make anything smaller, and with regards to weight, really? I have AXEIII as well with a FC12, the FM3 is just fine. Try lugging a couple of Subs and a drum coffin about.
Click to expand...

I have an 8U rack with a Marshall JMP-1 & 9100 in it, along with a few other bits. It weighs right around 100lbs. The FM3 is a feather.
 
I guess all my gear I bring to a gig weighs 100 lbs at maximum...including guitars, backline, cables, backup unit, mic, guitar stand
 
Sach said:
So what it someone wished for smaller unit ? I just never get why some ppl are always against what others want ! it works for you fine others may want something else !
Click to expand...
Because this is a discussion forum. Post something and naturally you are going to get responses from both sides of the isle.

If you don’t want comments that oppose your views, don’t post on a public forum. Instead, send an email directly to FAS expressing your desires.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom