Poll: MK1 owners, 1024 User 2 cab slots or 32 FullRes cab slots?

MK1 owners, 1024 User 2 cab slots or 32 FullRes cab slots?


  • Total voters
    536
  • Poll closed .
How would they not have access to their old school IRs? The factory banks are untouched, and the user banks get filled by IRs that you have purchased and/or downloaded. All of your user banks should still exist on your computer, if you back them up.

I have yet to hear one person explain why they need to have 2048 user IRs on their FX3 at all times. I’m truly curious to see a real-world example of why 1024 User IRs is just not enough. I should say that my perspective is colored by my past, which consisted of using 1 amp and 1 cab with a few pedals for an entire gig. But even if I could swap out a new rig for every song, it would still “only” be 40 amps and 40 cabs. Stereo? Okay - 80. So a bank of 100 IRs would suffice. What am I missing?
??? ...thought I read somewhere where you could have one IR type or the other loaded into the user bank? ..but not both? .. Now, If you could have both, then yes, I guess the best of both worlds would be doable (if the powers that be deem it), but if Mk1 users could only have user banks stuffed with their previously purchased IRs, or the new, then it kinda throws people under the bus who have collected hundreds of the previous IRs and use them for live-sound etc., (was my point).

Probably have it all mixed-up though. :0) ...I didn't have caffeine before rattling off all that crap. Damn lucky there wasn't any mention of Aliens and the Loch Ness Monster or whatnot riddled through that post, for it! :0)
 
I'm truly curious about it and have yet to really hear an explanation from anyone who "needs" the additional 1024 IR slots in the User 2 bank so let's speculate. Not that we're entitled to an explanation, it's just that there are a lot of us that don't understand the need.

One reason for and purpose of the User banks is the need to have IRs stored on the unit for presets using those IRs. Just using 1024 IRs, having 16 different IRs in the cab block (4 in each channel) allows for 64 presets. That means that there could be users that need more than 64 presets available with 16 different IRs per preset.

Another reason that comes to mind are studio players that need access to different cabs for different tones depending upon what the customer/producer is wanting. In this scenario, time is of the essence, is it not? Wouldn't having a laptop connected in this scenario be the better option than scrolling through the IRs on the unit itself? I would like to hear those who have needed to change IRs in this case whether that's the only change that was necessary or were other adjustments to the amp or other effects necessary? I have not been in a studio environment more than a handful of times but in those cases I felt that being the most prepared meant having a laptop connected to make any tweaks to a preset as fast as possible.

I thought about recording at home or in a personal studio as a reason but in that case I can only see it as purely convenience.

Again, I am legitimately curious for the reason, other than convenience, that makes the additional 1024 IRs a necessity. That's not to minimize a person's need for convenience, just stating that if the Mk 1 only had 1024 user slots to begin with, people would find other ways to manage as I'm sure those that feel that 2048 slots are not enough have found other options to make it work.
 
??? ...thought I read somewhere where you could have one IR type or the other loaded into the user bank? ..but not both? .. Now, If you could have both, then yes, I guess the best of both worlds would be doable (if the powers that be deem it), but if Mk1 users could only have user banks stuffed with their previously purchased IRs, or the new, then it kinda throws people under the bus who have collected hundreds of the previous IRs and use them for live-sound etc., (was my point).

Probably have it all mixed-up though. :0) ...I didn't have caffeine before rattling off all that crap. Damn lucky there wasn't any mention of Aliens and the Loch Ness Monster or whatnot riddled through that post, for it! :0)
Instead of 2048 user IRs (old) you would have 1024 old and 32 full res
 
At the risk of just being ignored, I would still like to know in detail just how impossible it would be to turn a Mk I into a MK II at some reasonable cost less than a brand new MK II? Thanks!
 
Can there just be two separate downloads for 17? One for folks that are ok with losing the 1000 user slots (seriously, who really uses that many?) and folks that do not want AITR?
 
Option 3 - none of the above. The IR difference is irrelevant for live performances. I could really go for Output 3 cloning Output 1 though,
 
??? ...thought I read somewhere where you could have one IR type or the other loaded into the user bank? ..but not both? .. Now, If you could have both, then yes, I guess the best of both worlds would be doable (if the powers that be deem it), but if Mk1 users could only have user banks stuffed with their previously purchased IRs, or the new, then it kinda throws people under the bus who have collected hundreds of the previous IRs and use them for live-sound etc., (was my point).
It would only affect the User 2 Bank. Factory 1 & 2 and User 1 are not affected at all.
 
IMHO there is 1 thing people rejecting FullRes IRs on MK1 don't get....this is a new and probably evolving/developing technology for axe fx.
I think it will soon(-er or later) be about Convolution Reverbs and potentially by saying "no thanks, i want to keep my user bank 2" you are also saying "no thanks i don't want that convolution reverb on MK1."
 
Last edited:
Speculating: I don't know if FM9 will/can have FullRes IRs but i think FM9 is actually an Axe FX 3 killer. For most people it has enough power and
also most people will not need anyhing beside expression pedal(s) to use it where as for Axe FX 3 you still need a controller. Simplicity, cost, easier transport and all that...makes the Axe FX 3 pretty weak against FM9.

My point is, i think more and more features will be added to Axe FX 3 MK2 which can't be put on MK1 or FM9 which will give some customers reason to buy/consider Axe FX3 over FM9.
 
FM9 is actually an Axe FX 3 killer
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you there. FX3 has IR Capture, and about twice as much horsepower. It's the Flagship, and there will always be a market for it, especially in studios where real-time foot control isn't super necessary, or with larger acts where nothing but the best will do.

I think for many users, the FM9 is going to be the FM3 killer. Lots of AX8 users didn't want to go with the FM3 because it was too small and underpowered, and the FM9 fills in the gap between the FM3 and the FX3 perfectly.
 
At the risk of just being ignored, I would still like to know in detail just how impossible it would be to turn a Mk I into a MK II at some reasonable cost less than a brand new MK II? Thanks!
Cliff already replied on this.
$2199.00 is the only way to get you there.
 
Speculating: I don't know if FM9 will/can have FullRes IRs but i think FM9 is actually an Axe FX 3 killer. For most people it has enough power and
also most people will not need anyhing beside expression pedal(s) to use it where as for Axe FX 3 you still need a controller. Simplicity, cost, easier transport and all that...makes the Axe FX 3 pretty weak against FM9.

My point is, i think more and more features will be added to Axe FX 3 MK2 which can't be put on MK1 or FM9 which will give some customers reason to buy/consider Axe FX3 over FM9.
Since the III has double the cpu it's not going to be killed by the fm9 and that extra cpu will be made use of for something. The fm9 is the ultimate live FAS unit when portability is a concern. The III is the ultimate for several things. Get both!!! win/win
 
Back
Top Bottom