The Axe-Fx 3 works only at 48Khz

Status
Not open for further replies.
“Should” is all about opinion.
It’s an Internet forum..it’s all about opinions..mine is that samlerate switching is a standard you don’t just drop. It makes it a hassle to use. If you only work at 48khz.. no problem.. but if you like me work with different people all the time it is. I get all kinds of projects in different bit and sample rate. Having to convert them to be able to use an Axe FX digitally is a no go. So I use it analog. Not a huge problem for me since I use the Axe Fx as an stereo fx unit in parallel with a real mic’d amp 99% of the time.

I realize that in my frustration yesterday over people over analyzing every word of the OP and 7 pages of excuses I got just as bad as the rest. But anyways life’s to short. When someone points out short comings it’s always people trying to rationalize bad decisions. Making the Axe FX III be able to switch from 44.1 to say 96k would not break the bank or break the product.

MY NOT SO HUMBLE OPINION!!
 
Last edited:
Even if it could switch from 48 to 96 you'd probably need a whole different set of (much more limited) patches because of the increased CPU usage (potentially double or more). Your maximum reverb and delay times would be shorter, (or maybe only half as many blocks available), etc. It would be its own set of hassles. Seems a lot easier to just run it analog, use a sample rate converter, or track in 48 kHz and then import the recordings into another project with the desired sample rate.
 
The solution is very simple. Make your own world-class modeler with the features you want and quit complaining about another innovator's design and implementation decisions.

In the short time I've been around here, it's apparent that Fractal is very open to ideas from their customers but they are unwilling to compromise and are committed to a standard of excellence and quality. It's been documented why they chose 48khz, either accept it and work within its "confines" or find something else that has what you so desperately need.
 
it is what it is.

I've noticed though in the 6 years I've been around here that generally when people are not asshats, Cliff not only listens, he usually makes great strides to see if he can make it happen... just some food for thought @leon1991
 
The solution is very simple. Make your own world-class modeler with the features you want and quit complaining about another innovator's design and implementation decisions.

In the short time I've been around here, it's apparent that Fractal is very open to ideas from their customers but they are unwilling to compromise and are committed to a standard of excellence and quality. It's been documented why they chose 48khz, either accept it and work within its "confines" or find something else that has what you so desperately need.
Well since the competition all does switch sample rate I rest my case. It’s proven to be possible..both the Kemper and Helix
 
Well since the competition all does switch sample rate I rest my case. It’s proven to be possible..both the Kemper and Helix

Well that kinda raises the question of “Why in the world is one contemplating going Fractal if the above named gear is viewed as superior and apparently has what you want? Geeess… wipe your tears and go for whatever floats your boat and spare us the agony of witnessing your agony.
 
Well that kinda raises the question of “Why in the world is one contemplating going Fractal if the above named gear is viewed as superior and apparently has what you want? Geeess… wipe your tears and go for whatever floats your boat and spare us the agony of witnessing your agony.
Well I never said they are superior at all...I pointed out even the non superior competitors have sample rate switching so there are no excuses for Fractal not have it. Fractal isn’t better because it does not..this debate is getting way past silly.
 
Well I never said they are superior at all...I pointed out even the non superior competitors have sample rate switching so there are no excuses for Fractal not have it. Fractal isn’t better because it does not..this debate is getting way past silly.
Not exactly. The competitors you point out are not using IRs for their cab sims, right? So if part of the reason Fractal is not supporting different sample rates is that they need different IRs, then that right there is all you need to know.

At this point you are having a circular conversation. It is going nowhere. The OP is awol from what I can tell. You made the point that this is a forum and is all about opinions. Well your opinions have been heard and that is all you can ask for on an Internet forum. To continue tilting at this windmill like you are makes me thank that you are not seeking to be heard, but are seeking agreement. You do not have any right or entitlement to having people agree with you.

...or an alternative reason to continue a circular conversation is that you are trolling. The difference between a troll and someone insisting on validation comes down to your intent and we simply do not know what your true intent is.

You paint a picture coming from a big stage environment. Given your forum name, I have never heard of you. I can’t imagine a true marquee player coming into Fractal via a forum like this. A big name would have more direct access... as we see with Metallica, Def Leppard, et al. Also your time would be far too valuable to waste on a bunch of anonymous chumps on an Internet forum. Also your opinion would be far more valuable and Fractal might actually listen, again as we see with Metallica, Def Leppard, et al. So please spare us the desperate attempt to establish a false pathos.
 
Last edited:
In the manner of proposing solutions and not complaints. Here's how I do it.

I'm using a Mac with Studio One 4, Apollo x8 and Axe FX III and have my DAW sample rate set to 96K and have no issues with that.

Recording:
  1. Set up an aggregate device for your Audio Interface and Axe FX III
    1. Configure your preferred sample rate for your audio interface, e.g. 96k
    2. Configure the Axe interface at 48k
    3. Configure your DAW I/O to the "Aggregate Device" and set sample rate to e.g. 96k (now Apollo x8 is at 96k and Axe at 48k)
  2. Add a DI track for Axe IN 5 (mute and record)
  3. Add a "Original track" for SPDIF and make sure the SPDIF source is set out OUT 1 (record)
Reamping alt. 1
  1. Add a new Reamp track for SPDIF and mute the "Original track" and set it to record
  2. Go the the DI track and configure "Sends" to Axe OUT 5+6 (in accordance with your DAW I/O setup)
  3. Go to Axe FX I/O Menu and set your input source to "USB Channels 5/6"
  4. Hit play to audition and record to reamp. Works great!
Reamping alt. 2
  1. Add a new Reamp track for SPDIF and mute the "Original track" and set it to record
  2. Go the the DI track and configure "Sends" to Axe OUT 7+8 (in accordance with your DAW I/O setup)
  3. Add and enable an "Input USB" block and disable the "In 1"
  4. Hit play to audition and record to reamp. Works great!
Reamping alt. 3
  • If your DAW doesn't support real-time SRC, make a complaint to your DAW vendor
  • If your Audio Interface doesn't support SPDIF SRC, either get one that supports it, or go Analog
  • Consider to get a DI box like the CountryMan Type 85 og Radial J48 and split your signals to support DI through your Audio Interface and do Analog Reamping. Also works great and yep, you'll add theoretically higher jitter and noise floor, but I'd say it is pretty much inaudible.
I would also like Fractal to support selectable sample rates, however the Fractal Wiki "Digital I/O" speaks for itself and all the rationale Cliff and this team has put behind this incredible inexpensive unit. And we really don't want audio degradation or less flexibility, because then it's likely to compromise what it's best at. Being the best Amp Sim out there! Architecture and design choices comes with consequences.
 
Last edited:
@oranheim Thank you!

I too just grabbed Studio One 4 when it was on sale recently. Haven't used it with the AF3 yet.
Maybe we start a separate thread on that?
Having you been using Studio One for long?

Be well.
 
I too just grabbed Studio One 4 when it was on sale recently. Haven't used it with the AF3 yet.
Maybe we start a separate thread on that?
Having you been using Studio One for long?

I've been using it for a couple of months and I am really happy with it. The workflow and simplicity is awesome!

Happy Easter!
 
Last edited:
Not exactly. The competitors you point out are not using IRs for their cab sims, right? So if part of the reason Fractal is not supporting different sample rates is that they need different IRs, then that right there is all you need to know.

At this point you are having a circular conversation. It is going nowhere. The OP is awol from what I can tell. You made the point that this is a forum and is all about opinions. Well your opinions have been heard and that is all you can ask for on an Internet forum. To continue tilting at this windmill like you are makes me thank that you are not seeking to be heard, but are seeking agreement. You do not have any right or entitlement to having people agree with you.

...or an alternative reason to continue a circular conversation is that you are trolling. The difference between a troll and someone insisting on validation comes down to your intent and we simply do not know what your true intent is.

You paint a picture coming from a big stage environment. Given your forum name, I have never heard of you. I can’t imagine a true marquee player coming into Fractal via a forum like this. A big name would have more direct access... as we see with Metallica, Def Leppard, et al. Also your time would be far too valuable to waste on a bunch of anonymous chumps on an Internet forum. Also your opinion would be far more valuable and Fractal might actually listen, again as we see with Metallica, Def Leppard, et al. So please spare us the desperate attempt to establish a false pathos.
Well both the Kemper and Helix uses IR technology. You can use the same IR’s in the Helix as in the Axe FX. Fact is that most IR producers provide the same IR’s for most units in Wav. I never claimed fame or a big name at all. But I do run a fairly successful small studio and I’ve done that for the last 21 years. So I think I qualify to speak out about things like this.
 
Last edited:
I ran into this problem ONCE. Then I figured out the fix was to plug into my interface instead of going USB for those projects. The recording comes out flat if you record 48 into 44. Every piece of hardware has a limit, learn how to use it or find the gear that works for you.
 
Well both the Kemper and Helix uses IR technology. You can use the same IR’s in the Helix as in the Axe FX. Fact is that most IR producers provide the same IR’s for most units in Wav. I never claimed fame or a big name at all. But I do run a fairly successful small studio and I’ve done that for the last 21 years. So I think I qualify to speak out about things like this.
The Wizard from HRI?
 
Well both the Kemper and Helix uses IR technology. You can use the same IR’s in the Helix as in the Axe FX. Fact is that most IR producers provide the same IR’s for most units in Wav.
You 100% sure about that? Could be wrong, but I thought they used EQ...

Still does not invalidate that IRs are specifically mentioned as one of the reasons that FAS does not support different sampling rates. That was decision that was made. Such a decision surely would not be made without some consideration of the upside and downside of the decision. I don’t think any designer wants to make a decision with more liabilities than benefits, so I believe that the decision makes sense to Cliff and he ultimately is the “decider”.

I frankly would not be interested in having to set a simple rate, convert a bunch of .wav files into an appropriate IR, then upload the IRS to the AFX. Especially if I had to do it before the unit would be usable.

So, this horse has beaten thoroughly. Cliff has not at this point seen fit to chime in. It seems from reading what is out there about this that the constrain for the I/O centers around FAS wanting a dedicated chip to do sample rate conversion. I would guess this is so that the main CPU will not be impacted by I/O sample rate conversion. If that is the case, it is what it is.

That.chip.is.not.there.

If my interpretation is wrong, I think you just will have to let this ride and see if one Firmware Friday Cliff decides to deliver new sample rates, though with the approach taken on this thread I would understand if Cliff decided not to enter into the fray.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon
I never claimed fame or a big name at all. But I do run a fairly successful small studio and I’ve done that for the last 21 years.
...
Well I come from the land of huge racks and Bradshaw rigs. Instant access switches is a must.
So I think I qualify to speak out about things like this.
Nope. Running a small, fairly successful studio in no way makes you an electrical engineer or product designer. It does qualify you to contribute potential requirements, should the designer choose to accept your requirements into the product scope.

You have made your case for a requirement that you would like integrated into the product. The ball is in FAS’ court now.
 
Again I never claimed to be a designer or an electrical engineer. I clame to be a studio engineer with experience with a lot of gear and what a unit needs to be able to do in a studio invirement to be considered a pro studio unit these days. Nothing more nothing less. A basic standard function for studio gear is missing, and it makes the unit harder to interface in the studio. That’s what the OP was frustrated about. It’s not a huge problem for most people but non the less frustrating for the ones impacted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom