Upgrade to Axe III from FM3?

C

charley

Member
I recently purchased an FM3. It’s my second go around, having only sold the first one to replace with an AxeFx3.

However, my mind started wandering, and I questioned whether I would benefit from the Axe3 any more than I already do with the FM3, and then I started making excuses to “save the money” yadda yadda yadda.

So I bought another FM3. I love it, it’s amazing, and so much fun, but once again I’m wondering if I would benefit from the added functionality of the Axe3?

So I’m turning to you guys to help me wrap my mind around what to do….

I’m a studio guy. I do session work, film scoring, and sound for documentary and marketing films. I am a multi instrumentalist, and do all of my own mixing and mastering for the projects I work on.

I don’t use my FM3 live, it’s solely a studio tool. I love recording guitars and pedal steel with it. I love getting raw vintage amp tones, as well as sonic landscapes from my FM3. Initially, my desire to upgrade to an Axe 3 was to be able to record though dual amps. However, it occurred to me that when I do this, I generally don’t simple duplicate a guitar track, but record a second take through another amp. The nuances and differences between the two takes always has a much more synergistic effect than simply pumping the same track through two amps.

I’m not interested in tone matching.

What other benefits would the Axe3 offer me over my FM3?
 
For studio use, I would highly recommend upgrading to the Axe-FX. Totally aside from the extra blocks and processing power:

- The Axe-FX can be mounted in a rack, within arm's reach in a studio. You don't want to be bending down to the floor to push any front panel buttons. The FM3 simply is not designed for studio use.

- spdif input on the Axe-FX gives you a lot more flexibility for connecting your Axe-FX in the studio to an interface.

- Updates that are important to somebody who uses it for recording may come slowly on the Axe-FX, but they're even slower on the FM3, presumably because there aren't many people using the FM3 for recording.

- The extra I/O comes in handy when using the Axe-FX in the studio.

- The Axe-FX has midi over usb.
 
charley said:
I generally don’t simple duplicate a guitar track, but record a second take through another amp. The nuances and differences between the two takes always has a much more synergistic effect than simply pumping the same track through two amps.
Click to expand...
This is why for recording I primarily just use the FM3 on my desk (with FM3-Edit open on my computer): I'm usually double tracking in mono and printing as few effects as possible so the extra DSP and ability to run 2 amps is "wasted" for me in the studio. I own both units and I record them using SPDIF into my interface. The Axe-FX III primarily stays in my road case for live use (where the additional DSP and footswitches add tremendous value over the FM3). If I were not playing live / touring then I would only have the FM3.
 
Last edited:
charley said:
I recently purchased an FM3. It’s my second go around, having only sold the first one to replace with an AxeFx3.

However, my mind started wandering, and I questioned whether I would benefit from the Axe3 any more than I already do with the FM3, and then I started making excuses to “save the money” yadda yadda yadda.

So I bought another FM3. I love it, it’s amazing, and so much fun, but once again I’m wondering if I would benefit from the added functionality of the Axe3?

So I’m turning to you guys to help me wrap my mind around what to do….

I’m a studio guy. I do session work, film scoring, and sound for documentary and marketing films. I am a multi instrumentalist, and do all of my own mixing and mastering for the projects I work on.

I don’t use my FM3 live, it’s solely a studio tool. I love recording guitars and pedal steel with it. I love getting raw vintage amp tones, as well as sonic landscapes from my FM3. Initially, my desire to upgrade to an Axe 3 was to be able to record though dual amps. However, it occurred to me that when I do this, I generally don’t simple duplicate a guitar track, but record a second take through another amp. The nuances and differences between the two takes always has a much more synergistic effect than simply pumping the same track through two amps.

I’m not interested in tone matching.

What other benefits would the Axe3 offer me over my FM3?
Click to expand...
If you’re not lacking anything with the FM3, meaning you’re not trying to do something with it that you can’t, you could continue on with the FM3 until you experience a limitation. It’s not as though it sounds inferior. But sometimes it’s just freeing to know you’re able to create to the limits of the technology, and the
III or III Turbo certainly take you there.

To me, having the flagship is worth it, even though my normal presets wouldn’t have the FM3 breaking a sweat. I like playing with the extra capabilities, and some of those things are only in the III series. Check the comparisons in the Wiki, as mentioned, to see what else you gain at each level. You wouldn’t regret the upgrade!
 
GlennO said:
- The Axe-FX can be mounted in a rack, within arm's reach in a studio. You don't want to be bending down to the floor to push any front panel buttons. The FM3 simply is not designed for studio use.
Click to expand...
Since most (studio) players do the editing with Axe Edit this is no issue. You can also put the FM3 on your desk.

To the OP: you had both units once so you should know already what works the best for you I think? If you are not using the extra stuff of the Axe fx III why not just stick to the FM3?
 
charley said:
I’m a studio guy. I do session work, film scoring, and sound for documentary and marketing films. I am a multi instrumentalist, and do all of my own mixing and mastering for the projects I work on.
Click to expand...
I'm in a very similar situation – multi-instrumentalist, studio owner, mastering engineer, mix engineer, etc.

I've gone back and forth regarding gear for years. I've been an Axe-FX owner going back to the Ultra. I don't have an FM3, but I do have an FM9, and I own the Axe-FX III MKII (pre-Turbo). Between the FM9 and Axe-FX, I like the Axe-FX better. There are a couple reasons, but primarily because the sheer power provides ways to do things even the FM9 can't.

On the other hand, there can be creative peril having too many options! At least for me. I've honestly considered selling off my "bajillion options" gear – like the Fractal gear – and simplifying with a flagship REVV amp or similar. However, I've been down that path, too. I've done that at least once in the past, and ended up coming back to the Axe-FX when the III was introduced, which is when I sold off the beloved JVM410HJS and the holy trinity of Strymon's flagship pedals. (I wouldn't be surprised if several people on this forum have done something similar – tried to "Fractal" without Fractal – but ended up coming back.)

It just comes down to how much bling do you need for your craft. In the ambience department – especially for ambient soundtrack work – my personal opinion is that Axe-FX is the king of the world. Huge potential for creating massive, ambient, never-before-heard patches. But it's just potential unless used.

If you're a single amp/cab person most of the time, and you tend to shape your ambient soundscapes via plugins and/or other pedals/outboard gear, then the FM3 seems like it could be a perfect fit.
 
I currently own both and have considered selling the FM3 several times but still haven't done it because I like its portability. My Axe-Fx 3 is a big, bulky rack unit that doesn't fit very nicely on my desk and so on. Next weekend I'm visiting my parents in another city and I plan to throw the FM3 in luggage and try out the new 6.0 firmware (hoping for another beta today!).

Sounds to me the FM3 would actually cover your use cases. You could record a DI signal from one of the outputs, then reamp that through another scene with different channels with your second amp chain set up. That should end up basically the same as running dual amps, except you need to mix the tracks after the fact which you would probably do anyway.

I don't think you need as massive fx chains as the Axe-Fx 3 is capable of most of the time. I enjoy being able to use it in overkill fashion but it's by no means necessary.
 
laxu said:
I currently own both and have considered selling the FM3 several times but still haven't done it because I like its portability. My Axe-Fx 3 is a big, bulky rack unit that doesn't fit very nicely on my desk and so on. Next weekend I'm visiting my parents in another city and I plan to throw the FM3 in luggage and try out the new 6.0 firmware (hoping for another beta today!).

Sounds to me the FM3 would actually cover your use cases. You could record a DI signal from one of the outputs, then reamp that through another scene with different channels with your second amp chain set up. That should end up basically the same as running dual amps, except you need to mix the tracks after the fact which you would probably do anyway.

I don't think you need as massive fx chains as the Axe-Fx 3 is capable of most of the time. I enjoy being able to use it in overkill fashion but it's by no means necessary.
Click to expand...
That’s always my thought.
 
Bodde said:
Since most (studio) players do the editing with Axe Edit
Click to expand...
Of course, and so do I. I was referring to using the front panel for operations that can’t be done from Axedit. For example, displaying the meters page. With the FM3 you have to reach down to the floor or put it on your desk and lose the use of the foot switches. But this is just one issue in a list of AxeFX advantages
 
Last edited:
I’m thinking of the same thing. Previously I didn’t like the rack format and that’s a reason I sold the Axe FX 3 and got an FM3 (plus FC12 for controls on the floor). But now I have a new space where I have my FM3 set up on a side table on a laptop stand to angle it for easy editing. The rack unit would actually be a little easier to use in this way.

I don’t stretch the CPU of the FM3 too much, but having more doesn’t hurt. Also having the option of dual amps can be nice. And the Axe 3 seems more future proof compared to the floor units.
 
LanceZ said:
I wouldn't be surprised if several people on this forum have done something similar – tried to "Fractal" without Fractal – but ended up coming back
Click to expand...
Ha. This was me. Had the axe fx 3. But needed a portable solution for a fly gig. Went the pedal route, getting some drives, delays, chorus , reverb etc. Hated it. So clunky, so difficult to control without tap dancing and I couldn’t get the amazing tones I was used to.
Came back, sold everything and bought a FM3 for my next fly date. Life was good again.
 
I definitely recommend you update to Axe-Fx III. The main argument is CPU performance. It's incomparable to FM3. You can make amazing tones without performance limiting you.

The other thing is the TMA functionality. I use it every day and it's a great, extremely useful, tool to get your favorite tone from any source within a relatively simple procedure.

I might also highlight the frequency and speed of updates that come out for the Axe-Fx III. It's absolutely amazing how Fractal cares about their customers.
 
I have both. FM3 is my live rig, FX3 is racked in my studio.
Best of both worlds. If you can afford it that is the way to go.
 
If you can afford it, get the Axe Fx III no question….I mean it’s the flagship model, you know?

Plus, you can’t blend two amps at once with the FM3….;)
 
Own what you can afford. That’s the best advice I can provide.
You’ll benefit from the added functionality of an AxeFx3.
You’ll sound great with either device.
One more thing to consider. Have you mastered and utilized the relative parameters and benefits of the FM3? It’s only limiting your capability, if you’re up against the limits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom