Was there ever a consideration of different OS's for different types of players?

there aren't enough metal amps modeled and delivered by Fractal to justify the $2500 investment.
The vast majority of the amps in the box can be used for metal...

And I think you are seriously under valuing the worth of the Axe Fx. Buy any 2 of the modeled amps (plus the cab for heads) and you are easily hitting $2500, and you have no effects, no recording interface, no midi control, etc.

I was expecting a price tag of $3500-4000 when the Axe Fx III was announced... Imagine my joy when it was only $2500!
 
The question I ask is, is something missing? Are all the letters there in the alphabet of tone? In my mind, they are there. Leave it to the third party developers and the users to spell the specific words. A lot of these amps that are missing have similar architectures to ones that are there which can be tweaked.
 
Last edited:
The vast majority of the amps in the box can be used for metal...

And I think you are seriously under valuing the worth of the Axe Fx. Buy any 2 of the modeled amps (plus the cab for heads) and you are easily hitting $2500, and you have no effects, no recording interface, no midi control, etc.

I was expecting a price tag of $3500-4000 when the Axe Fx III was announced... Imagine my joy when it was only $2500!

This. Just a single one of the amps I use regularly as a metal player (including such brutal amps as the Hiwatt *gasp*, lol) would cost as much or more in and of itself than the Axe does. I was very pleasantly surprised to see the Axe III at the price point it is, especially given all the further improvements over the last generation.

And as others have addressed, defining a “metal” amp or a “rock” amp or the like isn’t cut-and-dry. As a personal example, I’m not the hugest Mesa fan anymore so I could live without a ton of variants of those, whereas someone else’s idea of the perfect metal amp collection could very well be just Mesa models. Compartmentalizing things will just make it harder for people to find what they like among the options at hand, I think, not easier.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s all sorts of amps both metal-geared and otherwise I’d love to see added. But the current lineup is far from lacking in any regard IMO.
 
Need? None... want to explore? Tons...

Like I said, the question I posed doesn't even apply to me. I'm happy with my II and dont feel compelled to get a III.

I was posing it as a hypothetical way for Fractal to possibly attract more customers. If the 3rd party market is already doing that with preset packs, I guess that's similar, but there aren't enough metal amps modeled and delivered by Fractal to justify the $2500 investment.

I think its clear that this is not a priority for Fractal, so I consider this thread dead, Zed.

What truly unique amps aren’t covered by what’s in the Fractal? The overwhelming majority of all amps out there are just minor riffs on other amps. Sometimes it’s more channels or adding features not present (like a loop or DI out). But modeling another twenty metal amps will not increase the number of available tones much (if at all). They are soooo similar sounding and much, much more of a difference can be made with cab IRs.

Seriously, what’s an amp sound that you think you cannot get with an AxeFX?
 
As mentioned, yes, there are numerous amps that can be used for metal already. Does that make it wrong that somebody might be looking for others to be added? In light of how generous Cliff has been to us in constantly adding new amps, I can see how one might think it’s the norm around here. I don’t see it as entitlement or being ungrateful to wish for such things. If that part of being an Axe owner is now over, then so be it....it was fun while it lasted! I for one, really liked and looked forward to that aspect of being in the Axe club. Whether it means new amps or not, I can’t wait to see what’s ahead!
 
We've got all the major amp flavors covered - Fender, Vox, Marshall, Hiwatt, Mesa, and many, many multiples of their various clones and offshoots, totaling over 250 amps. Add to that 2000+ IRs and countless other 3rd party IRs. Just in the box alone as it comes from the factory that equals over half a million possible combinations. Now add the tweakability of each amp model - change the tubes, the tonestack, the bright cap, the sag, etc. You're at literally million of possibilities, and we're not even looking at most of the other parameters (not to mention effects). I've gotta agree with Cliff. If you can't find the tone in your head with the current offerings, adding more metal (or jazz or blues or country) amps isn't going to magically get you there.

As for simplifying things to attract new buyers, on the surface that might sound useful, but where do you draw the lines? I play in a cover band doing mostly lighter classic rock stuff. I spend most of a gig running through various Fender models. But for some leads, I prefer to use "metal" amps like the HBE or other Marshall variants. Which flavor of the "OS" would I buy?

So some of the TGP participants resist modeling, complaining about spending time tweaking instead of playing. Fine. Let them buy a few multi-thousand dollar amps and a few thousand dollars worth of stompboxes, if that's what they'd prefer. It doesn't affect me. It appears to me that Fractal is selling their modelers about as fast as they can make them. While I'm sure they are always appreciative of new customers, I'm not sure having their business expand to the point where it's no longer a small company would ultimately be beneficial to the guitar playing community. Line 6 is a good example of what happens to product innovation and customer support when a small company becomes a big one. (And that's not a dig at Line 6. They make fine products, but I doubt they'll ever have the customer satisfaction Fractal does.)

And from a software development standpoint, having a variety of "flavors" adds to the complexity of the code or multiple code trees, neither of which is conducive to rapid development and release of new enhancements.
 
We've got all the major amp flavors covered - Fender, Vox, Marshall, Hiwatt, Mesa, and many, many multiples of their various clones and offshoots, totaling over 250 amps. Add to that 2000+ IRs and countless other 3rd party IRs. Just in the box alone as it comes from the factory that equals over half a million possible combinations. Now add the tweakability of each amp model - change the tubes, the tonestack, the bright cap, the sag, etc. You're at literally million of possibilities, and we're not even looking at most of the other parameters (not to mention effects). I've gotta agree with Cliff. If you can't find the tone in your head with the current offerings, adding more metal (or jazz or blues or country) amps isn't going to magically get you there.

As for simplifying things to attract new buyers, on the surface that might sound useful, but where do you draw the lines? I play in a cover band doing mostly lighter classic rock stuff. I spend most of a gig running through various Fender models. But for some leads, I prefer to use "metal" amps like the HBE or other Marshall variants. Which flavor of the "OS" would I buy?

So some of the TGP participants resist modeling, complaining about spending time tweaking instead of playing. Fine. Let them buy a few multi-thousand dollar amps and a few thousand dollars worth of stompboxes, if that's what they'd prefer. It doesn't affect me. It appears to me that Fractal is selling their modelers about as fast as they can make them. While I'm sure they are always appreciative of new customers, I'm not sure having their business expand to the point where it's no longer a small company would ultimately be beneficial to the guitar playing community. Line 6 is a good example of what happens to product innovation and customer support when a small company becomes a big one. (And that's not a dig at Line 6. They make fine products, but I doubt they'll ever have the customer satisfaction Fractal does.)

And from a software development standpoint, having a variety of "flavors" adds to the complexity of the code or multiple code trees, neither of which is conducive to rapid development and release of new enhancements.
In all fairness to both Fractal and Line 6, these are two different business models.

On the surface it is obvious that the Line 6 business model is to sell through retailers whereas Fractal has opted for direct sales. This allows Fractal to get the retailers portion of the sale. So they should be operating at higher margins than if the were simply a manufacturer selling to retailers.

IMO the real difference is in how the two companies engage the customer and evolve the product line.

Line 6 uses a pretty traditional model with feedback from the dealer network and select channels that drive a structured product development cycle. Updates are big and infrequent. If they misread the market or have a dud, they can be stuck for a considerable amount of time. This can have considerable impact on their brand.

Fractal is a true disruptor here. In a good way. They are engaging the customer directly. The guy making the decisions has a direct finger on the pulse of what his customers think and want. His product cycle is very agile. Frequent, smaller enhancements that can rapidly and incrementally add new features. If they misread the market, they can quickly change paths. If there is an issue, they can address it in short order. Fail fast, recover quickly is a mantra of Agile methodologies and Fractal has this figured out. This offers a lot of resilience to the Fractal brand. In the Fractal world the hardware platform is the anchor point of a continually evolving product. As long as the hardware supports where they need to take the product, they are golden. Once it does not, a new piece of hardware can be released. Cliff has executed agile development methodologies in a very effective and disruptive way.
 
What truly unique amps aren’t covered by what’s in the Fractal? The overwhelming majority of all amps out there are just minor riffs on other amps. Sometimes it’s more channels or adding features not present (like a loop or DI out). But modeling another twenty metal amps will not increase the number of available tones much (if at all). They are soooo similar sounding and much, much more of a difference can be made with cab IRs.

Seriously, what’s an amp sound that you think you cannot get with an AxeFX?

Said by the guy who's owned every amp under the sun lol.

Tim and I are friends and neighbors.

Dude I keep hoping this thread will die!
 
Said by the guy who's owned every amp under the sun lol.

Tim and I are friends and neighbors.

Dude I keep hoping this thread will die!

And the common theme for almost every amp I’ve ever owned is that it’s been a Marshall or Fender variant.

:)
 
I've been toying with getting a Kemper to go along with my axe, because I have truly unlimited amps to choose from.

Unlimited? How so? Profiling is not really unlimited it’s just an automated procedure to choose parameters not unlike oneself choosing and amp manually and tweaking parameters not to mention tone match as well.
 
Last edited:
The Kemper is limited by the available universe of real amps. The Axe III, on the other hand, allows for the creation of “unreal” amps.... for example, a JCM 800 tone stack in a Mesa Mark IV.

Nothing is truly unlimited. Both systems are limited in different ways. Both excel at something different. Both arrive at the same end point — killer guitar tones.
 
Unlimited? How so? Profiling is not really unlimited it’s just an automated procedure to choose parameters not unlike oneself choosing and amp manually and tweaking parameters not to mention tone match as well.

I understand his point here, where people profile every amp under the sun with the Kemper, and you just buy/download that profile. So you can get any new amp loaded into your Kemper, with almost no effort or thought.
Of course, the new super amp that just got profiled may just be a Marshall with a Mesa Tone stack, so the same tone can be found in the Axe. The difference is just how you get there.

I do agree that it is sometimes easier to just pull up a Kemper profile and say - yup, I like this amp (that may be some boutique head that is a Marshall with a Mesa tone stack), rather than pulling up a Marshall amp in the Axe and messing around with the tone stacks.
Maybe it's a few more mouse clicks to do this in the Axe, so we certainly have the tools to create 99% of the amps on the planet already. But I do agree that it's sometimes easier to just load a random amp profile in a Kemper (one click) and say - yes I like this amp, or no I don't.

Just personal preference. Both get to the tone you want though.
 
Both get to the tone you want though.

From my understanding of the Kemper, this isn't quite true if the tone you want deviates too far from the profile, though.

For example, if the profile sounds like you want but has too much gain. Dialing down the gain is much more limiting than on the Axe Fx.

This is only based on what I have heard from others.
 
From my understanding of the Kemper, this isn't quite true if the tone you want deviates too far from the profile, though.
For example, if the profile sounds like you want but has too much gain. Dialing down the gain is much more limiting than on the Axe Fx.
This is only based on what I have heard from others.
You are correct. The Kemper takes a snapshot of the amp (including, of course, gainstaging, and cab / mic combinations) as set when profiled. Turning the gain knob later on the Kemper has no real correlation to turning the drive knob on the amp that was profiled. Everyone in Kemper-land agrees that it is necessary to profile an amp at various gain and EQ settings if you want those tones... in fact, most profile packs are exactly that — an amp that has been profiled at a few (or numerous) Gain, EQ settings, and Cab / Mic combinations.
 
From my understanding of the Kemper, this isn't quite true if the tone you want deviates too far from the profile, though.

For example, if the profile sounds like you want but has too much gain. Dialing down the gain is much more limiting than on the Axe Fx.

This is only based on what I have heard from others.

Yup, it does not have the deep editing capabilities of the Axe.
When I say - gets you to the tone you want, that means trying out profiles and finding one that you like (not one that you are going to edit to sound like something that deviates far from the original tone when you loaded the profile).

As much as that seems limiting, it sometimes makes it quicker.
You know very quickly with the Kemper if you like the tone or not. So you never find yourself in the rabbit hole doing deep tweaking.
You can whip through a ton of profiles in minutes and find something that appeals to you.

The reason I have a Kemper is because I think it does a great job of taking profiles of my tube amps (this is direct amp tone, not micing a speaker). I like to profile my tube heads, and them store or sell them. Kemper keeps me a really nice copy that I can play through a SS power amp and 4x12 cab in my basement. Just another fun toy to play with, but I am still a Fractal fanatic. :)
 
My limited experience with the KPA has also left me with the impression that the KPA effects are not on par with the Axe.

I also have been told that the KPA effects are less flexible and more difficult to work with.
 
Last edited:
The flexibility with the Axe is what makes it light years ahead IMHO!

And the constant improvements and future upgrades is really incredible and something unseen till Fractal.

Imagine ...

Constant ”NEW & IMPROVED!” .....& it’s FREE!!

This is part of the attractiveness and investment!

And the access to the top brass in the company by customers is unheard of!!

Fractal has set the bar super high!

Incredibly hard to beat!!

Fractal ❤️ :darts:
 
My limited experience with the KPA has also left me with the impression that the KPA effects are not on par with the Axe.

I also have been told that the KPA effects are less flexible and more difficult to work with.

They are not on par with the Axe, that is a fair statement. But they're not bad. Certainly usable for gigging.

They have the same tweak-ability as pedals....just a few controls.
Fractal's effects have amazing tweak-ability, never anything left to be desired.

I think we're way off topic here, so I think we can save the Fractal/Kemper discussions for other threads :)
 
Need? None... want to explore? Tons...

Like I said, the question I posed doesn't even apply to me. I'm happy with my II and dont feel compelled to get a III.

I was posing it as a hypothetical way for Fractal to possibly attract more customers. If the 3rd party market is already doing that with preset packs, I guess that's similar, but there aren't enough metal amps modeled and delivered by Fractal to justify the $2500 investment.

I think its clear that this is not a priority for Fractal, so I consider this thread dead, Zed.

That's so weird to me. I feel like what drives some people away from Axe Fx is that it seems too geared toward metal heads. Most of the youtube videos I saw that drew me to it were of metal amps. I'm always open to having more models to try, but I would probably default to my main mesa based tone.
 
Back
Top Bottom