What The Hell?

Status
Not open for further replies.

shawnguess

Inspired
just got my AFXII. using USB, i MUST use the AFX as my entire sound card to use its functions. sure, i'll bypass the two Lynx Aurora 16's clocked from the Apogee Big Ben to use a USB interface just to get full functionality. so i'll use AES straight into my RME HDSPe's. . . nope, the AFX won't sync to anything but 48k. i'm a pro studio running all projects at 96k -- i'm not going to reduce the quality of most of my vst instruments by running at 48k. these seem like glaring oversights on a product intended for pro studio use. am i missing something?
 
What makes you say that it's a "glaring oversights on a product intended for pro studio use"?
That is just one of it's many uses.
I'd bet that you are possibly in the minority of users ?
 
What makes you say that it's a "glaring oversights on a product intended for pro studio use"?
That is just one of it's many uses.
I'd bet that you are possibly in the minority of users ?

if people who use it in a professional studio setting are the minority, then yes, you are correct. for a new piece of gear to force a samplerate of 48khz over an AES connection in a professional studio setting is a glaring oversight.
 
for a new piece of gear to force a samplerate of 48khz over an AES connection in a professional studio setting is a glaring oversight.
Would you have preferred 44? How many studios really run at 96? I'm no expert, but none of the local ones I've been in do. Not saying they don't exist tho'.

Besides, making derogatory comments about the flagship product ON the company-owned forum in your first 3 posts isn't the best approach to winning friends and influencing people.
 
Would you have preferred 44? How many studios really run at 96? I'm no expert, but none of the local ones I've been in do. Not saying they don't exist tho'.

Besides, making derogatory comments about the flagship product ON the company-owned forum in your first 3 posts isn't the best approach to winning friends and influencing people.
i would prefer that it at least be able to handle standard sample rates of pretty much every pro and consumer level audio device made in the last few years -- 44.1, 48, 88.2, and 96.

studios with high end converters, computers that can handle the processing and storage requirements, and that make extensive use of vst instruments use 96k because of the sonic benefits.

it's not my goal to win any friends or influence anyone. i was open to the idea that maybe i was missing something. but in the case that i wasnt, its something that certainly needs to be said.

these statements come in my first posts because i just got the unit today and these things could be a deal breaker that cause its return.
 
Last edited:
i would prefer that it at least be able to handle standard sample rates of pretty much ever pro and consumer level audio device made in the last few years -- 44.1, 48, 88.2, and 96.

studios with high end converters, computers that can handle the processing and storage requirements, and that make extensive use of vst instruments use 96k because of the sonic benefits.

it's not my goal to win any friends or influence anyone. i was open to the idea that maybe i was missing something. but in the case that i wasnt, its something that certainly needs to be said.

these statements come in my first posts because i just got the unit today and these things could be a deal breaker that cause its return.
Sorry you feel that way. I'm sure there's a solution that someone has already come up with.
I'd bet your not the first 96-based studio/user to get one <shrug>
 
There must be other threads about it, cause I recently copied this from one:

fractalaudio said:
IMHO, the ideal sample rate is 64 kHz but that's not a standard. The nice thing about 64 kHz is that you can have a gentle transition band from 20 kHz to Nyquist which results in shorter filters, lower latency, less phase shift, etc., etc. I was very tempted to make the Axe-Fx II run at 64 kHz but people probably would have freaked out.

But I see people are still freaking out anyway...? :p
 
Sorry you feel that way. I'm sure there's a solution that someone has already come up with.
I'd bet your not the first 96-based studio/user to get one <shrug>
an aes card that supports on the fly src is a solution, but not a great one because of audio degradation in the process. otherwise, besides the obvious conveniences of digital loops to and from the afx, i go through two stages of conversion to loop back into the system via analog. the simple solution is to create a vst that handles the audio loop within the host in the same way that Access has done with the Virus -- it works beautifully this way.
 
Try it with analog before you condemn it. I'm 100% with you on it really irking the crap out of me when I first got my Ultra because while I'm not a professional musician I do work in professional studios for a living and I was right about where you are now...I'm sending it back.

Now?

I don't even bother messing with the digital stuff (or USB portion except for AxeEdit) with it and to be honest I don't miss the headaches with clocks, sample rates, bit depths, etc. If you've got a good interface (which you have a great one) the balanced analog outputs are extremely good and I believe you have MORE flexibility using them. I nean you know that if you are too hot at the source in digital it's just clipped and you can't adjust it without going into the thing to edit the patch, but with analog you just twist the front knob a touch and it's fine.

Just make sure that you get the levels set; your input levels should tickle the red when you bang on it hard (set in the first page of the I/O menu) and the output is usually run all the way up which is supposed to be unity gain for all intents and purposes.

I don't have AES at home right now, but I did do some A/B testing comparing SPDIF and the analog signal through my interface and I couldn't for the life of me find anything significantly different besides the fact that I can't control it if it clips. The D>A convertors in the AxeFXII are fantastic, let the audio interface do the work.

You got nothing to lose by trying it, right?
 
There must be other threads about it, cause I recently copied this from one:



But I see people are still freaking out anyway...? :p
if ideal is 64k, even consumer level devices run up to 96k, why not go ahead with 96k? 48k seems a poor choice given that statement, ya know? i mean, its a $2500 device, m-audio delta's can run at 96k.
 
Try it with analog before you condemn it. I'm 100% with you on it really irking the crap out of me when I first got my Ultra because while I'm not a professional musician I do work in professional studios for a living and I was right about where you are now...I'm sending it back.

Now?

I don't even bother messing with the digital stuff (or USB portion except for AxeEdit) with it and to be honest I don't miss the headaches with clocks, sample rates, bit depths, etc. If you've got a good interface (which you have a great one) the balanced analog outputs are extremely good and I believe you have MORE flexibility using them. I nean you know that if you are too hot at the source in digital it's just clipped and you can't adjust it without going into the thing to edit the patch, but with analog you just twist the front knob a touch and it's fine.

Just make sure that you get the levels set; your input levels should tickle the red when you bang on it hard (set in the first page of the I/O menu) and the output is usually run all the way up which is supposed to be unity gain for all intents and purposes.

I don't have AES at home right now, but I did do some A/B testing comparing SPDIF and the analog signal through my interface and I couldn't for the life of me find anything significantly different besides the fact that I can't control it if it clips. The D>A convertors in the AxeFXII are fantastic, let the audio interface do the work.

You got nothing to lose by trying it, right?
very good points. my main problem is that i want to record dry (for editing) and then effectively reamp through the afx. doing so digitally without all the extra conversion would sound better (even if marginally so), be easier, and yield less latency if i wanted to track the dry signal while monitoring through the loop into the afx without using extra IO channels.
 
Apparently somebody didn't do their research before purchasing.

I have used mine both analog and AES and as Sasha has stated found very little difference. I leave it on the AES simply because it works for me and I dont need 96.


I also dont get the attitude but when your first three words introducing yourself to a forum are "what the hell?" I guess it's to be expected.

What ever happened to common courtesy? :roll
 
Apparently somebody didn't do their research before purchasing.

I have used mine both analog and AES and as Sasha has stated found very little difference. I leave it on the AES simply because it works for me and I dont need 96.


I also dont get the attitude but when your first three words introducing yourself to a forum are "what the hell?" I guess it's to be expected.

What ever happened to common courtesy? :roll
yeah, stupid me, who would think that a $2500 digital device brand new in 2012 would be capable of 96k over AES.

there is no attitude, simply statements. . . if you perceive an attitude, sorry. "what the hell" is an appropriate title to the topic at hand.

ok, if it drags out the same statement more to your pleasure:
hi guys, im a new user and i got my brand new axe fx ii today. its a brilliant piece of gear. i know this is a very friendly community so i thought i would come here to say hello to everyone and ask -- does the axe fx not support any sample rate other than 48k? is it really necessary to use the axe fx as your only audio device in order to fully use its IO capabilities. now i dont want to offend anyone by suggesting perhaps that the axe fx ii is not the pinnacle of modern electronics and especially amp modeling, but these facts seem just tiny bit short-sighted.

better? ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom