Why the AFxII has one dsp chip dedicated to amp(s)?

DLC86

Fractal Fanatic
I was looking at how other dual dsp modelers work (amplifire and helix in particular) and I asked myself this question. I think it's kind of a waste to have one of the two cpus dedicated to just this task in the case you want to use the axe as an effects only (or amp only) unit, you would have about twice the power if it had a more flexible architecture. Is there a technical reason for this choice? And in case, wouldn't be possible to have a global setting to switch between say "FX + amp" and "FX only" mode?
Sorry if this has already been answered or if it's a stupid question
 
What you are asking makes the coding required multiple times harder - by a factor of probably 1,000,000

Not only would you have to code the unit to work as is, you would have to code it for the other two 'options' too as everything changes.
 
Ax Fx has a much deeper set of algorithms in comparison, try running one on the other units and see what happens !
 
Thats a really good thought. Unfortunately parallel processing is extremely difficult to code. For example, even with todays multicore computers, most applications only use one of the available cores at a time.

If FAS could pull it off, there probably wouldn't be a need for global "modes" such as amp only or effects only. Instead, you would select "Ultra High Resolution" or something similar for each selected amp / effect which would increase the resource requirements for that amp / effect. The end result is you would run out of resources quicker.

Not sure if I am making sense, but this would be a cool feature. I would only have need to run an Amp -> Cab. I use my own pedal board as I have not been impressed with the effects to date...
 
I use my own pedal board as I have not been impressed with the effects to date...
Of Axe users I would say you're a minority there.
But the thing about the Axe is that it is so flexible that you can use it any way that suits your needs.
 
The amp processing must use a ton of resources. The same chip that can have two delays, two multi delays, reverbs, flange, drive and everything else you can use simultaneously, is needed just to run TWO amp models (does it do the cabs as well? I assume it does). When you think of how dynamic and responsive the amps are it amazes me that it can do two at once.
 
Is it possible to even know how they are using those processors? We know FAS uses one dedicated only to AMP because Cliff told us so. Has Atomic and L6 publicly said how theirs works
 
wouldn't be possible to have a global setting to switch between say "FX + amp" and "FX only" mode?
Sorry if this has already been answered or if it's a stupid question
... or "amp + amp" to have four different amps... I know it coul be silly or stupid, but creativity has no limits... :)
 
The amp processing must use a ton of resources. The same chip that can have two delays, two multi delays, reverbs, flange, drive and everything else you can use simultaneously, is needed just to run TWO amp models (does it do the cabs as well? I assume it does). When you think of how dynamic and responsive the amps are it amazes me that it can do two at once.

When running two Amps it uses "normal" instead of "highest quality" amp modeling. These names might be incorrect but you get the idea. This is because running 1 high quality amp uses more than 50% of DSP power on this chip. The amp modeling is extremely deep and high quality, and this is the tradeoff for that.
 
yeah, i'd be curious as to what fx they haven't been impressed with...

Sorry, I was generic with the statement. Delays and Reverbs in the Axe are killer sounding, although I prefer my timeline and blue sky.
I just can't seem to dial in the drive pedals, even the G3'd ones. There is something with the EQ that isn't right to my ear.

Whats great with the Axe FX is I can plug my board in front of the modeled amp and it sounds and reacts as I would expect!
 
Back
Top Bottom