Will there ever be FM9 hardware in an FM3 size box?

jzucker said:
i think there will be a lot of pressure to come out with a smaller pedal form factor unit based on what the reaction has been in the market to tonex and KPP. The next product fractal might come out with could be something underneath the FM3 in terms of power and flexibility.

Additionally, the processing power of fender tonemaster pro and quad cortex is driving the market to put more powerful processors in smaller floor units.

Even though those units pale in comparison to fractal's offerings (i like the FM3 better than tonemaster or QC), the market is pushing for having more power in smaller units.

Regardless of fractal's desire to be consistent to their existing platforms , we will likely see that change somewhat in the future.
Click to expand...
I think there is a bit of a flaw in your thinking: Fractal doesn't seem to worry too much about "the market", at least in the way many companies do.
 
For me, the "dream" is Fractal amp tones in an HX stomp format.

The engineering & physics may mot be possible/practical, but a guy can dream!
 
jzucker said:
i thought the QC had more processing power than an FM3?
Click to expand...
It's not really about simple processing power, but the elegance & efficiency of the firmware code that makes a unit 'powerful'. It could have the most powerful DSP chip ever created, but if its running bloated code, it's not gonna be that great.
 
jetdriver1775 said:
It's not really about simple processing power, but the elegance & efficiency of the firmware code that makes a unit 'powerful'. It could have the most powerful DSP chip ever created, but if its running bloated code, it's not gonna be that great.
Click to expand...
You're conflating 2 different things. I was responding to the previous poster who said it was a matter of physics. We're talking about adding horsepower to the FM3 and if so, that would be fractal engineering and presumably non-bloated code so I'm not really sure where you're coming from?
 
jzucker said:
You're conflating 2 different things. I was responding to the previous poster who said it was a matter of physics. We're talking about adding horsepower to the FM3 and if so, that would be fractal engineering and presumably non-bloated code so I'm not really sure where you're coming from?
Click to expand...
Simply saying that 'powerful' in terms of what a unit can do, isn't simply a function of the DSP horsepower. People were losing their minds when the QC was announced, and Neural was hyping the DSP in the unit. But IMO it's been hampered by its underdeveloped firmware. A true measure of power comes from being able to do more (functions) with less (DSP), which Fractal excels at. Not just the specs on paper.

Not really a reply to the OP. Just an observation that the modeling communities seem to focus too much on DSP power as a sole representation of what a unit is capable of. That's all.
 
jetdriver1775 said:
Simply saying that 'powerful' in terms of what a unit can do, isn't simply a function of the DSP horsepower. People were losing their minds when the QC was announced, and Neural was hyping the DSP in the unit. But IMO it's been hampered by its underdeveloped firmware. A true measure of power comes from being able to do more (functions) with less (DSP), which Fractal excels at. Not just the specs on paper.

Not really a reply to the OP. Just an observation that the modeling communities seem to focus too much on DSP power as a sole representation of what a unit is capable of. That's all.
Click to expand...
seems like that belongs in a different thread. This thread is specifically about adding additional processing power to the FM3 to be able to run the current firmware without having to jump through hoops to get it ported over. NOBODY in this thread said that the QC was superior. Clearly fractal has 3 different processing levels with the 3 products and have been struggling to get the latest firmware and algorithms ported to the least powerful platform so it's pretty clear that additional hardware does solve some problems in that regard.
 
Fair enough! Didn't mean to derail the convo LOL.

I was just wishing for a flagship AF3 level power in an FM9 format, so I get it. I went so far as to say, wouldn't be nice if they had one firmware for all three units (a la Helix ecosystem) so that we could choose the form factor that works for each of us without having to wait or sacrifice features.

I was promptly shot down :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy:
 
jetdriver1775 said:
Fair enough! Didn't mean to derail the convo LOL.

I was just wishing for a flagship AF3 level power in an FM9 format, so I get it. I went so far as to say, wouldn't be nice if they had one firmware for all three units (a la Helix ecosystem) so that we could choose the form factor that works for each of us without having to wait or sacrifice features.

I was promptly shot down :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy:
Click to expand...

I would think having to do ANY porting at all would be detrimental from an engineering and support standpoint but clearly fractal is successful. I hate the HUGE pedal formfactor so I tend to shy away from the FM9 but I might be forced into it just to get multiple amps and the better reverb algorithms...
 
Just because: 'why not say what you would perfectly want', even if it seems unlikely it would ever happen....

I think it's silly to duplicate all the controls of the software on front panel hardware that you have to kneel down on the floor to adjust. I don't get the pedal form factor at all for something this sophisticated. And three rack spaces is far more space than I can spare. You can't even take that on an airplane.

For my purposes, I'd like the smallest possible black box that you could plug any of the footswitch extenders into, and control from a tablet. A single-space half rack maybe? Just needs ins and outs on the box. Half the mixers I see on gigs these days work this way. It has its issues (mostly because the quality of the software becomes crucial) but it saves money in buttons and switches, and puts the control up where you can get at it without kneeling. And you don't have to build the box to be stepped on.

Have a low-power version and a high-power version, and buy the version you need independent of how many footswitches you want.

Since we're fantasizing.
 
Last edited:
woodslanding said:
Just because: 'why not say what you would perfectly want', even if it seems unlikely it would ever happen....

I think it's silly to duplicate all the controls of the software on front panel hardware that you have to kneel down on the floor to adjust. I don't get the pedal form factor at all for something this sophisticated. And three rack spaces is far more space than I can spare. You can't even take that on an airplane.

For my purposes, I'd like the smallest possible black box that you could plug any of the footswitch extenders into, and control from a tablet. A single-space half rack maybe? Just needs ins and outs on the box. Half the mixers I see on gigs these days work this way. It has its issues (mostly because the quality of the software becomes crucial) but it saves money in buttons and switches, and puts the control up where you can get at it without kneeling. And you don't have to build the box to be stepped on.

Have a low-power version and a high-power version, and buy the version you need independent of how many footswitches you want.

Since we're fantasizing.
Click to expand...
i feel differently about the pedal
usersnoozer said:
Uh....

What does QC have to do with HX Stomp?
Click to expand...
none of this conversation had anything to do with the HX stomp
 
woodslanding said:
Just because: 'why not say what you would perfectly want', even if it seems unlikely it would ever happen....

I think it's silly to duplicate all the controls of the software on front panel hardware that you have to kneel down on the floor to adjust. I don't get the pedal form factor at all for something this sophisticated. And three rack spaces is far more space than I can spare. You can't even take that on an airplane.

For my purposes, I'd like the smallest possible black box that you could plug any of the footswitch extenders into, and control from a tablet. A single-space half rack maybe? Just needs ins and outs on the box. Half the mixers I see on gigs these days work this way. It has its issues (mostly because the quality of the software becomes crucial) but it saves money in buttons and switches, and puts the control up where you can get at it without kneeling. And you don't have to build the box to be stepped on.

Have a low-power version and a high-power version, and buy the version you need independent of how many footswitches you want.

Since we're fantasizing.
Click to expand...
FM0. Always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom