Just ordered a Fractal AxeFx Ultra !

[GITTarzann]

That exact (except for the speakers)setup is for sale over at the Axe forum.

Fractal Standard, QSC PA, 2 JBL passive monitors MRX212's(I think) and a 4 space rack

2400.00 !!

That is a great deal if you were in the market.

I want powered monitors myself.

[HKSblade1]

Hooked this up to 824 Mackies. I like it but not as much through a guitar cab. Not sure if nearfield mon's are best way to use this. Tweaking was a bit different. But I'm, a noob for 3days!

[GITTarzann]

Cliff said he used passive Event 20/20's to tweak the original tones, but the monitors a lot of people are using are the QSC HPR122i's. They are PA monitors though.

[Elric]

The problem is that rocktron, TC, and Line6 often market their products for "mass consumption" using consumer grade components. Fractal Audio makes "boutique" electronics, meaning they cut no corners and use top of the line components (especially in the area of AD/DA converters). So it really doesn't matter if it's FAS or some other boutique maker, the truth is that the small shop will always be able to make the superior product because ROI is not as much of a concern and they can charge a premium. . . same as with tube amps. -W

 

I'm not convinced this is actually true the more high tech an area gets. And the truth is the modelers aren't much like an amp... it's simply not a good analogy... You're thinking about a traditional low tech analog type of method for differentiating products (component selection of device in the signal path) which simply does not hold up for long in this area, IMHO.

 

Today's boutique is tomorrow's (heck, sometime's this afternoon's ) consumer grade in the land of digital. And there will be a point where component selection crosses the threshold of diminishing returns for things like D/A converters and op-amps. That's the beauty of digital and why we've been able to enjoy this gizmo laden bounty of the last decade. Modelers are much more like a computer than an amplifier. The analog and mixed signal components are pretty damn minimal.

 

So, for this class of devices there's likely to be a certain point where once the consumer grade components get to a certain spec a better D/A converter is not going to make a noticeable difference to anyone (other than a psychological difference, I suppose). That's one of the advantages of digital technology. You don't have to track down a certain op-amp or germanium part and things don't corrode they sound the same as the day you bought them. There is simply very little analog stuff in there to make component selection critical from a signal perspective compared to a "real" amp. You basically have buffers, jacks, and a couple of converters and the rest is 1 and 0's which for the most part do not vary in quality. So, at that point it's all about CPU, memory, and algorithms/software, with the key being the latter and having enough of the other two to support them.

 

So, If you're thinking is that D/A converters and other components are going to justify an order of magnitude price difference or sustain a "boutique" modeling niche for very long in the high tech world you are lost.

 

Companies like FAS had better do it through software. So far it sounds like they've done a good job. Hopefully they can stay at the cutting edge. But I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually got blown out or at best remain a niche thing indefinitely for the FX junkies.

 

Try running a Tonelab or POD through an impulse cab modeler sometime and a para-eq to notch any artifacts due to D/A conversion. If you're not already too biased by the AxeFx exposure you'll likely be shocked that they're not that far off in terms of the amp modeling. Given the extra CPU power and memory of the L6 X3 stuff they maybe just a firmware release away from a quantum leap. And, also given the huge processing power and memory improvements for modern PCs the purely software systems (see Revalver MkII soon to be MkIII) may be really poised to simply kick everyone's ass.

 

Oh well, it's an exciting time for guitarists from a technological perspective. (But I'm definitely not spending $2K on a modeler right now (or any amount of money for that matter), even though I have the dough. )

[OverDriven]

I bet offers have been thrown. As well as threats of lawsuits and filling his email with crap etc. You know some of the big boys have taken keen notice of what is going on at the Fractal shop. To think that Cliff has been selling his units at a price that to some undermines the likes of Eventide has to make them angry to say the least. I think Cliff will eventually raise his prices a bit to fit the market better.

 

 

I don't see how that would make him fit the market better. That would remove his advantage and his unique selling point. Sound quality of an Eventide and many more features at a lower price. If he is in the same price range, he loses one thing that makes him unique. If anything, he should lower it. The processor is actually fairly cheap, and that's the most expensive part. The chip he uses is actually the cheapest/lowest powered in the TigerSHARC family.

[GITTarzann]

The processor is actually fairly cheap, and that's the most expensive part. The chip he uses is actually the cheapest/lowest powered in the TigerSHARC family.

 

 

The chip is right around $200.00. Seems the entire TigerSHARC family is right there, give or take 20 bucks (at least the ones I found)

 

200 bucks seems pretty substantial to me, then you have to figure a board, a chassis, LCD screen knobs, buttons, jacks, etc etc. Then add time to invent code, and assemble the product, create a manual, package, ship, budget, etc.

 

The standard seems like he is barely breaking even if you ask me.

[mctallica1]

I got upgraded to 5.0 yesterday and fiddled around with it for quite a while last night.

Very impressive.

The tone stack options alone are worth the hassle to upgrade (a major undertaking for me...but will be easy for tech oriented folks).

The tube screamer is also very much improved...me likey)


With that said, there seem to be a lot of folks who really like the FET drive block...for my purposes (boosting a high gain amp sim), I find it to be OK, but not great.

Love this thing more every time I play through it.

[mctallica1]

I will say this...I sent them an email question asking them what users have been/recommend power amp. The response was basically : "I have no clue" LOL. I think I got the girlfriends' email response LOL.

 

 

 

Do a search at teh Axe Fx forum. Various people using various methods to amplify the unit. THere is no ONE right way.

[starsnuffer]

I'm not convinced this is actually true the more high tech an area gets. And the truth is the modelers aren't much like an amp... it's simply not a good analogy... You're thinking about a traditional low tech analog type of method for differentiating products (component selection of device in the signal path) which simply does not hold up for long in this area, IMHO. Today's boutique is tomorrow's (heck, sometime's this afternoon's ) consumer grade in the land of digital. And there will be a point where component selection crosses the threshold of diminishing returns for things like D/A converters and op-amps. That's the beauty of digital and why we've been able to enjoy this gizmo laden bounty of the last decade. Modelers are much more like a computer than an amplifier. The analog and mixed signal components are pretty damn minimal. So, for this class of devices there's likely to be a certain point where once the consumer grade components get to a certain spec a better D/A converter is not going to make a noticeable difference to anyone (other than a psychological difference, I suppose). That's one of the advantages of digital technology. You don't have to track down a certain op-amp or germanium part and things don't corrode they sound the same as the day you bought them. There is simply very little analog stuff in there to make component selection critical from a signal perspective compared to a "real" amp. You basically have buffers, jacks, and a couple of converters and the rest is 1 and 0's which for the most part do not vary in quality. So, at that point it's all about CPU, memory, and algorithms/software, with the key being the latter and having enough of the other two to support them. So, If you're thinking is that D/A converters and other components are going to justify an order of magnitude price difference or sustain a "boutique" modeling niche for very long in the high tech world you are lost . Companies like FAS had better do it through software. So far it sounds like they've done a good job. Hopefully they can stay at the cutting edge. But I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually got blown out or at best remain a niche thing indefinitely for the FX junkies. Try running a Tonelab or POD through an impulse cab modeler sometime and a para-eq to notch any artifacts due to D/A conversion. If you're not already too biased by the AxeFx exposure you'll likely be shocked that they're not that far off in terms of the amp modeling. Given the extra CPU power and memory of the L6 X3 stuff they maybe just a firmware release away from a quantum leap. And, also given the huge processing power and memory improvements for modern PCs the purely software systems (see Revalver MkII soon to be MkIII) may be really poised to simply kick everyone's ass. Oh well, it's an exciting time for guitarists from a technological perspective. (But I'm definitely not spending $2K on a modeler right now (or any amount of money for that matter), even though I have the dough. )

 

 

Converters are EVERYTHING in the digital world. It's what separates the toys from the tools. It's why companies like Apogee are in a totally different realm then companies like m-audio or presonus.

 

The "big boys" will always skimp on components for the sake of mass marketing. It's true of amps, it's true of consumer electronics, and it's true of digital musical production tools. Why? Because it makes good business sense to cut costs. Small boutique shops do not make good business sense, but rather exist on persistence and love of their industry.

 

I agree that components will get better all around. Keep in mind though that this is just V 1.0 of the axe-fx, which completely blows away version 5 or 6 of whatever the vetta and pod stuff is on. As components get better, there will be new products from the small shops as well.

 

Keep in mind that the little guys with short production runs can adapt to new components much quicker without having to foot the costs of retooling. There is no reason why the little guys can not stay ahead of the big guys in this game.

 

I'm not a fanboi. I'll buy whatever sounds good. It actually took a lot of convincing to buy the axe-FX, and I didn't buy it for modeling, I bought it for FX. I've tried a lot of other products and they don't even come close, not even in the same ballpark. I have a digi003 rack, Eleven, amplitude 2, and I have a pod XTL. . .and I can't stand any of them. My computer isn't shabby either, and certainly has way more power then the fractal stuff, but that isn't the point. There's just a huge gap right now that I don't see closing in the next 2-3 years (which is the amount of time it takes Line6 to get a new product to market).

 

2-3 years is a lifetime in electronics.

 

-W

 

-W

[mctallica1]

Converters are EVERYTHING in the digital world. It's what separates the toys from the tools. It's why companies like Apogee are in a totally different realm then companies like m-audio or presonus. The "big boys" will always skimp on components for the sake of mass marketing. It's true of amps, it's true of consumer electronics, and it's true of digital musical production tools. Why? Because it makes good business sense to cut costs. Small boutique shops do not make good business sense, but rather exist on persistence and love of their industry. I agree that components will get better all around. Keep in mind though that this is just V 1.0 of the axe-fx, which completely blows away version 5 or 6 of whatever the vetta and pod stuff is on. As components get better, there will be new products from the small shops as well. Keep in mind that the little guys with short production runs can adapt to new components much quicker without having to foot the costs of retooling. There is no reason why the little guys can not stay ahead of the big guys in this game. I'm not a fanboi. I'll buy whatever sounds good. It actually took a lot of convincing to buy the axe-FX, and I didn't buy it for modeling, I bought it for FX. I've tried a lot of other products and they don't even come close, not even in the same ballpark. I have a digi003 rack, Eleven, amplitude 2, and I have a pod XTL. . .and I can't stand any of them. My computer isn't shabby either, and certainly has way more power then the fractal stuff, but that isn't the point. There's just a huge gap right now that I don't see closing in the next 2-3 years (which is the amount of time it takes Line6 to get a new product to market). 2-3 years is a lifetime in electronics. -W -W

 

 

You bring up some good points.

 

However, I really don't care what is inside...all I care about is that it doesn't break down and it sounds good.

 

I have become a big time Axe fanboy.....reason? It flat out works and sounds great. period. end of justification.

 

If it didn't, I would have kept my Elmwood Modena or bought another VHT, Mark series, etc, etc, etc.

[chobley]

If it didn't, I would have kept my Elmwood Modena or bought another VHT, Mark series, etc, etc, etc.

 

 

 

I would love to hear the axefx/power amp/monitors side by side with a Tube head/cab . Is it just as clear and punchy ?

Thanks

[GITTarzann]

However, I really don't care what is inside...all I care about is that it doesn't break down and it sounds good.

 

 

 

+1 !!

 

I agree with starsnuffer on his points about the convertors and such, but the whole argument is about tone, and if the Fractal is delivering the goods, I really don't care if something "better" comes along. I will still have good tone.

 

Now whether I buy the newer technology I will just have to wait and see, but if I don't, I will still have good tone!

[Elric]

Keep in mind that the little guys with short production runs can adapt to new components much quicker without having to foot the costs of retooling. There is no reason why the little guys can not stay ahead of the big guys in this game.

FWIW, I've worked in the semiconductor industry for about 17 years as an electrical engineer, I've worked on many fully digital chips as well as mixed signal designs. So, FWIW, I DO have some ideas and experience in relation to how electronics work, about design trade offs, and also how increasing complexity and goemetric growth impact an industry. I am NOT a complete expert on complete Audio systems but have worked on CODECs, etc, that have to live in complete systems. So, that's my perspective.

So, yes, A/D converters may be a big differentiator, right now. But like I said, I am not convinced that they always will be. An A/D converter is really a pretty simple thing. When $0.10 part and $3.00 part are only marginally different spec wise it's not going to make a huge difference and only a few are going to be willing to pay 10x for the bragging rights. There's a certain point where the signal is fully digitized in the audio spectrum as far as the human ear is concerned. So, if you've preserved the fidelity up to that point it is not going to be a factor forever for the vast majority of consumers (which again, does require a good design and good components, but not nearly as many as an analog processor or amplifier and I would argue this could be eliminated as a product differentiator going forward).

Sorry. There's just a certain point where throwing money at a problem does not generate significant advantage or distinguishable results. The problem of getting a good digital signal in and out of a modeler is likely of that type, I suspect, it's just not that hard. So, I just don't think there is enough analog content in these boxes for the analog component variation to justify the price difference and hence justify the existence of a mom and pop shop in this space for very long.

Like I said, there may be other things (as noted in another post: software, software, software), but IMHO, I'd be worried if those guys gave me a job offer and that was their long term differentiator in their business plan.

Another point someone who tries to argue that the modeler business is like the stompbox and amp business is not taking into account is that these are potentially R&D intensive devices. If they experience massive or significantly accelerated growth it will get to the point where one or two people are not enough to do the firmware, hardware design, etc and keep pace with the rest of the market. There is absolutely NO guarantee of viable mom and pop operations for things that are that R&D intensive and have a large enough market to attract big players and investment.

Now, they may dodge this bullet simply because the modeling market may be below critical mass, and really as a technology, modeling may be sufficiently far a long and there is not much acceleration left until the curve plateaus (i.e. it's not that R&D intensive from a $$$ perspective), etc. But it's something to take into account.

I know in the semi industry it's literally impossible to do it as a small operation now whereas you could get going with just a bit of venture capital 25-30 years ago. You must be a multi-billion dollar company to operate in the space at this point. Similarly, I read a recent article that said mom and pop (boutique) video game studios will be dead by 2010 due to this same R&D capital intensive business situation affecting the business model. The PC industry went this way, too. Pretty much anything high tech has.

The question is just how high tech and maybe even more important is how big a market the modeling stuff is... In fact lack of $$$ is likely the root cause as to why the acceleration hasn't been faster. So, really, I don't know if the R&D in this space will get that intense but if it does companies like FAS will be a wholly owned subsidiary of somebody or cease to exist.

2-3 years is a lifetime in electronics.

No {censored}. I've spent about 7 lifetimes in the thick of things so far...

Note: I am not slamming the AxeFx. It sounds like it has a LOT of happy users. I'm just commenting on someone else's projection of the modeling industry and relating it back to the amplifier space.

My point is that it is not a good analogy because even though modelers perform the same function the devices and the R&D environment in which they are designed is not terribly amp-like. The things you can rely on in the amplifier space you may not be able to rely on in the modeler space from a business perspective and your business plan better freaking take that into account if you plan to exist for a long period of time otherwise you're just relying on luck or a future buy out if you want longevity.