Axe Fx III and FM 3

  • Per latest neural DSP video I saw, cortex will be able to “capture” specific pedals themselves, which can then be used as blocks. But I don’t think this pertains to such effect pedals.

    Yes, not interested in distortion or boosts etc. We have the ability to profile that In the Kemper.

    I want my TERC Tri stereo chorus sounds and my TC Chorus sounds Profiled in my Kemper. That would be perfect.

  • Yes, it does. This is a quote from Christoph Kemper:


    "Profiling is a sort of automated modeling, where a very complex base model of a generic guitar amp is filled with settings that finally form a specific amp model." -Source

    "a sort of automated modeling" its him trying to put on simple words what the profiler does without start speaking about digital control algorithms and observable domain transfer funtions to a random press which is asking "what does your product do?". I am 99% sure kemper profiling technology is based into transfer function reproduction, and not modelling, 2 aproaches, as I explained, completely different from one another.


    Also I could quote the kemper guys telling again and again and again that this is not a modeler, but a profiler, and that adds up to their approach, Modeling, it isnt :D

    The answer is 42

  • With Kemper also, gain can be increased above the amp's regular range (not that you don't know this -- and cool things can be accomplished with KPA that way) at least after profiling. Or with axe FX you can modify the amp sim in such a manner to get more gain than the stock model left untouched, certainly.

    You can do things like increas the compresion, tube sag, and transient response, but in the kemper, all those (including the gain) are predetermined by the stock software, they behave in an stablish known manner, like the gain, if you ever profile an amp of your own, you will understand what the profiler does when you turn up the gain higher than initially intended, it does an stimation of the gain increase. In real amps, and models by that matter, the increase of gain is non linear, and also changes some other characteristics of the output, specially the compression and the low end are affected in particular ways from amp to amp.


    Still pretty impresive what the kemper does, but I gotta give these details to the modeling guys as the Axe, they model even the eq respons on the knobs of the actual amp, that is cool, and cannot be achieved so far with profiling due to the nature of the process. May be later with interpolation of parameters in the profiling session, but who knows...

    The answer is 42

  • "a sort of automated modeling" its him trying to put on simple words what the profiler does without start speaking about digital control algorithms and observable domain transfer funtions to a random press which is asking "what does your product do?". I am 99% sure kemper profiling technology is based into transfer function reproduction, and not modelling, 2 aproaches, as I explained, completely different from one another.


    Also I could quote the kemper guys telling again and again and again that this is not a modeler, but a profiler, and that adds up to their approach, Modeling, it isnt :D

    Christoph clearly explained what he meant by "a sort of automated modeling". He used the word model twice in that explanation. Again, the Profiling process consists of data collection regarding the reference amp over three phases. The first phase involves generating white noise that's used to learn about the circuitry of the reference amp, the frequency response of the cabinet, and the characteristic impedance curve of the speaker, including its feedback to the power amp. The next phase involves using white noise to learn about the dynamic distortion curve of the tubes in the reference amp. The third phase involves sending a complex tonal texture to the reference amp that creates unique interference patterns that allow the Profiler to take a “fingerprint” of the DNA of the reference amp’s particular sound. After all of those measurements are taken and data collected, the Profiler uses that data to fill in the settings of a complex base model.


    I could quote the kemper guys telling again and again and again that this is not a modeler, but a profiler, and that adds up to their approach, Modeling,

    I posted a direct quote from Christoph Kemper in which he clearly states that the Kemper uses "a very complex base model of a generic guitar amp". He then states that with the settings filled in, that generic base model forms a specific amp model. If you have a quote from him that contradicts that statement, post it. Otherwise, I have no reason whatsoever to think he means anything other than what he clearly stated.

  • I think it's harder to argue semantics with equations - does the following sum up (at a very high level) the different techniques?


    Axe


    [Digital version of Amp A, Component 1] + [Digital version of Amp A, Component 2] . . . + . . . [Digital version of Amp A, Component n] = Digital Model of Amp A


    Kemper


    [Generic Digital Base Amp Model] + [Phase 1 Profiling of physical Amp A] + [Phase 2 Profiling of physical Amp A] + [ Phase 3 Profiling of Physical Amp A] = Digital Profiled version of Amp A


    I don't think anyone is claiming that the two systems use the same techniques.


    Whether you prefer one over the other, both the same, or you believe each has its strengths and weaknesses should be informed by your use case and experience of using both.


    However, as not everyone has cash to spend on both, enjoy using the one you've got, but if you are tempted by the fruit of another - don't feel guilty if you end up running off with it . . . unless you were just after something shiny and new.




  • In europe the FM3 is1266€..add to this 633€ for the FC6.


    2000€.That's to much.


    I mean not only for me but for most potential customers in Europe..and from what I have read during the last weeks in several gear blogs the FM3 is faulty with many bugs.They should have stayed with the Ax8 and evolve it as they do with their rack stuff.

  • if you ever profile an amp of your own, you will understand what the profiler does when you turn up the gain higher than initially intended, it does an stimation of the gain increase. In real amps, and models by that matter, the increase of gain is non linear, and also changes some other characteristics of the output, specially the compression and the low end are affected in particular ways from amp to amp.

    Yea, profiling Amps for a long time. The point was relevant in so far as Kemper (even if post profiling) achieving something the original amps don’t.

    The bonanza

  • The same exactly no, but I certainly think there's some overlap, even going by the claims of both Christoph and Cliff, the way I understand them.


    Agreed with the fruit point certainly :)

    The bonanza

  • In europe the FM3 is1266€..add to this 633€ for the FC6.


    2000€.That's to much.


    I mean not only for me but for most potential customers in Europe..and from what I have read during the last weeks in several gear blogs the FM3 is faulty with many bugs.They should have stayed with the Ax8 and evolve it as they do with their rack stuff.

    If you need the FC6 it's quite a cost for many surely. Personally I've been after a small unit so the fm3 is attractive for that reason (no need for FC6). But I think we may see a more direct successor to ax8 at some point.

    The bonanza

  • I never said profiling is modeling. I said the Kemper uses amp models. The profiling process gathers data about an amp. That data is then used to automatically populate a complex base model of a generic amp with settings that form a specific amp model.

    That is simply not how it works my friend. What it actually does (in layman's terms) is it figures out what an amp does by sending it a known signal, then measuring what comes out with a microphone). It is clever enough to do enough of a range of input situations that it digitally duplicates exactly (or very close) how ANY input would be processed into an output. To put it more simply it captures the soul of the amp.


    A model is VERY different. A model attempts to put all the filters, circuits, etc, etc into mathematically equivalent make-ups like they are in the real amp. In theory, if you get all these pieces of the model right, you can not only capture the amp in a specific state (like Kemper does), but also know how it will behave when any piece of the amp is changed.


    The weakness of Kempers impulse response method is that you are only capturing the amp in one specific setup. Now, Kemper has done alot to allow us to tweak afterwards; however, as anyone who has used any clean profile can tell you, taking a very clean profile and cranking up the gain will NOT result in you getting what that specific amp sounds like when its gain is cranked.


    The weakness of modelers is that it is horrifically difficult to get everything modeled correctly. Even the simplified GUI presented by the Axe is VERY complex and there are a metric s**t ton of settings that can be controlled. Actually understanding how much of these settings will effect a specific model is quite difficult. Modelers have a very difficult time duplicating a specific amp. Kemper does it effortlessly.


    As I have already stated, it is my opinion after spending a good amount of time comparing the two that either unit can be a great gigging rig and will sound fantastic. It is also my opinion that the KPA is easier to get a great sound out of quickly. YMMV.

  • What it actually does (in layman's terms) is it figures out what an amp does by sending it a known signal, then measuring what comes out with a microphone). It is clever enough to do enough of a range of input situations that it digitally duplicates exactly (or very close) how ANY input would be processed into an output. To put it more simply it captures the soul of the amp.

    That's part of the three data collection phases that occurs during the profiling process. I'd recommend reading the reply I posted to Alfahdj in post #85 (above):


    "The Profiling process consists of data collection regarding the reference amp over three phases. The first phase involves generating white noise that's used to learn about the circuitry of the reference amp, the frequency response of the cabinet, and the characteristic impedance curve of the speaker, including its feedback to the power amp. The next phase involves using white noise to learn about the dynamic distortion curve of the tubes in the reference amp. The third phase involves sending a complex tonal texture to the reference amp that creates unique interference patterns that allow the Profiler to take a “fingerprint” of the DNA of the reference amp’s particular sound. After all of those measurements are taken and data collected, the Profiler uses that data to fill in the settings of a complex base model."


    A model is VERY different. A model attempts to put all the filters, circuits, etc, etc into mathematically equivalent make-ups like they are in the real amp. In theory, if you get all these pieces of the model right, you can not only capture the amp in a specific state (like Kemper does), but also know how it will behave when any piece of the amp is changed.

    You're referring to component level modeling, which is one type, but a model is simply defined as something that accurately resembles something else.


    Even the simplified GUI presented by the Axe is VERY complex and there are a metric s**t ton of settings that can be controlled. Actually understanding how much of these settings will effect a specific model is quite difficult.

    The Axe-Fx has an "Authentic" view which includes only the controls you'd find on a specific amp. If a user wants or needs greater control, there are more advanced parameters available, but they're not visible from the Authentic tab. There's generally no need for a typical user to access the advanced parameters, but an advanced user might enjoy getting into the nuts and bolts of an amp. The difference is, changing some of those parameters on a real amp would normally require a screw driver, and fortunately, the Axe-Fx provides a means to modify them without taking an amp apart.


    As I have already stated, it is my opinion after spending a good amount of time comparing the two that either unit can be a great gigging rig and will sound fantastic. It is also my opinion that the KPA is easier to get a great sound out of quickly. YMMV.

    In my opinion, it depends. In terms of turning the unit on, selecting a preset/profile and playing, they're both equally fast. It doesn't take me any longer to select a preset in the Axe-Fx than it does to select a profile in the Kemper, though the Axe-Fx III boots up faster. However, one could argue that creating a preset from scratch is often faster than creating a profile from scratch.

  • If you need the FC6 it's quite a cost for many surely. Personally I've been after a small unit so the fm3 is attractive for that reason (no need for FC6). But I think we may see a more direct successor to ax8 at some point.

    To be honest I dort understand the concept off the fm3.It is not "small"..it is big enough for at least two more buttons..


    But again IMO Fractal decided to go the way of "max the profit out"..no sane player will go on stage having set up the fm3 separately for 20 different songs using just three buttons which have double and triple functions..


    So an additional floor controller for gigging is a must.Cashing in at least some more hundreds of bucks.


    Anyway.


    I believe that Fractal knows very well that as long as as the € is 15-20% stronger than the $ there is no way Europeans will prefer the Fractal stuff.So they concentrate almost fully on the north American market.In europe the helix is half the price of the fm3/FC and the stage is 400€ cheaper.

  • To be honest I dort understand the concept off the fm3.It is not "small"..it is big enough for at least two more buttons..


    But again IMO Fractal decided to go the way of "max the profit out"..no sane player will go on stage having set up the fm3 separately for 20 different songs using just three buttons which have double and triple functions..


    So an additional floor controller for gigging is a must.Cashing in at least some more hundreds of bucks.

    These days there are many guitarists receiving their program changes from a computer, so the buttons are of little consequence. The FM3 interested me initially because of the size for flying, but waiting more than a year and other markets getting priority have left me cold.


    The price of Fractal has always been an issue in Europe. Now I just wish there was a small form factor Kemper to carry so easily.

    Karl


    Kemper Rack OS 9.0.5 - Mac OS X 12.6.7

  • To be honest I dont understand the concept of the fm3.

    The FM3 marketing doesn't specifically target gigging musicians, but I think the concept of the FM3 is simple. It offers the same quality of amp modeling, many of the same effects and the same number of stock IRs as their flagship model (ie. Axe-Fx III) at a more affordable price. Some users are primarily interested in the amp modeling and effects of the Axe-Fx III but can't afford it, and this represents a more affordable option.

  • I wonder if the Kemper team read these and laugh at how we try to explain this stuff...


    I've given up on trying to provide balance here, I'll leave that to others...

    I can't speak for anyone else, but my explanation regarding the phases of profiling was taken directly from the Kemper manual.

  • Just letting my 2 cents here...


    THe FM3 as well as the HX Stomp is VERY appealing due to the real state savings on the pedalboard. HOwever, coming from a Line6 Pod HD500x, I am playing more than tweaking with the kemper.


    Before modellers nobody was concerned about tube bias, sag and all these other crazy components of amps I didnt even know existed. Kemper, in my opinion, makes life simple as, if I dont like a profile, I move on.


    However, if you are a tweaker, these are definitely appealing :)


    No time spent on tweaking, just playing

    Nice profile, but does it go to 11?

  • The FM3 marketing doesn't specifically target gigging musicians, but I think the concept of the FM3 is simple. It offers the same quality of amp modeling, many of the same effects and the same number of stock IRs as their flagship model (ie. Axe-Fx III) at a more affordable price. Some users are primarily interested in the amp modeling and effects of the Axe-Fx III but can't afford it, and this represents a more affordable option.

    Huh?

    From the website--- "all in a compact, rugged, all-in-one, floor unit designed for the studio or stage."


    https://www.fractalaudio.com/fm3/