Is Axe Fx Viable?

Volvagia

Volvagia

Member
I have heard from people like Ola Englund that the Axe Fx isn't as good as real amps. But isn't tone really subjective? Personally I think that Periphery has some of the best sounding guitar tones that I've heard on an album. I haven't bad much experience with real tube amps but I really do like my Axe tones more than what I've heard from some expensive tube amps. I know people say digital is not as good but I don't exactly agree. Thoughts?
 
But orange is a sweet combination and therefore the best of the three colors. Isn't that obvious to 100% of the population? :)
 
Last edited:
In my opinion there will always be people who'll swear that a box like the AF2 will never be as good as a real amp. I suspect that for the majority of those folks it's all in the mind and I'd bet most would fail a blind test. There may be a very few out there that could honestly tell the difference, but there will be those who claim to just from gear snobbery standpoint.
 
Here's what I can tell you.. I've sold some pretty darn good amps THANKS to the amazing tool that the Axe FX is; because that's how darn good the Axe FX is!!

But like the guys have said, it's a matter of opinion. I am blown away by how good it really is.

You should tell Ola that Washburn guitars are generally sh1t... because that's what you think.. Same with his over-the-top SATAN amp.. But guess what? He won't give a F coz he's got endorsements, PLUS, it suits his needs. Get the picture?!

It really only depends on what you're trying to achieve man. Digital amp modelling has gone (quantum lol!) leaps and bounds over the years, it ain't what it used to be.
 
No matter what, there will always be cork sniffing, "naysayers" for whatever reason(s) they have. I miss my vintage Marshall's'. They weren't viable to me anymore with compact gigging/house volume and home studio production being the way to go. For my needs, the AFX... much more viable than to paying for local mediocrity productions. And being told by the bar owners and your wife, TURN IT DOWN !" ... besides... this damn thing sounds so killer.
 
Last edited:
Meh, opinions. Plus when hype gets involved some people get bizarrely annoyed by that which the hype builds around.

Axe-Fx has stood the test of time and got the tick from so many pros and so many more "amateurs" that it's beyond argument at this point. It solves so many problems that even if you could hear a difference (not that I'd accept that wasn't simply nocebo...), it seems impractical to choose anything else.

Axe-Fx II is the greatest musical purchase I've ever made.
 
I can't speak to anyone else's opinion or perspective but I can relay my experience.

I spent 30 years using only tube amp's, one decade collecting vintage tube amps, and another seven or so years cycling through a wide array of boutique tube amps. I only kept as many as I was able to play through on a regular basis (I only keep things that I use).

I bought my first AxeFX (Ultra) at firmware v11.0. I had been following the AxeFX with great interest but the sound clips preceding the v11.0 release were impressive enough to me that I bought an Ultra within days of hearing those first few demo clips. Though I could clearly hear the difference between the AxeFX and my amps the gap was narrow enough that I lost interest almost immediately in all that accompanies the 'real thing' (varying wall voltage affecting the amps tone, their weight and size, the inconvenience of tubes going microphones at inopportune moments, the inconvenience and/or futility of trying to recreate the recording conditions of a track recorded during a prior session making changes / punch-ins / etc. difficult after said session, etc, etc...).

In fact I very quickly changed my perspective on what 'the real thing' means. In other words, the AxeFX Ultra took no time at all becoming the real thing for me. I put all of my amps up for sale within days of receiving my Ultra in 2010 and have never second guessed that decision (actually, I held on to an inexpensive tube combo for guests to use but it sat unused and I sold it after a while as it was only taking up space. Tube amp's still held a slight edge in tone when playing solo but in recording in playing with a live ensemble the subtle differences between an amp and the AxeFX were too subtle for me to give it thought.

I traded up to the AxeFX II at firmware v5.00 - that's when I heard enough of a difference for me to justify the cost. I have to say I'm constantly, pleasantly surprised when a new firmware brings the AxeFX II still closer to the amps being modeled. If development stopped today I would be no less satisfied. Yet development continues and the very small gap keeps getting smaller with every new firmware version. I no longer compare the AxeFX II to the modeled amps. Rather I find myself comparing the 'real' tube amp to the modeler as occasions to play through a tube amp arise and the AxeFX consistently compares favorably against what many call 'the real thing'. I can think of no sound reason why I would ever choose a tube amp over the AxeFX II.

How does the AxeFX II compare to the tube amps modeled therein? The answer at this point is: I personally don't care. The AxeFX II is the yardstick for me and amps are a poor substitute. As for the experience of others? A non-issue for me as it only matters to me what I think, how I perceive it.

That's my $0.02 :)
 
Last edited:
My fav Marshall tube amp has been sitting right next to me for over a year, plugged in but never switched on anymore. Sadly the only work it does now is gather dust cos I just love the tone and feel I get from my AFX.
 
chucma said:
My fav Marshall tube amp has been sitting right next to me for over a year, plugged in but never switched on anymore. Sadly the only work it does now is gather dust cos I just love the tone and feel I get from my AFX.
Click to expand...

Same here A MK IV and a Lonestar are dust catching boat anchors, I still use my GCX pedal switcher with many analog effects though.

My 2 XLs are just too awesome at any volume level!
 
This is a comment I posted on another thread -
Well I dug out my Mesa Boogie mark V combo (hardwood cab) and plugged in my guitar and gave it a bit of a workout. Then I plugged into my Axe fx and eminance cab (1x12) with the USA Amp block and gave it a spin, after that I put my boogie back in its case - I may sell it.
The boogie combo sounded very boxy, the axe fx sounded warm and full.
 
I stopped listen carefully what other people say about various digital amps and tube amps. The feel and sound is very subjective, it depends where is plugged in (good PA or monitor, or good power amp and cab). I also own a triaxis with 2:90 but I much prefer my Axe2 and how it sounds.
:D
 
We have a saying in Spain: "Poderoso caballero Don Dinero"
(a rough translation would be: "Sir Money [is a] powerful knight").

Is shocking to see how opinions change over time, I find some contradictory things about Ola and Fractal relationship, some food for thought:

Formerly he had an Ultra, in metalguiarist.org he had some Ultra presets under the name Fearedse, now this user is gone...in youtube you have many videos of Ola playing Fractal stuff very happy, in 2010 the Ultra, in 2011 he switched to Axe2, by the way he have some Axe2 presets in his web for download.

In the description of this 2012 video:

You can read "Thanks to Fractal Audio for letting me borrow an Axe Fx 2".

In 2013 his opinion was favorable:
Ola in Facebook said:
Question of the Day:

Q: "Kemper or Axe Fx 2?"

A:
This is a VERY common question I get, and from having used both the Kemper and the Axe Fx 2 for a long time, tried both live and dwelved deep within them, I can say this;

Both units are winners, they sound equally good, they are just a bit different when it comes to building patches and tweak-ability. While both have endless amounts of tweaking options, I would say the Axe Fx 2 is the winner when it comes to options. You have perfect control over the blocks, what comes where etc, while with the Kemper, it's pretty much fixed. It's not a bad thing the Kemper is designed this way, cause the Kemper wins in the field of being user friendly. It's just a lot easier to tweak and also a lot easier to dial in a good sound fast. With the Axe Fx 2 you will need a lot more patience but when you get there, you'll be pleased.

But other than that, I think both units sound about the same when recorded, the response when playing is good on both units. It's hard to really find flaws but there are two good pros/cons that needs to be said: - One is that the Kemper takes about 45 seconds to boot up, while the Axe Fx 2 boots up in about 5. - The powered Kemper has its own poweramp but is still cheaper than the Axe Fx 2(The regular Kemper is about half the price of an Axe Fx 2 in Europe)

But in the end, my opinion is that I'm happy with both of them. Whatever you'll get, you're probably going to be happy.

It's not me being neutral, it's just the way it is. There is no Axe Fx vs. Kemper war. They are both killer competent units.
(www.facebook.com/fearedse/posts/563062297085903)
Click to expand...

I find that in the last 3 years the Axe2 had improved a lot, I wonder what make him change his mind:D

Love/hate?
 
Last edited:
I've got it now for two years. Usually, I do about a year with an amp, because I want something new. And I don't see myself parting with it anytime soon, for a guy who loves changing amps and sounds, it's perfect. Ofcourse, only if it sounds right. And it does to me. And to my bandmates. And to our producer last weekend.
 
Deaj said:
I can't speak to anyone else's opinion or perspective but I can relay my experience.

I spent 30 years using only tube amp's, one decade collecting vintage tube amps, and another seven or so years cycling through a wide array of boutique tube amps. I only kept as many as I was able to play through on a regular basis (I only keep things that I use).

I bought my first AxeFX (Ultra) at firmware v11.0. I had been following the AxeFX with great interest but the sound clips preceding the v11.0 release were impressive enough to me that I bought an Ultra within days of hearing those first few demo clips. Though I could clearly hear the difference between the AxeFX and my amps the gap was narrow enough that I lost interest almost immediately in all that accompanies the 'real thing' (varying wall voltage affecting the amps tone, their weight and size, the inconvenience of tubes going microphones at inopportune moments, the inconvenience and/or futility of trying to recreate the recording conditions of a track recorded during a prior session making changes / punch-ins / etc. difficult after said session, etc, etc...).

In fact I very quickly changed my perspective on what 'the real thing' means. In other words, the AxeFX Ultra took no time at all becoming the real thing for me. I put all of my amps up for sale within days of receiving my Ultra in 2010 and have never second guessed that decision (actually, I held on to an inexpensive tube combo for guests to use but it sat unused and I sold it after a while as it was only taking up space. Tube amp's still held a slight edge in tone when playing solo but in recording in playing with a live ensemble the subtle differences between an amp and the AxeFX were too subtle for me to give it thought.

I traded up to the AxeFX II at firmware v5.00 - that's when I heard enough of a difference for me to justify the cost. I have to say I'm constantly, pleasantly surprised when a new firmware brings the AxeFX II still closer to the amps being modeled. If development stopped today I would be no less satisfied. Yet development continues and the very small gap keeps getting smaller with every new firmware version. I no longer compare the AxeFX II to the modeled amps. Rather I find myself comparing the 'real' tube amp to the modeler as occasions to play through a tube amp arise and the AxeFX consistently compares favorably against what many call 'the real thing'. I can think of no sound reason why I would ever choose a tube amp over the AxeFX II.

How does the AxeFX II compare to the tube amps modeled therein? The answer at this point is: I personally don't care. The AxeFX II is the yardstick for me and amps are a poor substitute. As for the experience of others? A non-fiction for me as it only matters to me what I think, how I perceive it.

That's my $0.02 :)
Click to expand...

+10000 :sunglasses:

As if i have written it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom