Able to plug into back now with AXE FX II???

[Tremonti]

I know the Standard and Ultra are made for the guitar to be plugged into front for best results.....but what about the Axe FX II? My wireless only has outs on back....makes more sense and looks less cluttered if it were now and option to route via back with good audio/sonic signals.

 

[guitarnet70]

Still front plug for best results.

 

[dsl]

Here's the most recent thread dealing with this subject:

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii/37434-axe-fx-2-wireless.html

 

[terdfurgunson]

My advice for that is to make a front panel input that is connected to your wireless in the back. I did the same until I switched to a g30 but I works extremely well doing that. It also makes your rack look pro

 

[jmpatrick63]

My advice for that is to make a front panel input that is connected to your wireless in the back. I did the same until I switched to a g30 but I works extremely well doing that. It also makes your rack look pro

You shouldn't have to burn an additional rack space to connect a wireless to the Axe with the best possible quality. It's a shame that this wasn't changed with the new model.

 

[Tremonti]

You shouldn't have to burn an additional rack space to connect a wireless to the Axe with the best possible quality. It's a shame that this wasn't changed with the new model.

I agree...why this wasn't addressed is a mystery. The other thread doesn't really answer my question...they just talk about dual wireless systems the whole time.

Looks like if you buy an Axe FX II you still have to route wireless in a funky way to front of Axe FX II for best results.....still can't believe that this wasn't address but "removable ears" was?????

 

[Spaceboy]

Here's the most recent thread dealing with this subject:

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii/37434-axe-fx-2-wireless.html

I asked this question in that thread, and never got an answer.

 

[terdfurgunson]

My opinion is how many people really use wireless vs wired....I think the majority will use a wired config...
Personally I love the front panel with my wireless as well....its not that difficult to run a cord to the front.

 

[Lionman]

Suggestion for aesthetic solution to front/back input wireless question

Having run into the same issue of coming out of the back of a wireless and wanting to go into the back of the Axe-FX, I decided to mount my wireless directly above the AFX, and left the bottom right rack screw out of the wireless unit ears. Since the wireless receiver's not that heavy, has a power supply above it, the AFX below it, it wouldn't torque. Then I came out of the back of the wireless unit using a piece of BLACK George L's cable (the thinner of the 2 choices from George L's, called .155), and ran it through the hole so it came out just above the AFX and THEN screwed on the right angle jack, used a BLACK jack cover they offer to hide the silver jack, a small piece of black gaff tape to hold the cable at a right angle so it looks nice and dressed, and from a few feet back, you can't even tell that I have a cable coming out of the rack. I know that's not plugging into the back, but it was the best I could come up with to not have a big cable sticking out of the front of my rack... Hope that might help.

George L's Custom Gear

 

[terdfurgunson]

Having run into the same issue of coming out of the back of a wireless and wanting to go into the back of the Axe-FX, I decided to mount my wireless directly above the AFX, and left the bottom right rack screw out of the wireless unit ears. Since the wireless receiver's not that heavy, has a power supply above it, the AFX below it, it wouldn't torque. Then I came out of the back of the wireless unit using a piece of BLACK George L's cable (the thinner of the 2 choices from George L's, called .155), and ran it through the hole so it came out just above the AFX and THEN screwed on the right angle jack, used a BLACK jack cover they offer to hide the silver jack, a small piece of black gaff tape to hold the cable at a right angle so it looks nice and dressed, and from a few feet back, you can't even tell that I have a cable coming out of the rack. I know that's not plugging into the back, but it was the best I could come up with to not have a big cable sticking out of the front of my rack... Hope that might help.

George L's Custom Gear

Love that idea. Never thought of it at all....thanks!

 

[Spaceboy]

Why was the Ultra/Standard built with the rear input suboptimal to the front? I assume there was an intended purpose, other than being simpler to wire into a rack.

 

[Tremonti]

My opinion is how many people really use wireless vs wired....I think the majority will use a wired config...
Personally I love the front panel with my wireless as well....its not that difficult to run a cord to the front.

But it makes more sense to have it in the back of unit even for a cable straight to the guitar. You might lose 1 foot but it would look clean and solve the issue for us wireless users(and their are a lot of us). Not a huge issue but just surprised.....like I said...more would use this feature than any that would TAKE EARS OFF rack. At the very least I would have thought it would now be designed so you could plug front or back w/o any issues or sound changes. Looks like this is NOT the case.

 

[javajunkie]

Why was the Ultra/Standard built with the rear input suboptimal to the front? I assume there was an intended purpose, other than being simpler to wire into a rack.

It is not sub-optimal. Front was optimized for guitar level. Rear was optimized for line level. Rear was intended for use as an effects processor that receives a line level signal.

 

[chapelizod]

But it makes more sense to have it in the back of unit even for a cable straight to the guitar. You might lose 1 foot but it would look clean and solve the issue for us wireless users(and their are a lot of us). Not a huge issue but just surprised.....like I said...more would use this feature than any that would TAKE EARS OFF rack. At the very least I would have thought it would now be designed so you could plug front or back w/o any issues or sound changes. Looks like this is NOT the case.

I'm pretty sure that any advantage you would get from running into the front input (special sauce, variable impedance on the II) would be entirely negated by using wireless anyway. You're stuck at whatever impedance and circuitry the wireless interface you're plugging the guitar into uses.

 

[javajunkie]

I'm pretty sure that any advantage you would get from running into the front input (special sauce, variable impedance on the II) would be entirely negated by using wireless anyway. You're stuck at whatever impedance and circuitry the wireless interface you're plugging the guitar into uses anyway.

Correct, the variable imp is not effective with a wireless or anything that buffers the signal.

 

[Spaceboy]

It is not sub-optimal. Front was optimized for guitar level. Rear was optimized for line level. Rear was intended for use as an effects processor that receives a line level signal.

Oh, gotcha! Why would there be two rear inputs, and why does the first rear input of the Ultra defeat the front instrument input, if it wasn't intended for instruments itself? Sorry if these question seem dense or have been covered before, I never owned the Ultra/Standard models.

 

[m lebofsky]

I'm pretty sure that any advantage you would get from running into the front input (special sauce, variable impedance on the II) would be entirely negated by using wireless anyway. You're stuck at whatever impedance and circuitry the wireless interface you're plugging the guitar into uses.

Cliff has stated multiple times to use the front with wireless.

 

[Tremonti]

I'm pretty sure that any advantage you would get from running into the front input (special sauce, variable impedance on the II) would be entirely negated by using wireless anyway. You're stuck at whatever impedance and circuitry the wireless interface you're plugging the guitar into uses.

With my Relay G50....I notice no loss in signal vs cable....so it is important to me to use the proper input......BUT.....I just think it was an oversight to not have this feature on the back now with the Axe FX II. No it ain't the end of the world and I know he can't think of everything and make everyone happy. Just talk'in ....that's all!

 

[javajunkie]

Oh, gotcha! Why would there be two rear inputs then? Sorry, I never owned the Ultra/Standard models.

For one, in case you wanted to use an effect processor in the loop of the Axe-fx.

 

[chapelizod]

With my Relay G50....I notice no loss in signal vs cable....so it is important to me to use the proper input......BUT.....I just think it was an oversight to not have this feature on the back now with the Axe FX II. No it ain't the end of the world and I know he can't think of everything and make everyone happy. Just talk'in ....that's all!

not commenting on sound quality between wireless vs. cable, simply that most of what the front input was designed to do would be ineffective if there is no physical circuit created between guitar pickups and axe fx.