AX8 Price Point - At what price do you get upset?

Thank you for your reply. I may have missed something earlier, but this is the first time I've heard that AX8 will indeed not have the FX8's optimized circuity (that wasn't just foremite speculation.)

I didn't mean that the effect DSP of the AX8 would be more powerful, but that the 4x12 grid would enable programming effects that are not achievable with the the series parallel choices for routing the FX8 currently has. I hope that at some point that kind of grid structure with shunts may get added to the FX8 as well. This opens up a lot of creative possibilities.

I think I, and some others, fall into a category to where we are divided between wanting both amp modelling and optimized 4cm sound quality and trying to weigh the benefits of each on a value scale. I would love to put a Friedman or D.Z sim to take the place of my tube preamp for some tunes, and then switch back to my tube pre running just FX. I've even thought about how I would pay $4,000 for a rackmount plus pedal board unit that combined the Axe FX XL+ with the optimized 4cm technology of the FX8 and amp relays. That's only $300 more than my Friedman amp which makes one genre of great optimized quality tone. But I understand there might not be a market for that kind of expensive box so instead I try to weigh the benefits of each.

This is where it has gotten confusing. The question becomes "is the difference in 4cm sound quality (and having relays) worth losing some CPU, amp modelling, and grid routing?" There is a price benefit as well, but with Ax8 that becomes much much smaller. That's an unanswerable subjective question.

I guess without having units to compare it's hard to quantify the optimized sound quality, and easy to take it for granted, as if anything else made by Fractal, like the AX8 should sound as transparent.

Thanks again for your reply. That answers many questions.

Sorry for the rambling.

I probably will keep the FX8, I just hope to see it grow the same way the Axe-FX has grown through the years.
 
FractalAudio said:
The AX-8 is not "way more powerful" than the FX-8. No one from the company ever said that. The AX-8 has one additional DSP that is DEDICATED to amp modeling. If you don't use the amp modeling the AX-8 has the same power as the FX-8.

As we stated recently we are working on a firmware release for the FX-8.

The AX-8 will not work as well as the FX-8 in 4CM. It is not designed for that. It will do 4CM, as will most digital processors but the FX-8 is the only processor of which I'm aware that is truly optimized for 4CM. That optimization requires a lot of expensive circuitry. The op-amps used are very expensive and there's dozens of them just to support the 4CM stuff. Add to that relays for true bypass, metal film capacitors, etc., etc., and you end up with an expensive design.

The FX-8 and AX-8 are built on the same code base. There is a single folder that is used to build the common elements for both products. Enhancements to one automatically enhance the other. All this work we've been doing for the AX-8 will improve the FX-8.

The AX-8 will be much more popular than the FX-8. That should be obvious. Most people want the amp modeling. If you don't care about the amp modeling then the FX-8 is the better product and the whole reason for having two different products.
Click to expand...


Thanks for this. The more you can do to communicate the differences, and similarities, between the two units the better.

I hope I'm not reading to much into your post, but what I'm taking from it is that although not optimized for 4cm like the FX8, the AX8 can be used in 4cm. I'm perhaps reaching on this, but it seems to me that you're confirming that the AX8 and FX8 will offer the same effects.

If you're saying that the AX8 doesn't have the expensive op amps, relays for true bypass, metal film capacitors and other expensive circuitry, those cost savings need to be taken into account when comparing the price of the AX8 and FX8. (I'm completely making this up, but perhaps this could lead to the same price for both units.)

I'm looking foward to hearing an AX8 used in 4cm and hoping it doesn't make me feel foolish for buying the FX8. :)
 
FullReverse said:
"I get offended when people write posts as facts and cannot provide a basis for those facts. It's a waste of my time and everyone else reading this thread. You do have something to prove; that what you wrote as fact is true. You refuse or fail to support your statement."

Welcome to the internet.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You'd think people here would be more intelligent than your average internet user.
 
I would think that most people using the AX8 are not going 4cm, since the FX8 is designed for that purpose.

Therefore, most people would be buying the AX8 as a scaled down version of the Axe FX II with controller. The all-in-one, easy in and out solution for gigging (what a great rig for a pit player!), fly dates, even session gigs.

I am certain the price point will be right on par. I mean, the latest, greatest version of the Axe FX (the XL+) is $2250. That right there is a deal!
 
If I was designing the AX-8, I would have left out the loop. Then we wouldn't be discussing whether the AX-8 loop is as good as the FX-8 loop !

So DavidE -- how about answering your own question?
You're upset if the AX-8 costs $1349.
You're still upset at $1499.
How about $1749?
$1999?
$2249?
$2499?

BTW, I don't care if they're giving the Helix away for free, with a bag of potato chips and a 64oz soda. I still don't want one!
 
Last edited:
No, you need to leave the loop so people can run other effects pedals in the loop of the AX8. To me, that's the purpose of having the loop, not to use the AX8 with an amp running 4-Cable Method.
 
DavidE said:
Perhaps. But I'm not sure the price of the Helix is relevant.
Click to expand...

Sure it is relevant. Someone has $1,500 to spend, here are there options: Pedalboard, Helix, FX8, AX8(depending on price), used ax-fx, etc. it's all relevant imho. You need to decide where to spend your hard earned money then all options are on the table. Great thread though. I will be in the same camp having purchased an FX8 a couple of months ago. Once the AX8 comes out, if it's more powerful for the same price I will be pissed and wished I had waited for the AX8. Sure it may not be optimized for 4cm but I'm sure you will be able to use humbusters as Fractal wouldn't want to lose $$$ on selling those cables. Not to mention I had POD 500X and it wasn't optimized for 4cm nor did it use humbusters and it was pretty quiet.
 
The AX8 has built in modelling so wouldn't use a separate preamp - so 4CM here doesn't have to be the same as the FX8.
 
One thing that's being overlooked is that the AX-8 has cab modeling (FX-8 doesn't) that will be handled by the same processor as the effects. Which could limit the AX-8's effects ability compared to the FX-8. This could be another advantage for the FX-8 along with the optimized I/O
 
NeoSound said:
One thing that's being overlooked is that the AX-8 has cab modeling (FX-8 doesn't) that will be handled by the same processor as the effects. Which could limit the AX-8's effects ability compared to the FX-8. This could be another advantage for the FX-8 along with the optimized I/O
Click to expand...

That is exactly why I hope I can use my FX8 and AX8 together.
 
NeoSound said:
One thing that's being overlooked is that the AX-8 has cab modeling (FX-8 doesn't) that will be handled by the same processor as the effects. Which could limit the AX-8's effects ability compared to the FX-8. This could be another advantage for the FX-8 along with the optimized I/O
Click to expand...

Oh man... It's in that same thread:
FractalAudio said:
The AX-8 has one additional DSP that is DEDICATED to amp modeling. If you don't use the amp modeling the AX-8 has the same power as the FX-8 .
Click to expand...

EDIT: oh, you're talking about the CAB block. I read amp instead of cab, sorry.
Yeah, I guess the cab block is part of the FX DSP
 
Last edited:
ethomas1013 said:
No, you need to leave the loop so people can run other effects pedals in the loop of the AX8. To me, that's the purpose of having the loop, not to use the AX8 with an amp running 4-Cable Method.
Click to expand...

And one reason I would have liked a loop in my FX8 to add effects not covered by the FX8.
 
NeoSound said:
One thing that's being overlooked is that the AX-8 has cab modeling (FX-8 doesn't) that will be handled by the same processor as the effects. Which could limit the AX-8's effects ability compared to the FX-8. This could be another advantage for the FX-8 along with the optimized I/O
Click to expand...

I'm not too familiar with these details. I'd expect the cab model to be handled by the amp model dsp. If a cab / mic / ir uses the fx dsp, forget it. The fx dsp is already overtaxed for many.
 
FractalAudio said:
The AX-8 is not "way more powerful" than the FX-8. No one from the company ever said that. The AX-8 has one additional DSP that is DEDICATED to amp modeling. If you don't use the amp modeling the AX-8 has the same power as the FX-8.

As we stated recently we are working on a firmware release for the FX-8.

The AX-8 will not work as well as the FX-8 in 4CM. It is not designed for that. It will do 4CM, as will most digital processors but the FX-8 is the only processor of which I'm aware that is truly optimized for 4CM. That optimization requires a lot of expensive circuitry. The op-amps used are very expensive and there's dozens of them just to support the 4CM stuff. Add to that relays for true bypass, metal film capacitors, etc., etc., and you end up with an expensive design.

The FX-8 and AX-8 are built on the same code base. There is a single folder that is used to build the common elements for both products. Enhancements to one automatically enhance the other. All this work we've been doing for the AX-8 will improve the FX-8.

The AX-8 will be much more popular than the FX-8. That should be obvious. Most people want the amp modeling. If you don't care about the amp modeling then the FX-8 is the better product and the whole reason for having two different products.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing this up. Can you comment on the axe fx xl+ as far as the 4cm circuitry? Does it have the optimized components similar to the fx8?
 
DavidE said:
I'm not too familiar with these details. I'd expect the cab model to be handled by the amp model dsp. If a cab / mic / ir uses the fx dsp, forget it. The fx dsp is already overtaxed for many.
Click to expand...

Really not sure how it will work in the AX8, but in the rack Axe-FX the Cab modeling is handled by the same DSP chip as the FX, not the one with the amp modeling. I'd venture a guess that the AX8 will be the same, but I'd be speculating... soooo... I won't go there. (Seeing as how speculating that the components for the 4-cable method being better in the FX8 didn't turn out so well until Cliff confirmed it)

Really, for me it comes down to a trade-off: best quality of I/O for 4-cable vs. modeling capabilities. I finally figured out I don't need 100 different amp models, just one good amp and the effects to go with it, so I'm happy with my FX8, with no real thought of picking up an AX8, no matter what the price is.
 
I am with you on that. I have a Mesa/Boogie Mark IV and all I see are people trying to get the perfect Mark IV lead in all the modelling examples online (seems like it, obviously not true :). I'll just stick with the FX8, it's wonderful scene system with relay control, and move on with my life.
 
ethomas1013 said:
No, you need to leave the loop so people can run other effects pedals in the loop of the AX8. To me, that's the purpose of having the loop, not to use the AX8 with an amp running 4-Cable Method.
Click to expand...

Precisely. The loop's intended use is, well, as a loop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom