Axe-Fx 2 or Ultra

Q_3006

New Member
Hello guys,
I’m new here.
I’m doing another rack system.
JCM800 in the rack and I want to use Axe FX as effect only.
Just wonder if for effects only the Ultra will be great or I need a Axe FX 2 ? If there is no massive difference in the effects sections, I think go with the Ultra

i can have a Axe Ultra + Fractal MFC-101 for 800£ here in UK

I NEVER use Fractal Product before and I just want to use it as EFFECT ONLY.

Thanks

- Q
 
I have an Ultra, XL and a III. They all have their special sounds. For what you want to do with Ultra vs II I would say consider this. The II uses scenes which allows you to store 8 variables per preset. On the Ultra you will have to jump from preset to preset.... which isn't all bad because it changes super fast. Also I think the II editor is more robust and compatible with current computers.

FWIW on the Ultra I turned my verbs off and ran it into my Strymon Big Sky for glorious sound.
 
I have an Ultra, XL and a III. They all have their special sounds. For what you want to do with Ultra vs II I would say consider this. The II uses scenes which allows you to store 8 variables per preset. On the Ultra you will have to jump from preset to preset.... which isn't all bad because it changes super fast. Also I think the II editor is more robust and compatible with current computers.

FWIW on the Ultra I turned my verbs off and ran it into my Strymon Big Sky for glorious sound.

Thank you for the answer. What do you mean by “8 variables per preset”.
You mean than I can play with 8 effects at the same time ?

sorry for the basic question, just never use fractal before.
 
The AxeII has 8 scenes per preset and an XY option for each effect. The Ultra doesn't have either of these options. Example: The XY option means that you could use 1 chorus block but have 2 choruses (an X and a Y) available that you could switch between. With scenes you can change multiple effects with a push of a button. On/Off, XY, etc, can be changed into 8 different configurations with 1 button push. It's like having 8 pedal boards available. Of course you'd have to set up a midi system to do all of this with your feet.

If you can get an AxeII MK2 or later then I would go that route. The unit has more power, the effects have more tweakability, and Cliff recently gave us an update that uses some of the Ares modeling. You may want to use some of the amps and cabs at some point.
Having said that, the Ultra is still a good unit.
 
I'd say go for the II ..... you're bound to dabble with the amp and cab modelling at some stage plus you'll like the straight forward USB sound device capability which the Ultra does not have (it requires a midi to usb interface).
 
Easily the II, if only for scenes. The ultra is still a fantastic unit but everything enjoyable about it is expanded, improved and easier to use on the II.
 
I've owned the Ultra and a II XL+ in the past. I would go with the II - scenes, more capabilities and more power. I would not be suprised if you end up using the Axe as a replacement for your JCM ...
 
hi q,
the effects in the 2 are vastly superior so definitely the axe fx 2.
thanks
pauly

Hello guys,
I’m new here.
I’m doing another rack system.
JCM800 in the rack and I want to use Axe FX as effect only.
Just wonder if for effects only the Ultra will be great or I need a Axe FX 2 ? If there is no massive difference in the effects sections, I think go with the Ultra

i can have a Axe Ultra + Fractal MFC-101 for 800£ here in UK

I NEVER use Fractal Product before and I just want to use it as EFFECT ONLY.

Thanks

- Q
 
Moar is always better. After all, why settle for a 1st gen iPad (to paraphrase a certain youtuber ;)) when you can have a later version? Scenes are also awesome. It's like having 8 additional presets into every preset.
 
I've used both the Ultra and Axe FX II for FX only with tube gear for years, and I'd say go for the Axe II if you can swing it.

As noted above Scenes, X-Y, better Editor (USB vs MIDI), and additional CPU power etc.

That said, I used a Ultra for years in that role and with creative programming I was able to get great results (if you want to replicate Scenes as much as possible, you need parallel FX chains controlled via MIDI CC, much more complicated and CPU intensive than the Axe II's Scenes and X/Y features, but doable if you can't swing a Axe II etc.

Note that you'd likely want to avoid the AX8 if creating complex FX rigs, as it's CPU is much weaker.

Finally, the Ares 2.x firmware port for the Axe II is very good, so you definitely need the Axe II is you want to use the best amp modeling which has for most usage replaced my tube gear (and I'm a tube snob of the highest order!), which on a Axe II lives on it's own CPU (so it doesn't effect FX power), where on a Ultra it shares CPU's with the FX (so it lowers your FX ability when using the Ultra's amp modeling).
 
Last edited:
Basicly it's "just" a computer. I wouldn't even consider the ultra anymore, except maybe as a backup unit that you assume will never need. Especially now the AXE III has caused a price drop for the II I'd say go for it.
As a former tube fanatic: The axe will serve excellently as a backup when your tube amp fails you on stage for whatever reason.

Kind regards,

Harm
 
Currently, I own the Ultra, the XL+, and an AXE FX III.

I had sold my original Ultra when the AXE FX II Mk I first came out and I regretted it since the Ultra sounded a lot better to me for a long time (all my Ultra presets had been tweaked to what I liked for recording) but eventually the firmware updates for the AXE FX II improved the unit.

At some point I found that I really liked the AXE FX II Mk I and I stopped missing the Ultra :)

I had purchased an FX8 to go with my JMP-1 for my live playing and I had learned a lot about the effects in the FX8 and scenes so I decided to get an XL+ and it replaced my FX8 in my live rig.

I found with each firmware update that the XL+ kept getting better and I was telling a friend of mine how great it was for effects and recording (I tried using it to replace my JMP-1 for playing live but I could never get an XL+ preset that sounded and felt like a real tube amp going through my Marshall EL34 50/50 tube power amp and Mesa cab).

Well, my friend wanted to get an AXE FX but he had limited funds so I suggested to him to get an Ultra.

He bought one but needed a LOT of help setting it up, connecting it to the computer, creating presets, etc..., so I had him leave it with me to get it dialed in for him.

I fell in love with the Ultra all over again for recording and playing through my recording interface and speakers (in part, due to Leon Todd's Ultra presets paired with the Own Hammer Mesa cab).

The OH Mesa cab opened up the Ultra for me and it made it a LOT easier to get GREAT sounding presets that I could use for recording.

I remembered there was a certain feel, tone, and uniqueness to the Ultra that I forgot about since many years had passed but the joy that I had felt using the Ultra was coming back (and then some).

It was also a lot easier to use for dialing in a live sound that it was in the past (I am sure that I picked up a few tips, strategies, and tone-shaping ideas from these good souls in the Fractal Forum).

I ended up buying three Ultras since one is for playing live (I have some GREAT presets for live playing now), one is a back-up, and the other is meant to be left at our studio for recording.

I will always keep at least two of the Ultras since they sound different from the XL+ and the III.

Yes, there has been a lot of improvements that you can find in the XL+ and II but I feel there was something lost in the XL+ and the III that was GREAT in the Ultra.

All three units are unique with different tones/feels and great in their own way and if you can find an XL+ for around $1,000 then I would say get it but the Ultra is more affordable right now and you can find them for pretty good prices (you will need a headphone amp like the $23 Behringer MicroAMP HA400 4-Ch Headphone Amplifier and a $29 midi interface like the M-Audio Uno).

I recently learned how to dial in ALL of my AXE FX's for a live sound where I always failed to get one in the past but the simpler structure of the Ultra helped me to better understand how to dial in various things a lot easier to get that live sound for each of the AXE FX units that I own right now (for recording it was always easy) just like the FX8 helped me to better understand the effect layouts/options and scenes.

I was playing my Ultra right at this moment and then I remembered seeing your post and I thought I should provide you with a reply/feedback/suggestions and some video links for the Ultra (I put these together to show the wide range of possibilities for the Ultra):

Here is a link to hear "some" of the Leon Todd presets (I have a LOT of his presets for live and recording):



Here is a link to hear "some" of the Mark Day presets (I have a LOT of his presets for live and recording):













Here is a link to hear some others using the Ultra:







https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbWj3x0VTWU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydx18i825ug

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyvr26z0Mbk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGJvcs8Gfog

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVuDsDfrlPk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm4SlcgE7qg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUfV1fvziso

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCe0fZ1rKqA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1h-1_eeIBo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqB2HoBLDuo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuPAbAlvnI4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0T-NpCWHrY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkxH3zTn5DU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g1YYTMBgHs (Reamping)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMc6rURackE (The Standard but you can see the AXE Edit being used here)
 
The ultra is still a fantastic unit but everything enjoyable about it is expanded, improved and easier to use on the II
I am with you in context 2112 excepting for the word 'everything'. I have found certain presets on the Ultra that I just don't find equaled or surpassed by any of the other units. I agree with previous post suggesting the Ultra has some kind of 'mojo magic'. Of course this is my opinion and experience only but I find that presets like Poltergeist Pig, Crystal Echoes, Studio Lead just sound better (subjective I know) on the Ultra. Also there were a couple of others like Thick Cali, Early Carlos, Subway Verb (with the verb down a bit) that are superb.

Compared with the addition of audio interface capability, easier and more in depth editing, more memory and more CPU of course the II and III outshine in those areas but I'm a strong believer that the Ultra is definitely survivable. I find the same to be true of the XL. For example I like the way Dual Clean sounds on the XL vs III. I have had the III the least amount of time however.

A testament to Fractal to have so many choices and to have their decade old gear still be a worthy contender.
 
Dunno if someone has mentioned it before, but IIRC one of the improvements of the II over the Ultra had something to do with noise and/or ground loops when you were using it as FX only unit/4CM... I remember Maddi Schieferstein (John Petrucci's guitar tech) mentioning how a big improvement it was.
 
I happily play an Ultra, haven’t found anything that actually sounds better yet. Are the twos and threes more powerful? Sure. Do I wish for just a bit more CPU for some of my more intensive patches? You bet. Are there things I would improve? Of course, but the core sound of the u it is unmatched for the music I play, and don’t foresee myself “upgrading “ any time soon.
 
Back
Top Bottom