axe fx 2 (Original) VS axe fx 2 XL

C

craig ferrari

New Member
i'm thinking of getting the axe fx 2 (original) is there any sound different between the axe fx 2 (original) and the axe fx 2 XL just wondering becoues the original says G2 amp modeling and the XL say's G3 amp modeling dont wont to spend $600 to $700 more on the XL when the only thing i will be using is the FASLINK connector everything else i wont need, just want to be sure that the amp's and effects in the original and the XL are the same Thank's
 
They both run the same firmware, so they both sound the same. The G2/G3/Quantum modeling stuff is in the firmware, not the AFX unit itself. I have both the AFX 2 and the XL+, and the primary difference (IMO) is the XL+ has a lot more storage space for presets and cabs. The amps and effects are exactly the same.
 
TG3K said:
They both run the same firmware, so they both sound the same. The G2/G3/Quantum modeling stuff is in the firmware, not the AFX unit itself. I have both the AFX 2 and the XL+, and the primary difference (IMO) is the XL+ has a lot more storage space for presets and cabs. The amps and effects are exactly the same.
Click to expand...

o.k thanks for your help
 
Who are you quoting? Who said that? They all sound the same..I just talk about 4CM due to the less noise floor
 
I normally say just get a II as it sounds great and is essentially the same, but based on current used values I’d spend like $50 more and get a xl+ since I’ve seen those going for like $1250 shipped. II will be a little cheaper, I sold mine for $1200, but it’s such a small difference might as well get something a little newer.
 
I had the same debate not long ago but I was buying used & the perfect deal on an XL+ with MFCMkiii and EV-1 came up so I snagged it. I agree with LQD, if you're buying used, just look for an XL+.

For me, every time I thought about in terms of what people talk about (i.e. the XL+ basically only offers more storage and everything else is pretty much irrelevant) I settled on just grabbing a II and calling it a day. But then every time I went back to that wiki page and actually read through the differences, I realized one reason or another why I definitely wanted an XL+. Some of the updates are just hard to pass up given that the prices (used) aren't too far off.
 
The Mark II model updated the regular RJ45 port to an Ethercon port. The rest is basically the same as the original Mark I.

The XL model added more storage memory for presets and cabs, uses flash memory for all storage, updated the value wheel to an optical encoder for longer life, added a second expression pedal jack, added dedicated MIDI THRU port, added FAS-LINK port, added emergency recovery firmware to recover from failed firmware updates (Mk I and II require a physical EPROM chip replacement if this happens). It supports more a few more block copies and a few more blocks have X/Y. It also has a lower noise floor due to an improved input circuit.

The XL+ model uses a different LCD screen and controller chips (old one was end of life). Main board layout was updated to accommodate the new LCD controller chips and this lead to an even lower noise floor. Everything else is the same as the XL.

The CPU's, RAM, and processing power are identical between them all.
 
mr_fender said:
It supports more a few more block copies and a few more blocks have X/Y.
Click to expand...

First part is inaccurate; XL block inventory is identical to non-XL.

I suppose you might be referring to the doubled preset size on XL. It's possible to run out of preset space before CPU on non-XL models. The XL may allow more blocks (from the same inventory) in those examples.
 
Last edited:
Marrafat said:
It's a quote from the page you linked to with, "Read this"

and in turn it's from here; https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...etween-axe-ii-mk1-and-mk2.97766/#post-1178592
Click to expand...

They share the same hardware and the same firmware (although it needs to be compiled separately), there's no difference, digitally. Maybe Cliff referred about analog I/O. Like I said, for 4CM, every following model was better in floor noise. Cliff words are obviously law, but I just sayin' that maybe we have to interpret his words. Anywhere else it's pointed that they sound exactly the same.
 
I'd buy as cheap as you can. I still have my II original, nothing introduced in the newer models had anything I needed. IMHO, YMMV.
 
lqdsnddist said:
I normally say just get a II as it sounds great and is essentially the same, but based on current used values I’d spend like $50 more and get a xl+ since I’ve seen those going for like $1250 shipped. II will be a little cheaper, I sold mine for $1200, but it’s such a small difference might as well get something a little newer.
Click to expand...

It depends where you live..in Italy, on our version "Reverb" we see used Axe-Fx from 1250€ to 1950€. I would choose a Mark I for 1250€ rather than a XL+ for 1950.
 
dtpancio said:
It depends where you live..in Italy, on our version "Reverb" we see used Axe-Fx from 1250€ to 1950€. I would choose a Mark I for 1250€ rather than a XL+ for 1950.
Click to expand...

Once the III starts shipping to Europe I bet there will be a lot more units going up for sale, which will drive prices down.

Likely folks are using their xl’s up to the point they can start getting the new gear

Here in the states the number of used units for sale exploded day the III was announced
 
Personally the biggest reason I'd go for an XL or XL+ is the faslink connector, so you can hook up the MFC mk.III with a basic XLR cable. Which is awesome, as those are practically indestructible. If you're going to use an older version of the MFC as controller, or a completely different one altogether, don't bother.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom