Axe Fx II vs Ultra

B

Boogie291

Member
For those who have both units what is the difference is it really big like day and night difference? I am asking this because I have Ultra and I just want to make sure before I will by the Axe Fx II.
 
I have both the Axe Standard and 2. I love them both, but the Axe 2 is worth the extra money. It's more flexible and easier to use. It's like Christmas Day every time we get a new firmware update.
 
Boogie291 said:
For those who have both units what is the difference is it really big like day and night difference? I am asking this because I have Ultra and I just want to make sure before I will by the Axe Fx II.
Click to expand...

I have both and still use them both. I think most experienced guitarists would agree that it is a major improvement in sound, feel, and realism. It's also the one that currently benefits from Cliff's continuous modeling breakthroughs. And a bonus is that it has some different amp models and new ultra-res speaker cabs that you'll love. Does the average listener know the difference? Probably not, but most of us play better when we're enjoying our sound. For me it's been worth every penny to own and keep both.
 
I have both the Ultra and the II, and the difference is huge. I loved the Ultra, but the II is truly a game changer, for me. I would be very surprised if you didn't also find the II that much more awesome than the Ultra.

Cheers,

Lee
 
I had an Ultra and loved it. But when I went to a II a year ago, I couldn't believe the evolution, and the II has only grown more amazing since then.

I sold the Ultra afterwards, and it made up for what it cost for me to get the II; what's not to love? Go for it.
 
at this point yes the difference is pretty large. I used to own the ultra and when going to the 2 the differences were not huge and the difference has grown drastically over the years. As was said above the feel has so much to do with it and that is not something you hear
 
If you never purchased the II the Ultra would probably be just fine. I've had the Ultra since 2008 and I adore it. I just got the II-XL a couple of weeks ago. It is much more dynamic. It has tons of preset room. The headphone out and USB interface use are fantastic. I eliminated, yet another piece of gear... my audio interface. The editor is so much easier, stable, etc. Then there are the tone matching features. I use my Ultra live and now use the XL in the studio. I'm kind of wondering how long that will last though. The XL is that good I may have to get one for live.
 
The only way I'd suggest an Ultra over a II is if you're either really tight for cash or if you want to use the Axe strictly for effects. If you just want to use it as a souped up Eventide rack, then you might be just fine with the Ultra.
 
Boogie291 said:
For those who have both units what is the difference is it really big like day and night difference? I am asking this because I have Ultra and I just want to make sure before I will by the Axe Fx II.
Click to expand...
I love them both. I actually miss my ultra and was considering getting one to have just in case. Absurd I know but i do love the ultras tone. The axe II is better.
 
I have an ultra and the II. The II is lot easy to dial in and much better for getting in-the-room amp tones. For playing live, the II gets you much closer to the sound of a real amp -- the Ultra sounds great, but does not sound as much like an amp. (This not necessarily a bad thing. I got a lot of compliments on my tone being close to the recording with the Ultra.). For recording, I think you can get as good tones out of the Ultra as the II. There aren't as many amp models or features, but there is plenty in there to get just about any tone you want. The II is a better box but the Ultra is still pretty good.
 
I had an Ultra and upgraded to the AxeFX II. At firmware v5.0 the AxeFX II was way out ahead of the Ultra IMO. Since then there have been some rather significant improvements and at the current v16.02 it rivals any/all of the some 40+ production, vintage, and boutique amps I have owned over the past 35 years. IMO - if you have the coin to spend then the AxeFX II / XL is a major upgrade from the Standard / Ultra models (and that's saying something as the Std/Ultra is an amazing sounding modeling and effects platform).

It's worth noting that the amp modeling and IR resolution are not the only recipients of Cliff's continued development efforts. The compressor block (studio comp enhanced & 2nd pedal type added), chorus block (dimension type), delay block (2290 type), drive block (all Tube Screamer based circuits), graphic EQ block (fixed and variable Q types, passive types), and the reverb algorithms have improved (from what was an already fantastic reverb) and will be seeing yet another improvement in the next firmware release per a recent post by Cliff.

Oh - there are more than a few new features in the amp block from the Std/Ultra block (major understatement here) but there are a couple worth mentioning IMO.
First - Cliff recently added a 'VariAC' function that allows the user to change the supply (wall) voltage from default (100%) to anywhere from 50% to 150% IIRC (or - well outside safe operating voltage in either direction out here in the real world). This parameter can have a subtle to dramatic effect on the response and character of any amp model.
Second - a bias modulating tremolo effect has been added to the amp block. If you've ever played a pre-1963 Fender Vibrato amp or perhaps an early Valco or Ampeg amp with tremolo this addition will require no explanation. If not then you're in for a treat! (...We'll, assuming you dig tremolo). Very warm and musical sounding effect.

As has already been mentioned cab emulation has taken a huge leap forward between recent enhancements in in the output portion of the amp block and with UltraRes IR's.

Then of course there's the fun in exploring whatever new improvements, parameters, amps, and or features that show up with each new firmware revision. There's no overstating the fun factor here. :D

Yep - the II is definitely an upgrade. :)
 
I don't think you'll be disappointed with the II. It is definitely an improvement on the feature set side as well as the amp realism side. Comments like "it blows the Ultra out of the water" are a bit of hyperbole. The Ultra and Standard were declared as "as real as it can possibly get" during their heyday. So I guess the II is even "realer than it can possibly get". :)

But I will say this: I gigged an Ultra for a year back when they came out and it was just fine. However, compared to a real tube amp, I chose and went back to tube amps. I can't say the same thing now about the II, especially at firmwares 13 and above. I actually prefer the II to real amps. Before firmware 13 I could have gone either way, and did.
 
As a former Standard user, and then I had an Ultra, then finally II, it's an evolution of the product. But back in the Standard/Ultra days, every user was gushing about how 'real' the amp sounds were and how amazing the effects sounded. Those statements are still true as far as I'm concerened. It didn't suddenly become a bad product once the next model arrived. Sure if you can afford it, get the latest version, but either way, you're going to do just fine.
 
Karl Houseknecht said:
I don't think you'll be disappointed with the II. It is definitely an improvement on the feature set side as well as the amp realism side. Comments like "it blows the Ultra out of the water" are a bit of hyperbole. The Ultra and Standard were declared as "as real as it can possibly get" during their heyday. So I guess the II is even "realer than it can possibly get". :)
Click to expand...

It's true. I love the II, but during the Ultra days people were already selling off their tube amps and giving themselves over to Fractal. Then the II comes out and it's like, "No, really, now it *really* sounds like a tube amp!". I'm quite sure when the III is out for a few years, people will be saying how the II doesn't hold a candle and that the III, "No, really, I'm serious this time, this time it really sounds like a tube amp!". Repeat the process with the IV, V, VI.....

It's just the nature of anything digital. Eventually, no matter how great it is today, it'll be considered obsolete at some point.

Then again, that doesn't meant that older digital gear is bad today. What sounded awesome in 1994 or 2004 probably still sounds awesome today. Some digital gear is sought after, such as a vintage rack digital delays, ADA racks, etc.
 
I had a pair of Ultras back in the day, and while ok, I wasn't thrilled and used them more for convenience, than them blowing my previous rigs away. The Axe II was again, ok, until FW 9, at which point it became exponentially better. I'm still on FW 15.02, but it compared to the Ultra is not a fair comparison, the II is much better in every way. If I were buying today, I'd go XL because while more expensive, it will retain more of its overall value on resale later if need be.
 
luke said:
I had a pair of Ultras back in the day, and while ok, I wasn't thrilled and used them more for convenience, than them blowing my previous rigs away. The Axe II was again, ok, until FW 9, at which point it became exponentially better. I'm still on FW 15.02, but it compared to the Ultra is not a fair comparison, the II is much better in every way. If I were buying today, I'd go XL because while more expensive, it will retain more of its overall value on resale later if need be.
Click to expand...

I started with FW15.02 I believe. I recently upgraded to 16.02. It was a HUGE improvement!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom