Axe-Fx III: I went with the Mk II over the Mk II Turbo

You are unlikely to see "Turbo only" features beyond having more room for stuff if you use the most demanding blocks. The number of Turbo owners are probably quite small compared to Axe-Fx 3 owners.

That extra HP is nice when you need it, tho.... šŸ˜Š

Absolutely nothing is future proof in digital modelers. You will eventually see the Axe-Fx IV, then maybe an Axe-Fx IV Mk2...

"More future-resistant" is how I think of it. When you buy tech, you are buying a perishable product. Personally can't wait to see what an FM9 Mk2 or Mk2 Turbo will look like, with faster processors and the bigger scribble strip screens when it arrives, and the FX4 as well. Likely have a while to wait, but looking forward to them....
 
You are unlikely to see "Turbo only" features beyond having more room for stuff if you use the most demanding blocks. The number of Turbo owners are probably quite small compared to Axe-Fx 3 owners.

Absolutely nothing is future proof in digital modelers. You will eventually see the Axe-Fx IV, then maybe an Axe-Fx IV Mk2...
This is obvious, and this is why I replied when I read previous post about people getting the turbo for more future proof.
I got the TURBO not for future proof, but just because it was a cheap plus as I wrote.
 
Regular MkII user here. I've never even come close to maxing out the CPU. That being said, as long as they don't write factory presets for the Turbo which would put non-turbo units over the top, it's cool.

Regardless, soon enough there will be either a "Turbo-Plus" or an Axe-IV, so I wouldn't worry about it either way.
 
I just wanted the extra 'bling'šŸŒŸ and it was a few dollars less on sale. And I've had every iteration new except the standard waaaaay back. Part of "support it or it goes away" philosophy, tho I doubt that will happen with this amazing box.
 
The CPU is not the limiting factor because you can cram so much stuff in a single preset. The limiting factor is being able to control it ad hoc. You can add so many effects, but that's only useful if you have the ability to switch them on/off through a controller.
Thatā€™s where having multiple presets starts to shine. I canā€™t imagine anyone using every pedal in a kitchen-sink preset in a particular song, so pushing the CPU to the limit isnā€™t necessary. Just have several ā€œbathroom sinkā€ presets that are a little more streamlined, so thereā€™s enough switches and scenes.

But I try to be a minimalist and donā€™t need, or want, every effect in one preset, because, well, I have lots of preset slots available.
 
Thatā€™s where having multiple presets starts to shine. I canā€™t imagine anyone using every pedal in a kitchen-sink preset in a particular song, so pushing the CPU to the limit isnā€™t necessary. Just have several ā€œbathroom sinkā€ presets that are a little more streamlined, so thereā€™s enough switches and scenes.

But I try to be a minimalist and donā€™t need, or want, every effect in one preset, because, well, I have lots of preset slots available.
"bathroom sink" lol!
 
I get away with it because I use RJM's GT/22 + add. switches.

View attachment 98468

View attachment 98469
Signal path does remind me the attached image, a pedal board of a great french guitarist.
Guess this is why for the time being a fm3 is largely covering my needs as I wouldnt put in a patch what I wouldnt use in the real world. I just need one or two more patches.
 

Attachments

  • 275126972_1591829937860464_9180577153299135216_n.jpg
    275126972_1591829937860464_9180577153299135216_n.jpg
    243.2 KB · Views: 20
Just wondering if and when stuff will stop working for the mk II
It won't - at some point in the future, new fw updates will not be available to older gen units - mk I/II Axe3s are not older gen (legacy) units at this point like Axefx2s are.

My Axefx2 still functions as good as ever but does not get new fw updates.
 
Last edited:
For me it is easy. I got my mark II in April of 2021 and that was all that was available.

I came from a refrigerator sized rack with 4 preamps 3 power amps, plus separate delay, chorus, Reverb, etc units. I had my rack setup by Bob Bradshaw and most things were patches, but I could add in a few things like verb or harmonizers to certain patches due to limitations with my line amps and switching. So I never get above 55% on my Mark II patches even if I use a single fullres IR.

If you don't have one massive do everything patch a Mark II should be plenty of power.

James
 
I see people singing the praises of FRIRs. Was the cost to CPU usage greater in the past? I saw people saying it took their 40% CPU presets up to 70%

Like I said, I wasn't about to get on yet another waitlist lol.
It takes 11% for each FullRes IR. If you use 2 cab blocks and 4 fullres, then maybe that is possible, but that would sound like a washy mess to me

James
 
Extremely happy with my Axe lll non Turbo, I don't ever want my tones to ever change, thats how happy I am with it, and I'm at 60% cpu
 
apa.png
I've always had the latest hardware, but the MKII turbo gives me an 18 cpu that's sure the big WIN =)
... and this is 4 scenes
 
Exactly rightā€¦ā€¦$200 is not much of a premium to future proof your Axe a little bit.
This is a good point that can be related to closing sales. When a customer is comfortable spending "X", but not "X + Y", with "Y" being a small % more, sometimes the focus is on the total price. But really it should only be on that small %, and what you actually are getting for your extra money.
In this case, as has been stated, and worth repeating, it's 10% more money for 25% faster processor speed. Seems like a good value.
 
Back
Top Bottom