Axe-FX III & resale value of AXFX2 after AX8 release?

M

mischa.sera

Member
Recently, I reluctantly sold an Axe-FX II Mark I (due to financial constraints), but am going to make another purchase ASAP.
Now I'm scoping the constantly shifting landscape of products, and wanted to open a few questions to the forum for speculation...

1) The the original Axe-Fx came out in, what, 2005? 2006? Ultra in 2007, Axe Fx 2 in 2011, XL in 2014...
People who purchased a Standard or Ultra right before the II was announced probably don't want to make the same mistake this cycle ;P
So, given this timeline, when do people expect to see an Axe-Fx III?

2) What are the current average resale values of each Axe-FX model?
How might the release of the AX8 impact the resale values of the other Axe-FX models, especially the Axe-FX II?
 
Don't worry about it.
Digital has never held value in high end audio or pro audio.
The Axe Fx series has been better than most.

Buy a used Axe Fx II XL.
You will get decent value out of it if there is an Axe FX III that you want to to buy.
 
I think it's going to be quite a while. We've already been told that the Sharc processors that Fractal uses are top of the line...and $500 a piece!!! There is nothing out there to rival it. So until something else is made, the AxeFx 2 is it. Once a new/better processor is made, then development on a new box can begin...
 
Question #1 has been asked a number of times around and experience shows that there is no answer as of this point in time. It's a bit of a dead-end question.

For the sake of accuracy, I would like to counter that some digital has held its value although these items are few and far between. The Lexicon PCM42 comes to mind.
 
If you buy used, you might be able to find a good enough deal that takes the edge off the paranoia. I recently bought a MK I for 1300 off craigslist. If you scour craigslist across the country, you'd be surprised who might ship you theirs if you can prove you're not a scammer. We have no way of knowing what unannounced products will do to resale value, but with whatever you decide to buy, i doubt the resale value will drop 80% overnight.
 
BrianJ said:
Once a new/better processor is made, then development on a new box can begin...
Click to expand...

I might be convinced to part with +$500 if Fractal could insert a 3rd Sharc and make good use of it... I'm just thinking about how the PC industry evolved when issues presented themselves. Higher clocks and parallel processing where the order of the day until thermal limits cropped up. I package electronics in my day job and, frankly, I've looked inside my AxeFX and the thermal solution works great but it's not particularly inspired...

Let's over-clock the crap out of the current AxeFX and toss in some heatpipe passive cooling, for fun! :)

Just teasing: This product is awesome and it breaks my heart to think that we have to wait on a silicon vendor before we can see the next magic box that Cliff can crank out!
 
You'll drive yourself batty if you look forward as to what's next. You have to look at what you're replacing. FWIW in spite of recently getting an XL my Ultra still kicks serious butt and is my choice for live at the moment.
 
An additional processor dedicated to spillover, and maybe increased looping time. Other than that, I think we'll be on the II series for a while.
 
no one knows when the III will come.

with technology, better to buy the best for your current needs and keep as long as you can.
In your case, since you seem worried about future Axe version revisions, I'd buy a secondhand axe-fx II now, and if you want to buy the "next best thing" whenever the axe III is released, you can sell at a lesser loss and upgrade.

I bought the Ultra a couple of weeks before the II came. If I was to sell the Ultra today and buy an XL, it would not make sense for me financially.
I still use a 7 year old iphone, just because it works for me. Same for my laptop, 7 years old and still as good as day one for my needs. Try not to fall into the upgrade/obsolescence trap if you can avoid it.

My 2 cents...
 
Wow, I made a really long post. Don't need to read it. My motto is similar to elkabyle's, but I try to point out the principal of diminished returns. Will the Axe-FX VII be any better than the Axe-FX IV? My point of view comes from comparing the Ultra to the XL.


I don't see myself ever upgrading until my unit breaks beyond repair. Even in that case I would probably just buy a used replacement. In terms of guitar tone, and for a modeller, if you be honest with yourself, the Ultra was already very close to the mark. You could think of it in terms of percentage accuracy or whatever. Did the axe-fx ultra sound like a trombone:)? No, it sounds like a guitar. That instantly puts it into the high 90's for me. Then, you can start dissecting other elements of the tone, the attack, thump, decay... while they were not "matched" or calibrated to real amps, they still represented what electric guitar tones are, and so I would hazard that if there were was such a way to assign a percentage to the modeller's accuracy, it would be somewhere at 98% for the Ultra/Standard. Does that sound too high? give it some thought.

You get to the point of diminished returns eventually. Fractal has said on so many occasions now that:
1) "G3'd amps sound the same as the real amps" and
2) "Ultra-res IRs sound the same as the mic'd cab".

Based on above, lets say the axe-Fx II gives 100% accurate tone (allowing for odd incorrect values and tweaks that will be amended in future FW). That's a tonne of work on Fractal's part for only 2% improvement, but that area is prime habitat for picky guitar people

I have an XL+ now. I think I get better tone out of it than my ultra (very difficult to tell as I moved house when the XL arrived. My Ultra patches were made for my previous listening environment), but a lot of that has to do with:
1) The user interface is more conducive to tone shaping. I think the tonestack knobs are more responsive. And there are some powerful additional parameters (e.g. the trims, saturation, fat switch)
2) Factory cabs are a lot better than before. I don't need to use many 3rd party IRs
3) Various effects modes that sound good at default
4) generally, less EQ/effect blocks required to achieve the end result

I don't think the amp / cab modelling in the next generation of axe-fx is going to sound any "better" than the current models. I predict that the unit will include more options, ease of use, additional amp models and other stuff that will be perceived as lending to superior amp/cab tone. Perhaps the next gen might have superior pitch shifting or something (e.g. 1 DSP dedicated to it).. oh and a Klon - 1 alien technology DSP just for that as well :).
 
visualrocker69 said:
Recently, I reluctantly sold an Axe-FX II Mark I (due to financial constraints), but am going to make another purchase ASAP.
Now I'm scoping the constantly shifting landscape of products, and wanted to open a few questions to the forum for speculation...

1) The the original Axe-Fx came out in, what, 2005? 2006? Ultra in 2007, Axe Fx 2 in 2011, XL in 2014...
People who purchased a Standard or Ultra right before the II was announced probably don't want to make the same mistake this cycle ;P
So, given this timeline, when do people expect to see an Axe-Fx III?

2) What are the current average resale values of each Axe-FX model?
How might the release of the AX8 impact the resale values of the other Axe-FX models, especially the Axe-FX II?
Click to expand...

No
 
JJunkie said:
Fractal has said on so many occasions now that:
1) "G3'd amps sound the same as the real amps" and
2) "Ultra-res IRs sound the same as the mic'd cab".
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see what Cliff has to say when new firmware improvements come out.

With statements like what he has said above, it seems that he has only left himself room for 'tube amp feel' improvement.............unless of course the next firmware will suddenly sound even better than the actual tube amps! lol
 
This is something I worried when I was getting ready to purchase mine. I stopped sweating when I realize how amazing the mkII is. To be honest, I don't think I can ever use the axe fx II to its full potential. It meets my needs and even though I'll salivate for the III I can't even imagine how or why I might need it haha
 
willowdale said:
It will be interesting to see what Cliff has to say when new firmware improvements come out.

With statements like what he has said above, it seems that he has only left himself room for 'tube amp feel' improvement.............unless of course the next firmware will suddenly sound even better than the actual tube amps! lol
Click to expand...

If you take his comments on face value then any future improvements to amp modelling may be valid but inaudible :). Of course existing presets will have to undergo re-auditioning and major retweak.
 
Even if the Axe III sounded identical to the II, I would gladly give Fractal my money for one provided I could run everything on high quality and have cpu to spare. Maybe that, and a color screen along with a silent fan ;-)
 
Last edited:
Very astute points, everyone. I greatly appreciate your input!

When I upgraded from Standard to Axe-Fx II, I did have the opportunity to A/B them briefly before shipping my Standard off to the buyer...
Initially, I actually prefered Standard's tone! It sounded more smooth/refined/hi-fi to me, and the Axe-Fx II seemed kinda brittle/raw/gritty... even abrasive by comparison. However, given time for my ears to adjust, and well over a dozen firmware updates later, it's undeniable that the realism of modeling in the Axe-Fx II by *far* surpasses that of the Standard/Ultra models.

So elkabyle & JJunkie - even though I see where you're coming from, I can't say I agree that an Axe-Fx III would not be a desirable enough upgrade (subjective though the considerations may be) provided that the improvements justify the cost difference between the two.

In contrast, when the XL was announced, I didn't find it enticing at all, because the added processing power wasn't enough of a selling point for me. But that's all factored into the price points - it's no surprise that users will gravitate towards different (higher vs lower capacity) models based on their needs/applications, the kinds of presets they use/design, etc.

So, in short, if the Axe-Fx III offered something really revolutionary and groundbreaking as far as the fundamentals of amp modeling and effects go, I wouldn't hesitate to upgrade. If it was just loads more features, bells/whistles, CPU, etc... I'd keep the Axe-FX II and pass it by.

Hell, I'm even thinking the AX8 might be better suited to my needs because dual amps isn't something terribly essential to me, though it is rather appealing. Hm. Decisions, decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom