AxeFX II Clips Master List

While Scott has a mild propensity for hyperbole :), the II is pretty darn cool. You have to play it to understand.
 
rickgk said:
Either way I think mickdoo deserves an apology, the responses of some of the senior members in this thread was just rude. He didn't state that the 2 wasn't better than the 1, with all the interface improvements etc I'm sure it is, he was simply speaking tonally the improvements are most likely minor, and every point he made was fair and valid, and not negative IMO.
Click to expand...
I apologize to mickdoo. I lose my patience with people who say stuff like: "out of the box, it does not seem to offer much in the way of real world difference over the Standard and Ultra" when they've never taken it out of the frikkin' box....
 
solo-act said:
I apologize to mickdoo. I lose my patience with people who say stuff like: "out of the box, it does not seem to offer much in the way of real world difference over the Standard and Ultra" when they've never taken it out of the frikkin' box....
Click to expand...

I said doesn't SEEM to.....time will tell.
I hope I spend some time with it and end up singing its praises like I do with the Standard. The Standard has changed the way I work. Over the last many years I had been using a miked Marshall and Boogie for recording pretty much everything, with a GSP1101 or Pod Pro sprinkled in here or there. Now that I have the Standard, I rarely turn on the amps, and NEVER turn on the GSP and Pod. Moreover, I find myself sitting and playing for the sheer pleasure far more often than I used to because of the Axe.
 
I think the problem here is the difficulty of trying to put sound and feel into words. The Axe has been the cutting edge of modeling right from the start, and each firmware update pushed the edge further. Players who raved about one update ran out of superlatives to describe the next one. Now we have the Axe II. I got to play one briefly - and it is noticeably better, in all the ways previously described. I don't know how to explain that what was once "best" is now "better," how amps that were "nailed" before are now even more "nailed." How can "real" be more "real," would it be "realier?"

Anything I try to say would appear to contradict what came before, and yet I find the II to be better. I have no doubt almost everyone who plays one will agree. Now comes the problem of trying to describe each firmware update!
 
Scott Peterson said:
No offense taken, neither your opinion nor any other. Everyone is more than welcome to hold any opinion they choose and express it freely. Whether or not I agree or not is of no consequence and it's not any pissing contest with me. I am fine with anyone disagreeing with me. I do ask folks to hold their opinions at bay about what the II is or isn't until they have tried one. That's the real acid test. I think a lot of folks that think I am stark raving mad will suddenly think, '...whoa... he's not crazy after all!'

I've always been very upfront about the negatives with the first series of Axe-FX's. Lack of knobs, lack of USB, lack of headphones, substantial learning curve, and so on. From my earliest posts on, I never shied away from such discussions here and elsewhere.

I am fully aware of the perception some folks hang on me; but a rabid lap dog kool-aid drinking fan boi I am really not. I just shoot straight, call it like I see it (hear it) and back up what I say with context and real life experience. Nothing more or less. Regarding the Gen1 Axe-FX; have I always felt the positives fully outshined the negatives? Yes I have. And I have never backed off that opinion nor will I.

The response and actual timbre of the II is indeed far beyond what the Gen1 boxes can do. The response of the high end, the more 3D sensation of the tone, and the dynamics, bloom and ease of dialing tones is leaps and bounds beyond what the Axe-FX Gen1 can do. Add in the interface improvements - it is indeed a carefully thought out, obvious nod to user input over the past years. It's like going from a very workable farm horse to a thoroughbred - everything is seemingly the same from the outside, but once you get in the saddle, you had better have a firm hold on the stirrups. This thing has incredible response to your input. The touch response is at *least* as good as the finest amps I've ever owned and/or used. And I've owned some very serious big boy amps.

This box is a massive evolutionary step into the future. That's no bullshit either. Wait till you try this box yourself for 5 minutes and then you tell me if I'm loony or not. Hint: I am not.
Click to expand...

The same could be said of FW 10.05 vs FW 11.00

Could you give us a comparison between the Ultra FW 11.00 vs Axe-fx II?
 
mickdoo22 said:
Thanks Rick.
By the way......I plan on buying one as well......WHY?.....because I am a certified gear slut for one, and secondly, I grew up a few houses away from Cliff, and I can't help but want to support what he is doing......half of us here wish we had the brains and talent to have pulled it off ourselves.
That said, my point was simply that I am somewhat confused how a month ago, the Standard and Ultra were spot on in modeling a whole host of amps, and pretty much universally regarded as the best of breed, and now the FX II is supposed to put it to shame? I have the Standard, and I agree it is a killer unit, and it's hard to imagine in getting much better.
I wasn't trying to piss on anyone or start a fire here, I was just asking the question.....no offense intended.
I will add though.....Solo-Act.....you REALLY need to relax son.
Click to expand...

You stated my feelings exactly. When I purchased my Standard a year ago, it was a unbelieveable leap in technology from my modeling gear, which played and sounded toy-like in comparision. At the time, I was using a Marshall JVM, with a boatload of fx-2 months later, all gone because of this box. I've owned other Marshalls, Deizels, Fenders, too many fx to mention. This replaced them all. No more trying new gear (amps/fx)-there was no point when you have the best in one box.

I've been listening to the clips from the new box (thanks for making/posting them), and while the playing sounds really good I just can't detect that difference other folks claim to be hearing. I admit I haven't played a II for feel yet, but my Standard has always impressed me with pick-attack sensitivity I didn't think you could get without playing into a vacuum tube amp. The subtle differences/nuances in sound are, for the most part, usually lost on a club audience or in a studio mix, where a lot of the magic is done at the board or post-production.

I'll probably end up with a new model someday, be it II, III, or whatever-I'm still a tonefreak. But right now the Standard is still king for me and I can't imagine it getting any better, especially after FW11.

I think some of these folks are really missing their (sold) Axe-fx.
 
Headphones vs Soundsystem?

peerhan said:
Earlier in this thread there was dialogue discussing how the Axe FX didn't sound as good using headphones or in-ears as it did out in the house through a venue's speakers.

Why is that?

I'm always a little self conscious onstage hearing what I do in my ear. Then I take the bud out of my ear and realize that it really sounds great. Right now I run stereo directly out of my Axe FX. It really does sound great. However, is there something I need to do to make it sound as good in my in-ear mix, or when I record to a DAW? In the previous instances it sounds.... digital... or something. As if the crunch of the gain is not integrating with the signal.

Would a rack mounted amp help this somehow? Do you all know what I'm talking about? What do you do?
Click to expand...

I just started working with IEM's. I've been through one rehearsal and one set and I've been pleasantly surprised. I don't find them lacking. In fact, I'm really happy so far.

There are two things that I think are important. First, I think you need a good reverb to give your tone a room to live in. You can do it in the AxeFX, but I'm looking at picking up a portable mixer with a decent live reverb so I can separate any reverb I add as part of my tone from the reverb needed for my IEM's. I take my IEM mix and an AxeFX signal from Output 2, mix those two, and send them to my IEM's.

The second is having a set of "reference quality" IEM's. I picked up a set of j-phonics (In-ear monitors. Professional Choice. j-phonic) made by Sensaphonics Japan. They present my guitar, and music for that matter, essentially the same as my Dynaudio near-fields. The mids are all in the right place and everything is balanced. All that they lack is a bit of really high-end sizzle. It's just as important to get a flat response from IEM's as it is with FRFR monitors. Based on what I've read on Head-fi, it seems that most IEM's purposefully colour the sound, just as home entertainment systems often do.

I'm looking forward to working with the headphone output on the AxeFX II.

Terry.
 
Hello everybody

This is my first post here, though I've been lurking for quite a while now.

I can't offer an opinion on how (and if) the Axe II will be a vast improvement tone and feel-wise vs the Ultra. I am on the G66 waiting list a couple of days after the announcement and I hope to have it in my hands reasonably soon, but I don't own a Std or Ultra. For me the point is moot really. I was planning on upgrading from my GSP and, in reality, waiting for Fractal to possibly come up with something new. For me, even the "other" improvements (USB, headphones, improved 4CM, variable input impedance, easier layout, etc) would be enough to place an order, since the price point remains virtually the same as the Ultra.

You see, I have tested the Ultra extensively, through a friend, and, for me, the thing had the same feel and response (let alone tone) as the best tube amps I've played. I understand this statement would be useless to anyone other than myself. Perhaps, for some people, the "Axe I" couldn't nail 100% the feel of their favorite amp. And, reading through the beta testers' reviews and opinions, perhaps Axe II is can more easily accomplish this, for more (or all) amps it "models".

It goes without saying that I'll be A/B testing the II with my friend's Ultra, except if he sells it before HIS Axe II arrives. :)

What I would like to ask Scott and the other beta-testers is this: speaking of feel/response, how much you think is due to the new input circuit? Or your view is that the new implementation of the power amp section has more to do with it?

Thanks and happy to be here!
 
The Genius Loci said:
What I would like to ask Scott and the other beta-testers is this: speaking of feel/response, how much you think is due to the new input circuit? Or your view is that the new implementation of the power amp section has more to do with it?

Thanks and happy to be here!
Click to expand...

I have no idea why or how it works to be honest. I am as Luddite as they come in terms of 'getting' the underlying technology; it just does feel better. It has a very different dynamic response to your picking and reacts differently as you roll off the volume, all in positive ways. You have to try on in person; it will be glaringly obvious within minutes if not seconds.
 
Scott Peterson said:
I have no idea why or how it works to be honest. I am as Luddite as they come in terms of 'getting' the underlying technology; it just does feel better. It has a very different dynamic response to your picking and reacts differently as you roll off the volume, all in positive ways. You have to try on in person; it will be glaringly obvious within minutes if not seconds.
Click to expand...

Hi,

I haven't tried the AF 2 yet so I have no experience to back up any opinion other than the clips posted here and elsewhere. I do, however, have experience of the AF 1 so what Scott writes about feel sounds very encouraging as I always thought the AF 1 didn't feel quite right.

Based on sound clips I'd like to say while the AF 1 sounds good, the AF 2 sounds "right".

Cheers,

Mats N
 
It really is hard to imagine how much better than an ULTRA + Firmware 11 it can get. And the feeling that it's better is giving me incredible gas
 
Last edited:
javajunkie said:
Here is a quickly of the new delay. Kind of a hybrid sound. The end shows the runaway delay. Can definitely get better than this but will get the point what you can do by just dialing in the tape delay type and tweaking a couple a parameters quickly.


Click to expand...

Thanks man, that is just what I wanted to hear from the Tape Delay block.... really nice.
 
Well thanks Casper... in fact I am focusing in on the Axe-FX II and will be reviewing it when they come out... yes indeed the Triaxis is still on the site... but so much has been updated on there I often lose count of whats being done... age you know :)

I'm not sure why this reply did not go to Casper... but there you go...
 
Last edited:
NY Guitarist said:
Same here! Triaxis is gone now, though.

I just sold all my amps including my entire Mesa rig to lighten my move to LA from NY. Looking into the Axe-Fx II to replace it all. I don't expect to be gigging, but want top quality sounds for recording.

Anyway thanks for consolidating the sound samples into a single thread. I'm all ears at this point!
Click to expand...

Glad you liked them. I sold my TriAxis too quite a few years ago... blame the rectifiers :) I never did get that recto sound from the TriAxis...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom