Does the Axe-FX II mean no more audio interfaces / preamps?

[Axisman5150]

That's why I cling to the Axe FX ... for the first time since Les Paul took us electric, we can go BIGGER, BADDER, MORE BEAUTIFUL AND BREAK BOUNDARIES. I am searching for this new sound that in many ways is better than any tube amp and speaker. The Axe FX is the only thing I've found on earth that can deliver this consistently.

And most of all, energized and beautiful new sounds will take you to NEW PLACES musically...and that's what it's about..an even cooler sound that delivers a new musicality. When you move from your acoustic guitar to your amp you're inspired to play things that are completely different , or from low gain to 11 on an amp. It's like getting a whole new instrument in your hands. That's what the Axe FX and beyond is...a new instrument...and even your amp at 111 if you want.

Well said relaxo! Cliff's innovation with his products ARE leading the music industry to newer boundaries, it will be just a matter of time before Fractal will be a "house hold" name. I also agree that newer sounds inspire, just spinning through the dial on some of the stock presets have sparked an A-HA moment that leads to writing a new riff.

 

[bertbacharat]

So anyways, is there any advantage to running the axe-fx II through a better converter via balanced analog outs? I always used the analog outs of my axe-fx ultra in the studio to my apogee rosetta, I never liked the spdif out.

 

[wake911]

Many players who are younger then 30-35 may have never played tube amp ever. They only know the JCM 800 sound from POD(xt), Digitech, Zoom, Amplitube, GuitarRig ... This generation still have desire for better sound and since are familiar with computers they have no problem using something like Axe-FX.
I know it's a though thing to stay, but "ONLY TUBE" guys will start to die out in 10-15 years. There will be no more fighting over tube vs digital.

To preface my statements, I am 30, and all my band members have been younger than me.

I also disagree with this statement. Everyone i have been in a band with has had a tube amp. Some were nicer (roadking) than others (Guitar Research) but everyone loved the sound and feel of the tubes. I will have a tube amp until the day i die probably. There is something cool about the heat and glow of tubes. And for "that tone" of my amp, i can't quite dial it in on my ultra (probably my fault not axe's) but i can instantly do it for my am, which is cool. I love the axe, can't wait for axe II, but the tube amp hasn't died yet, i don't see it dying anytime soon either. People dig old things. For better or for worse.

Can't wait to test the axe ii with protools 8 and see if i can get it to work or not. Might just have to have my mbox plugged in at the same time as plugging the axe in...only time will tell!!

 

[relaxo]

So anyways, is there any advantage to running the axe-fx II through a better converter via balanced analog outs? I always used the analog outs of my axe-fx ultra in the studio to my apogee rosetta, I never liked the spdif out.

If you want to capture the truest picture of what the Axe FX is communicating, use the digital outs into the computer. However, as you've said, most engineers have found the SPDIF outs to simply sound "wrong" still to our ears at this early stage of digital amp modeling. Maybe it's an inferior sound, or maybe we're just not used to it yet. Regardless, the vast majority of people who record don't like that sound.

Using a better converter than the apogee rosetta to translate the Axe analog outs will give you a truer picture of what the analog outs are communicating usually. Using a worse converter than the apogee rosetta to translate the Axe analog outs will give you a more colored and usually less detailed picture of what the analog outs are communicating usually. Point is, everything you change in your chain will change the sound in some way and it's up to you to decide what you like best. Are you a Coke or Pepsi man?

The AD and the DA converters on the first Axe FX series were decent. I often experimented with using different high end preamps going into the Axe I and then using the SPDIF outs into my system, ran the signal out to analog through great converters like apogee rosettas, through very expensive outboard iron transformers and circuitry and back into the apogees. I like Coke and I like that fat, hi-fi sound. Many Axe-haters hate that sound. They prefer the duller sound of tube amps with restricted EQs, old speakers, low quality guitar cables that remove more detail, etc etc. To them, that is the sound that makes them happy...and billions of others...kind of like the Motown Sound vs No Doubt or Steely Dan.

 

[relaxo]

And for "that tone" of my amp, i can't quite dial it in on my ultra (probably my fault not axe's) but i can instantly do it for my am, which is cool.

What about when you record that amp speaker vs Axe FX recordings. Do you still prefer the tube amp?

Often a loud live tube amp grinding in the corner of a room will sound cooler than the AXE FX through your monitor speakers...but will that live cabinet still sound better through the mic wherever it's placed, into the preamp and into the the recording medium and then out the studio monitors again? No, I find that 75% of the time the AXE will sound better through the some nice outboard then and to the studio monitors, and without the hauling around and trip to the tube repairman and crackles and buzzing etc etc etc.

BTW, it's widely acknowledged in the studio engineering world that mic'ing guitar cabinets up to get a phenomenal sound is one of the most challenging music recording jobs. Therefore, so much more for the inexperienced working with not a $30,000 recording chain, but a $1000 chain of gear. The Axe FX really shines in this scenario.

 

[bkrumme]

What about when you record that amp speaker vs Axe FX recordings. Do you still prefer the tube amp?

Often a loud live tube amp grinding in the corner of a room will sound cooler than the AXE FX through your monitor speakers...but will that live head still sound better through the mic wherever it's placed, into the preamp and into the the recording medium and then out the studio monitors again? No, I find that 75% of the time the AXE will sound better (to me) through the some nice outboard then and to the studio monitors, and without the hauling around and trip to the tube repairman and crackles and buzzing etc etc etc.

This is something I can get behind. Because the signal chain is so simple with the Axe and you don't have to mess with mics and phase issues, recording becomes much easier.

 

[wake911]

I have great recordings with the My Mesa Express Tube Amp and "My tone" is super easy to get in room and recorded. I'm normally a low gain player. I can get my tone dialed in with a recording studio in 5-10 minutes, seriously. That's at local studio here i work with a bunch, as well as pro studio in Nashville. Virtualyl identical tone at each place, with minimal set-up and dialing in time.
But if i waver AT ALL from "that tone" it is tough to find the new tone in a relatively timely manner of speaking, and that is where I love the axe. I can get very good results in no time at all. And only limited in quality by my skill at tweaking the axe, not by the axe itself. Whereas with my tube amp, what it does it does fantastically, but that is basically all it does, one or two trick ponys, versus a basicalyl limitless ponies in the Axe

That said, i won't get rid of it, cause i love "that tone" that is in my opinion the perfect tone for my guitar, my fingers, my pedals, my tastes. But i don't always want that tone, and that plus the ease of transporting an axe, ease of getting new tones in studio, ease of switching tones in cover band, + about a million other things is why i bought Ultra, sold Ultra and am waiting for Axe II

 

[andree.theander]

So anyways, is there any advantage to running the axe-fx II through a better converter via balanced analog outs? I always used the analog outs of my axe-fx ultra in the studio to my apogee rosetta, I never liked the spdif out.

Okay... this is intresting... Anyone else with this experience?

I've just trying to play through the analog outputs into the interface and I thought it sounded amazing so I decided to buy one and simply use the spdif to avoid expensive d/a converters and stuff...

 

[levipeto]

Allright! I am convinced! I 'll take it back

 

[jerotas]

Yes if you NEVER plan to record anything other than the Axe-Fx possibly you could ditch the preamp. What I'm thinking is you probably won't be able to do zero-latency monitoring using the USB input though. You'd have to turn on "input monitoring" in Sonar for example, which delays the signal (and that really really sucks to use). However built into most $200+ standalone interfaces is the ability to monitor with zero-latency the input from anything plugged into it. I cannot record without this. It's like going back to a 4-track.

Is there someway a way to have it when using the USB and no interface? Total dealbreaker if not.

 

[rickgk]

Yes if you NEVER plan to record anything other than the Axe-Fx possibly you could ditch the preamp. What I'm thinking is you probably won't be able to do zero-latency monitoring using the USB input though. You'd have to turn on "input monitoring" in Sonar for example, which delays the signal (and that really really sucks to use). However built into most $200+ standalone interfaces is the ability to monitor with zero-latency the input from anything plugged into it. I cannot record without this. It's like going back to a 4-track.

Is there someway a way to have it when using the USB and no interface? Total dealbreaker if not.

Yeah i figured once i get the axe2 i'll use the usb for recording and reamping but still have the main out plugged into my mbox 2 for zero latency monitoring because i just can't deal with latency.
I could mute the usb inputs whilst recording and use them for playback and reamping only...as well as axeedit of course.

 

[RJSAudio.]

Yeah i figured once i get the axe2 i'll use the usb for recording and reamping but still have the main out plugged into my mbox 2 for zero latency monitoring because i just can't deal with latency.
I could mute the usb inputs whilst recording and use them for playback and reamping only...as well as axeedit of course.

Well how much latency can you deal with? Right now I go through my interface, AND use the input monitoring in Logic (muting the signal from my interface) and I can play/record with 3 ms latency, which I can definitely deal with. Which is really good for me b/c I like to use the verb and delay in logic a lot of times.

 

[jerotas]

Well how much latency can you deal with? Right now I go through my interface, AND use the input monitoring in Logic (muting the signal from my interface) and I can play/record with 3 ms latency, which I can definitely deal with. Which is really good for me b/c I like to use the verb and delay in logic a lot of times.

I don't know what latency I have in Sonar with my MOTU, but it's definitely more than 3ms because it's near impossible to record with and make sure you have precise timing. Zero latency is a must. Not sure I understand your point anyway though, because I use the verb and delay in Sonar as well. But I sure as hell want to know if my timing is off before playing it back, so I need the zero-latency. Having said that, the one cable re-amping is a very cool addition. But that's the only way I'd use the USB.

 

[jerotas]

oops double post

 

[RJSAudio.]

Hmmm...well I'm running a nice MacBook Pro (i7), through a ProFire 2626, at 48 kHz with an I/O Buffer Size of 32 samples, and that leaves me with 2.2 ms latency, which is pretty much unnoticeable. The buffer size is the most important.

 

[jerotas]

Hmmm...well I'm running a nice MacBook Pro (i7), through a ProFire 2626, at 48 kHz with an I/O Buffer Size of 32 samples, and that leaves me with 2.2 ms latency, which is pretty much unnoticeable. The buffer size is the most important.

Lucky you Maybe higher latencies are common with PC cards? I don't know. I don't screw with the settings when it's working.

 

[knoll]

Also, remember that in air (at sea level) the sound travels one meter in about 2.94ms (one foot in about 0.90ms). Headphones are your friend if you need to go even closer to "zero-latency".

 

[Rotaholic]

Lucky you Maybe higher latencies are common with PC cards? I don't know. I don't screw with the settings when it's working.

You are using ASIO drivers right? I use sonar and have zero, well no detectable latency. The more things you have running the more latency you will get. If you have just one track armed you should be good to go. If you have vstis running with mutliple effects on all tracks and master buss and verbs/delays etc you will get bad latency (unless you have a serious kickarse DAW) Make sure you run ASIO, 256 should be fine, if you need to track later on in a project, if you press "CTRL Shift Y" this disables all plugins and your good to record, then just press it again to re-enable them and your done

 

[jerotas]

You are using ASIO drivers right? I use sonar and have zero, well no detectable latency. The more things you have running the more latency you will get. If you have just one track armed you should be good to go. If you have vstis running with mutliple effects on all tracks and master buss and verbs/delays etc you will get bad latency (unless you have a serious kickarse DAW) Make sure you run ASIO, 256 should be fine, if you need to track later on in a project, if you press "CTRL Y" this disables all plugins and your good to record, then just press it again to re-enable them and your done

Sounds promising and I'll try it on the next song. Not only do I use tons of plugins, but I usually heavy SoftSynths like for drums, yes I am using ASIO. On the rare occasion that I listen to the input echo it's latent enough that I hate it. Thanks!

 

[Rotaholic]

Sounds promising and I'll try it on the next song. Not only do I use tons of plugins, but I usually heavy SoftSynths like for drums, yes I am using ASIO. On the rare occasion that I listen to the input echo it's latent enough that I hate it. Thanks!

Yup thats your problem then, the CTRL + Shift + Y trick is the quickest easiest way to go, otherwise you can use the freeze track option which is awesome for freeing up cpu, or the old bounce track way, but its hard to undo. With a frozen track you can just thaw/unfreeze then adjust and then refreeze. Hopefully you will be rocking now without the horrible latency