For those with both AXE FX II XL and AX-8....

Had both, kept the Axe II. While I don't use too many crazy patches, dual amps all the time etc, I found that I often was hitting the CPU limit a lot of times. Certainly there are things one can do to reduce CPU, switch to lower quality reverb etc, but on the II its really nice because I never really had to worry about those things.. Just created what I wanted and almost always had CPU to spare

Additionally, USB over audio is so darn nice (and fun). Just plug in one cable and I can record tracks to my DAW, I can reamp tracks to check out different settings with the DI track etc, and its all built in and that single USB cable does it all. On the AX8 you've got to run cables into the PC audio interface, its tougher to record DI and processed together etc. This was a pretty big one for me, its not about having an audio interface or budget, I have plenty, its just about ease of use and the easier it is to record something, the more I'm going to do it.

Last but not least, I really love the bias tremolo in the amp block on the II. To my ears its a more pleasing sound than using the tremolo block, more natural and organic. Its a feature I found missing on the AX8


While the AX8 form factor is great too, I have to say my MFC takes very little space too. I have the Axe II in a 4 space Gator case and it can sit off to the side of the stage, out of the way. Only thing taking up any stage space is the MFC, and it gives more control, and bigger LCD so I can read the patch name easier. I feel its also far more rugged in the event someone was jumping around on stage (not really my style music these days) like a drunk fan. Accidently step on the MFC, you'll have a patch change. Have someone step on the AX8 and you might get a patch change, or you might have the control knobs busted. Same goes with a spill.... Plus, with the AX8 I had to run cables for power, and also for sound. With my MFC its just the single ethernet cable (I don't have the XLR option as mine is older) so its a bit less as far as cords goes. Not a huge difference, but I like patching in the FOH sound, my direct monitor when I use the CLR, the mains power etc to my stage side/back MFC case
 
This is precisely what i was after. I'm thinking I'll just go with the MFC and see what happens after that.
 
Ax8 for rehearsal and small gigs, No doubt. Axe fx for studio and recording.
I own both. For big concerts i still use my tube amps plus ax8...marshall and laney all the way.
 
jamn4jc said:
I'm also a P&W (Worship) player. Used the FX for a couple of years. Jumped at the AX8 and used it for 4 months and eventually got frustrated with running out of CPU resources. I supplemented the AX8 with an external Eventide H9 and EHX mPOG, but that kind of defeats the primary goal of the AX8 (compact and self-contained). I employed all the "tricks" to stay under 88% CPU, but often needed a bit more power. It was forcing me to build too many unique presets to accommodate a single song. I went back to the XL about 4 months ago and couldn't be happier. I have the XL in a 2U Gator case and the MFC in another case. It's not a lot more gear to carry and provides a lot more functionality. I have a master template that is filled with about everything I need to cover our catalog of songs. I've also noticed that things like the Pitch (my mPOG) sound better on the XL. They should sound the same, but I think the better processors in the XL help it track better. Could be in my head, but I'm very happy with the Pitch block in the XL, whereas I was always fighting it in the AX8.
Click to expand...

Hey Man, when you say you got frustrated with resources, what kind of preset build would cause cpu issues?
I'm having a really hard time deciding on the AX8 or go all out on the AXE II/MFC. I just don't want to drop the extra $ if I don't need to.
Thank You
 
I have an AxeFX II with MFC and an AX-8... the AxeFX II stay in a rack at the studio at home, and the AX-8 goes to every show... sets up in 5 minutes, all the tone of the AxeFX II, and with Scenes and X/Y states for the amps and cabs it give all the cleans and absurd amounts gain and FX I need for live...
 
MysticTR1 said:
Hey Man, when you say you got frustrated with resources, what kind of preset build would cause cpu issues?
I'm having a really hard time deciding on the AX8 or go all out on the AXE II/MFC. I just don't want to drop the extra $ if I don't need to.
Thank You
Click to expand...

From my experience, there are a few of scenarios that will challenge the resources:

1. Don't build kitchen sink presets that include every effect you might want to use. I don't build kitchen sink presets and as a result end up using a few more presets that I would on the AxeII.

2. The Reverb block can be the biggest CPU hog. Using High quality mode and a high Echo Density value on the Reverb block take more CPU resources than Normal mode and reducing the Echo Density value. There's no way that 99% of us could hear the difference between Normal mode in with a lower Echo Density value in a live setting so, IMO, this is not really compromising the tone. If you like, or can get by with the Spring Reverb models, that uses the least CPU of the various reverb types.

3. The Drive block can be the second biggest resource hog. If you need to two drive blocks in a preset this will limit how many other effects you can add to the preset.

4. People who build really dense ambient presets complain about CPU. I do a lot of ambient stuff at Church and have never run into CPU problems. In the preset below, the Multi-Delay, Delay, and Reverb provide all the ambient options I need for live use.

Remember that with Scenes, X/Y settings, and Scene Controllers you can do a LOT of things to help manage CPU usage. For example, it you need two different drives, but don't need to turn them both on at the same time, then one Drive Block with different X/Y settings is the way to go. Or use a Scene controller to charge the Amp block's Drive parameter.

I'm sure there are other scenarios, but that's what I have encountered.

Here's one of my presets with about a much as I could cram into it. 87% CPU Is about as high as you can go before the AX8 has to shut off the Reverb block. I'm using a Spring Reverb and a mono Cab Block with this. I really don't need both the Chorus and Rotary block in this preset so I could take one out and that would give me CPU room for a more pleasing Reverb and a Stereo Cab block.

AX8.jpeg
 
ethomas1013 said:
From my experience, there are a few of scenarios that will challenge the resources:

1. Don't build kitchen sink presets that include every effect you might want to use. I don't build kitchen sink presets and as a result end up using a few more presets that I would on the AxeII.

2. The Reverb block can be the biggest CPU hog. Using High quality mode and a high Echo Density value on the Reverb block take more CPU resources than Normal mode and reducing the Echo Density value. There's no way that 99% of us could hear the difference between Normal mode in with a lower Echo Density value in a live setting so, IMO, this is not really compromising the tone. If you like, or can get by with the Spring Reverb models, that uses the least CPU of the various reverb types.

3. The Drive block can be the second biggest resource hog. If you need to two drive blocks in a preset this will limit how many other effects you can add to the preset.

4. People who build really dense ambient presets complain about CPU. I do a lot of ambient stuff at Church and have never run into CPU problems. In the preset below, the Multi-Delay, Delay, and Reverb provide all the ambient options I need for live use.

Remember that with Scenes, X/Y settings, and Scene Controllers you can do a LOT of things to help manage CPU usage. For example, it you need two different drives, but don't need to turn them both on at the same time, then one Drive Block with different X/Y settings is the way to go. Or use a Scene controller to charge the Amp block's Drive parameter.

I'm sure there are other scenarios, but that's what I have encountered.

Here's one of my presets with about a much as I could cram into it. 87% CPU Is about as high as you can go before the AX8 has to shut off the Reverb block. I'm using a Spring Reverb and a mono Cab Block with this. I really don't need both the Chorus and Rotary block in this preset so I could take one out and that would give me CPU room for a more pleasing Reverb and a Stereo Cab block.
Click to expand...

Wow thank you so much! I'm just going through the features of of the Axe II and comparing to the AX8. Sort of a need vs want list lol.
From what you have shown there the AX8 will definitely suite any preset build I would do.

As my guitar has a piezo pickup this is definitely something I would want to do. Is this also possible on the AX8?

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/y-cable-for-piezo-equipped-guitar.127168/
 
I use the XL most of the time, as it is set up at home, ready to go. The AX8 goes to gigs only, sometimes rehearsals (to test the tones). If i'm playing somewhere with shitty or no PA, i just bring an analog pedalboard and use whatever tube amp from the provided backline.
 
MysticTR1 said:
Wow thank you so much! I'm just going through the features of of the Axe II and comparing to the AX8. Sort of a need vs want list lol.
From what you have shown there the AX8 will definitely suite any preset build I would do.

As my guitar has a piezo pickup this is definitely something I would want to do. Is this also possible on the AX8?

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/y-cable-for-piezo-equipped-guitar.127168/
Click to expand...

I did not read the thread you linked, but I did open it and saw the initial image of a Stereo Y-cable and the second post with the signal path for separate processing of both signals. No, you cannot do that with the AX8 (unless you use the FX Loop for the second signal path - more on that below). The reason is that the AX8 has a single mono input and the AxeII has a stereo input. The AX8 also does not have a Mixer block (which was not used in the preset shown in that thread, but is useful for dual signal paths) and the AX8 has less instances of each Block available compared to the AxeII. For example, that preset uses 4 volume blocks (the AX8 only has 2), presumably the first two are just used for panning to separate the Left and Right inputs - which I would have done with a mixer block.

That does not mean that you cannot use a Piezo with the AX8. It just means that your options are much more limited by the mono input and by the CPU power. I occasionally us a PRS with a Piezo, and I have a preset that has Scene 1 with the signal path for the magnetic pickups and Scene 2 for the piezo. I use a single mono output cable to connect to the AX8. I do not use both the Piezo and the Magnetic pickups at the same time. If you want to use both at the same time, and have two separate signal paths, then the AX8 cannot do that. I use the toggle switch on the PRS to select either the magnetic pickups, or the Piezo. When I switch from one to the other, I have to also change the Scene on the AX8. So, the signal path looks like this:

AX8-2.jpeg

The 2 PEQ blocks are really just toggle switches (the bypass state is set to Mute for both PEQ blocks). When Scene 1 is selected, the top PEQ is enabled and the signal goes through for the Piezo. When Scene 2 is selected, the bottom PEQ block is active and the signal passes through to the Drive/Amp/Cab blocks. I also use X/Y switching on the Reverb block so I can have different reverb settings for Scene 1 and Scene 2.

Also, note that I'm at 73% CPU with this so there's not a lot of room to add more that one, or maybe two, FX Blocks to the signal path.

Another way to accomplish this in the AX8 is with the FX loop Block. That WILL allow you to separate the signal into two independent paths by using IN 2 and OUT 2 for the Piezo signal, BUT if you do that you cannot use OUT 1 to send a signal to the mains and OUT 2 to send a signal to your monitor since OUT 1 and OUT 2 are now being used as an FX loop (and the input for the Piezo). I use OUT 1 to go to my monitor and OUT 2 to go to the house. That way I can turn up my monitor without effecting the level that I am sending to the house. So, using the FX Loop for a second input, and loosing separate control for the House/Monitor levels us not a good option for me. If you only need one output, or if you don't care if changing the output level impacts the house sound, then this will allow separate signal paths in the AX8 and will allow you do do cool things like mix the signals together using a volume block on one or both signal paths.

Hope that makes sense, and hope that helps. If you do a lot of Electric/Acoustic stuff and also want to mix the signals together, the AxeII is definitely the way to go. If I were using the Piezo guitar a lot I would have never sold the AxeFX II.
 
Last edited:
ethomas1013 said:
I did not read the thread you linked, but I did open it and saw the initial image of a Stereo Y-cable and the second post with the signal path for separate processing of both signals. No, you cannot do that with the AX8 (unless you use the FX Loop for the second signal path - more on that below). The reason is that the AX8 has a single mono input and the AxeII has a stereo input. The AX8 also does not have a Mixer block (which was not used in the preset shown in that thread, but is useful for dual signal paths) and the AX8 has less instances of each Block available compared to the AxeII. For example, that preset uses 4 volume blocks (the AX8 only has 2), presumably the first two are just used for panning to separate the Left and Right inputs - which I would have done with a mixer block.

That does not mean that you cannot use a Piezo with the AX8. It just means that your options are much more limited by the mono input and by the CPU power. I occasionally us a PRS with a Piezo, and I have a preset that has Scene 1 with the signal path for the magnetic pickups and Scene 2 for the piezo. I use a single mono output cable to connect to the AX8. I do not use both the Piezo and the Magnetic pickups at the same time. If you want to use both at the same time, and have two separate signal paths, then the AX8 cannot do that. I use the toggle switch on the PRS to select either the magnetic pickups, or the Piezo. When I switch from one to the other, I have to also change the Scene on the AX8. So, the signal path looks like this:

View attachment 39726

The 2 PEQ blocks are really just toggle switches (the bypass state is set to Mute for both PEQ blocks). When Scene 1 is selected, the top PEQ is enabled and the signal goes through for the Piezo. When Scene 2 is selected, the bottom PEQ block is active and the signal passes through to the Drive/Amp/Cab blocks. I also use X/Y switching on the Reverb block so I can have different reverb settings for Scene 1 and Scene 2.

Also, note that I'm at 73% CPU with this so there's not a lot of room to add more that one, or maybe two, FX Blocks to the signal path.

Another way to accomplish this in the AX8 is with the FX loop Block. That WILL allow you to separate the signal into two independent paths by using IN 2 and OUT 2 for the Piezo signal, BUT if you do that you cannot use OUT 1 to send a signal to the mains and OUT 2 to send a signal to your monitor since OUT 1 and OUT 2 are now being used as an FX loop (and the input for the Piezo). I use OUT 1 to go to my monitor and OUT 2 to go to the house. That way I can turn up my monitor without effecting the level that I am sending to the house. So, using the FX Loop for a second input, and loosing separate control for the House/Monitor levels us not a good option for me. If you only need one output, or if you don't care if changing the output level impacts the house sound, then this will allow separate signal paths in the AX8 and will allow you do do cool things like mix the signals together using a volume block on one or both signal paths.

Hope that makes sense, and hope that helps. If you do a lot of Electric/Acoustic stuff and also want to mix the signals together, the AxeII is definitely the way to go. If I were using the Piezo guitar a lot I would have never sold the AxeFX II.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much! I really appreciate the help!
 
Glauben said:
Worship ministry once a week.
Click to expand...

I have both AFC II Original + MFC-101 MII and AX8. I play at church bi-weekly and only use my AX8.

I like having the AFX II at my home as my recording device as well as "frame of reference" for firmware upgrades so I know what to expect on the AX8 when released. For portability and ease of use, the AX8 is the way to go for worship settings IMHO. If you go with one, check out some of my ambient presets which will be updated soon for the Q7-Q8 updates: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/various-ambient-presets.112541/

Cheers!
 
It depends on what I'm doing. If I have gigs coming up I always play the AX8 so I can dial in sounds. I've been playing that pretty much exclusively lately. But generally, otherwise, it's the XL+. Both are in the studio where I work. So it's just a matter of picking up the right cable. I prefer not having to worry abut running out of memory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom