Glenn Fricker reviews the Axe-fx II

Status
Not open for further replies.
He's entitled to his opinion.

But just by his demeanor, I'm surprised anyone bothers to get chippy about what he sais. It should be plain that he doesn't care to be taken seriously. He claims flat out that he's a Metal Producer, so his view is completely myopic on that one genre, and only those 3 amps.

He did lose me a little complaining about the prices. If you want ONE sound, sure, go his route. But complaining that 'I don't need all that other stuff and so I call it expensive' is boneheaded. And, from his standpoint, if you had the little black box that never needed tubes, mic'ing, or excessive TLC to move from one location to another, wouldn't that be something a producer would WANT?

And I'm sure his idea of a pedalboard is a 2 button switch that sais 'clean' and 'OD'. So yeah, $799 is alot to spend for 2 switches.

Anyway, vaguely entertained. Had to edit the crap out of it tho (cutaways every 8 seconds...)
 
To be fair, if you want *one* sound for playing live the Axe is probably an overpriced option. That actually describes an awful lot of guitarists. Not us lot here on the Fractal forum of course, but that is some pretty serious selection effect.

Also, from the comments:

mooseman0389 "I absolutely agree with your arguments against the Axe as a live gigging option. It would be a terrible idea. However the $$ argument holds up pretty solidly in favor of the axe as a studio option. About $2-2.5k for more amps than most people would know what to do with! All the tones were great, particularly the real cobra. Great video."

Reply (SpectreSoundStudios aka Glenn) "Absolutely! For the studio, the AxeFX is a serious contender."

*note: of course I disagree about the axe being a terrible idea for live.
 
Admin M@ said:
Can we change the subject already?
Click to expand...

Frickin' Glenn Reviews the Axe-FX II
There-I-fixed-IT.gif
 
electronpirate said:
He's entitled to his opinion.

But just by his demeanor, I'm surprised anyone bothers to get chippy about what he sais. It should be plain that he doesn't care to be taken seriously. He claims flat out that he's a Metal Producer, so his view is completely myopic on that one genre, and only those 3 amps.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with you, i actually LOL at one point!.
 
Does it really matter what he says. If he loves his specific sound of the amp and wants to use it,good for him. He said that the tone matching is the most impressive feature of the product.

That point doesn't really make sense,if the Fractal is able to tone match then that shows its ability of cloning things. Fact of the matter is tons of people have created amazing tones with the Axe Fx Ultra and II as well before the tone matching feature was even in existence. It takes time and work to build great tone but once they are built then there is a fruitful result. It's the man behind the machine,if he is happy with his amp good for him but if he doesn't want to put in the work in getting a vast variety of tones,well then that is his personal issue.

I would have agreed with his review if I hadn't heard and seen others build great tones with the Fractal before I even bought it.

He is a good producer for sure.
 
Speculum Speculorum said:
Further, and you have to accept this fact at some point, the Axe-fx II is in fact an expensive unit for a lot of people. B
Click to expand...

Is it? I've spent way more than $2200 on several individual amps. Not to mention in excess of $1000 on a limited set of effects pedals in front of me. And a single cab. For instance:

Mesa Mark V head: $2249
Mesa Recto 212 cab: $699
Pedalboard with Tuner, wah, TS, BBPre, delay, Decimator, power supply: ~$1150
Total: $4098

I spent only about $1000 more for a complete Axe rig with foot controller, expression pedals, and 2 Atomic CLRs. Both rigs are very versatile, but I'd argue the Axe rig is FAR more flexible.
 
Man, a lot of you guys are pretty harsh. There is more value to the review than I think a lot of you are giving it.

Regardless of whether you agree with his presentation or like his tone or playing - that was a good demo of tone matching and showed the Axe in a pretty favorable light.

He's right about the monitoring situation. If you're relying on the sound guy in a lot of places you are screwed without your own monitor (that is often true with a traditional rig as well but usually not in smaller venues).

He's also right about the cost of a gigging rig using an Axe (or any other high end modeler). The MFC - it's expensive. So are all decent MIDI controllers. And you need one to play live. A decent monitor is pretty important and they're not cheap. If you get the MFC and a CLR you're going to spend $4k on a gigging rig. If you can find that stuff used, you're going to spend at least $3k. If you skimp on the MIDI controller and monitor and buy some stuff used, you're still going to spend at least $2.5k. For a LOT of musicians, a single amp and a couple stomp boxes is all they need - I know I can get by with a rig like that and be perfectly content at a gig. There is no question that you can get a great used traditional rig for way less that $2.5k. And you can get a great new traditional rig for way less than $4k. Of course, you can also spend way more on a traditional rig but it's not likely out of real necessity.

Oh and comparing the infinite flexibility of the Axe to the proven simplicity of a traditional rig is not something that's going to change anyone's mind. It really doesn't matter to most folks.
 
Everyone has every right to their opinion. Whether you agree or not is also your right. How you express that difference says a lot about you, not the reviewer though. Here's my take on it:

He's entertaining. And his opinion is fine. He made me chuckle more than once because he's a character; and has a great sense of humor it seems to me.

But I'd love to talk to him for 10 minutes in person and show him some things that I do that addresses each of his hangups with the box. Let me explain:

What happens is that guys that haven't done the direct-to-FOH thing successfully for 7 years (and before that, I was *just* as guilty of it) are applying their perspective to something that, honestly, begs a whole new paradigm to 'get'.

Live work? You *need* to carry your own powered cab. I run mine as a backline if necessary, but in my main gigging band with another guitarist that runs a totally conventional amp/cab rig, we both setup our rigs as side fills from across the stage. It's foolproof and simple in the real world. In fact it *helps* get around the 'local sound guy' issue the video reviewer brings up because you are spoon feeding him a consistent and ideal tone. I handle my own switching and all my solo boosts from stage. In gig after gig (over 7 years now of constant weekly gigging, not just some gig in the past month or something) the EQ is zeroed. They bring my level up and done. Soundcheck is over. My soundchecks are literally 3 seconds. Indoor/outdoor and everything in between. In the parlance of the video reviewer, "Let... that... sink... in." lol.

Also, as I've gone over many times over the years, there is a component of the reverb that is necessary IMHO for spatial perception when running direct. A close mic'd amp/cab requires the same understanding and if the video reviewer was in the room with me and I could show him what and how to set the reverb to account for that... I believe his opinion would be different overall again. But not for the 'better' or 'worse' thing. It's integral to how we perceive things; and the way to express it in words from me to you on this forum is to add depth. It's subtle, it's almost imperceptible in application, but it makes ALL the difference in the world. (*All it is: balancing the early reflections and reverb tail and they are NOT the default settings on those).

The Cab IR's are something I've gone on about forever; IMHO a proper tonematch of an amp in a studio like the video reviewer has would be DEEPLY enhanced by tone matching the amp direct and shooting an IR of the actual cab of the amp the way he has it set and utilizing that. At that point, you've essentially cloned the existing rig with accurate dialing capabilities of the Axe-FX to further customize your tone.

Now, I'm confident I have 'my' thing down after going direct for 7 years now successfully and I've used Fractal gear to do that. So I have the utmost confidence in what I believe to be true because I am out there - like any gigging guy - doing the thing. Not just pounding my chest on the internet or 'justifying my purchase' or 'shilling' some company or being a 'fanboy'. All that crap is tossed around nowadays like it's straight up truth; I just laugh at it because none of it is.

I say that to say this: it's fine to have alternate opinions, differing opinions and it's fine to share them. I'd love to sit down with the video reviewer for 10 minutes and share what I can with him because he'd be even happier than he is now. I know what I know because I do the thing. I do not see it as a pissing match. I could improve his results with 2 minutes of minute things to how the reverb block is setup and mixed in. Or explain it and teach him in 10 minutes or less.

But there you are. It's sophisticated gear; it is expensive and it is not without it's drawbacks and learning curve. Having faced each of those discussion points personally, I am still seriously satisfied with my own rig and have gained a tremendous amount of experience and knowledge along the curve in the past 7 plus years. It's a big world, we can't and won't all agree on what/how/when/why etc. and shouldn't.

So in short, I could take 10 minutes with his rig in his studio and make the 'real' vs. 'Axe-FX' tones so identical that it would be staggering by some quick adjustments to the Tone Matching process (including shooting an IR of the actual rig's speaker in addition to tone matching the amp head directly) and balancing the early reflections and reverb tail in *exceptionally* nuanced and subtle manner to add the depth to the direct sound. Rolling with an MFC creates a system whereby you can take effects from just being 'on/off' to making them dynamically interactive in real time; most people that have not experienced that don't get it until they experience it; and lastly by carrying a powerful, accurate and versatile powered monitor you can remove the issues some direct-to-FOH newbies run into.

Peace.
 
Apologies for re-directing this thread slightly, but Scott - has your approach to reverb (as mentioned in your post above) changed much since your YouTube tutorial of 11 months ago?
 
hippietim said:
Oh and comparing the infinite flexibility of the Axe to the proven simplicity of a traditional rig is not something that's going to change anyone's mind. It really doesn't matter to most folks.
Click to expand...

I disagree. In the last year I have changed many minds about the Axe-Fx and modeling in general. A lot can be said for presentation and NOT having a biased opinion towards either.

Also the comments about midi controllers, if you are just simply switching amp channels, you don't even need a dedicated 3rd party controller as amps come with a foot switch... comparing that to the MFC which can control everything the Axe-Fx can do then saying it's a rip off is beyond silly.

I'll be honest, it wasn't a bad review until he decided to compare prices to value in which he obviously has no clue about the full capabilities of the axe-fx and how the MFC is designed to control it, which made his review invalid because the reason it costs what it does is because of ALL it capabilities...... it's like going to an "all you can eat" and then complaining about the price because all you had was rice.
 
Severed said:
I disagree. In the last year I have changed many minds about the Axe-Fx and modeling in general. A lot can be said for presentation and NOT having a biased opinion towards either.
Click to expand...

I think you've missed the point about comparing capabilities. Most guitar players I know really and truly do not care about all of the fancy stuff you can do. They just want a couple decent tones and a few effects. The advantages of modeling to most folks I know is not in the infinite flexibility. It's in the simplicity for recording, small/simple/lightweight/consistent gigging rig, getting big loud tones at lower volumes. Very few folks I know of get into modeling because they really want to use 37 amps with 13 custom IRs and unique patches for every song. I know a number of guys locally that use modelers (Axe, KPA, Line 6, and Vox) and they all basically setup their patches as a nice channel switching amp with overdrive, mod, delay, reverb.

When I demonstrate my Axe to someone, I play 3 or 4 familiar tones, turn on some basic effects, show them what it takes me to setup, and play at conversation and gigging levels. All the rest of the features are gravy.

Severed said:
Also the comments about midi controllers, if you are just simply switching amp channels, you don't even need a dedicated 3rd party controller as amps come with a foot switch... comparing that to the MFC which can control everything the Axe-Fx can do then saying it's a rip off is beyond silly.
Click to expand...

It's not silly. It's not just about comparing just the amp foot switch, you have to factor in the typical guitar player's pedalboard with a tuner, delay, chorus, overdrive, wah, etc. At that point, you need *something* reasonably capable as a MIDI controller. If you want the Axe tuner on your pedalboard then you're going to have to spend at least $500 for the Liquid

Severed said:
I'll be honest, it wasn't a bad review until he decided to compare prices to value in which he obviously has no clue about the full capabilities of the axe-fx and how the MFC is designed to control it, which made his review invalid because the reason it costs what it does is because of ALL it capabilities...... it's like going to an "all you can eat" and then complaining about the price because all you had was rice.
Click to expand...

You can't invalidate his price comparison just because the rigs have differing capabilities. He's just comparing the cost of two gigging rigs to do a certain style of music. Just because the Axe can simulate a violin with the synth block and the right IR and has a built in looper does not make it a better value.
 
I don't like the way the guy looks, i don't like the way he plays, i don't like his technique, i don't like the music he plays, his voice is annoying, his opinions are just that his opinions.

Personally if this guy was crossing the road, and i was dirving a car, id have second thoughts about applying the breaks
 
Cant help it, that's what i felt like when i watched it, however we are all entitled to our opinions i guess, even Sasquatch featured in the Vid, however none of us have to like them
 
Last edited:
hippietim said:
I think you've missed the point about comparing capabilities. Most guitar players I know really and truly do not care about all of the fancy stuff you can do. They just want a couple decent tones and a few effects. The advantages of modeling to most folks I know is not in the infinite flexibility. It's in the simplicity for recording, small/simple/lightweight/consistent gigging rig, getting big loud tones at lower volumes. Very few folks I know of get into modeling because they really want to use 37 amps with 13 custom IRs and unique patches for every song. I know a number of guys locally that use modelers (Axe, KPA, Line 6, and Vox) and they all basically setup their patches as a nice channel switching amp with overdrive, mod, delay, reverb.

When I demonstrate my Axe to someone, I play 3 or 4 familiar tones, turn on some basic effects, show them what it takes me to setup, and play at conversation and gigging levels. All the rest of the features are gravy.
Click to expand...

You are mistaken, I am not missing any points. I'm glad that most of the players you know don't care about more than a basic setup, but most of the players I know DO CARE and DO want 200 amps, unlimited IRs, and endless effect possibilities. I'm happy that in your opinion all the rest of the features are "just gravy" but for myself and MANY others those features were the reasons we purchased. These are features, not just extras..... but what do we know, right?

It's not silly. It's not just about comparing just the amp foot switch, you have to factor in the typical guitar player's pedalboard with a tuner, delay, chorus, overdrive, wah, etc. At that point, you need *something* reasonably capable as a MIDI controller. If you want the Axe tuner on your pedalboard then you're going to have to spend at least $500 for the Liquid
Click to expand...

The problem is, he is not even mentioning effects, he talked about a controller to switch amp channels, which again you don't need to buy a midi controller for unless you are also switching a rack or other midi device. I don't want to be rude but it's like you are just looking to argue your own points that have nothing to do with the review.

You can't invalidate his price comparison just because the rigs have differing capabilities. He's just comparing the cost of two gigging rigs to do a certain style of music. Just because the Axe can simulate a violin with the synth block and the right IR and has a built in looper does not make it a better value.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes I can, and did and will continue to do so. He's not comparing 2 rigs, he's comparing 2% of one rig to 100% of another and if you can't see this then there is no point in conversing with you about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom