Is the Axe FX 2 the same sound quality as the XL?

Hey guys,

I'm just wondering. I'm buying an Axe FX soon along with the MFC and a couple expression pedals. Is the sound quality of the II just as good as the XL? I see they have a deal on for the Mark II and the MFC for 500 dollars cheaper than the XL and the MFC. Is the XL really that much better that I should just shell out the extra money? I can afford it, its not a problem, I'm just wondering if it's necessary, that's all.

Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

-Dan
 
Same exact thing, more memory in the XL.

Yeah I've read around and didn't notice much difference besides memory stuff. The XL uses flash now and holds more presets. Because the mark II doesn't have enough already LOL

So that's literally it? I can update it just like the XL and it sounds exactly the same?
 
Yeah, as far as I know. The article/thread above that's a sticky talks about the differences between them. Should be the same except for the memory and the Faslink port for whatever. I'm no expert though, just spitting what I've read. Wait until someone more experienced chimes in if you're really concerned. I've decided to pick up an XL just because the II won't accept XL patches and there's some good ones out there. It'd bug me to know they sound good but I couldn't use them.

If cash really isn't an issue, I'd grab the XL dude...you're going to fill it up fast with IRs. Good luck!
 
I chose the XL because there is a lower noise floor ("secret sauce III") and a built in back up firmware in case of anything weird that could happen when updating.
 
Hmmm, after reading around some more, I'm almost leaning towards getting the Mark II. I might change my mind with more opinions and further reading, but as it stands, I don't play in a band. I'm a long haul truck driver. I'm home 1 week out of the month. I'm not touring, I'm not pro. I just decided that I'm 34, time to build my dream guitar rig, road cases and all haha... you know, because I'm not touring. It's all to look nice. After much research, I think the axe FX is the best choice for me, because it has so many amps and cabs and tones it's going to satisfy me in every way. To have flash memory and a bit more room for IR's is not that big of a deal to me.

Hmmmm, much to think about.
 
I would recommend you the MarkII cause it doesn't sound like you need the XL features at all :D I would invest the extra money in a pair of good headphones/cab+amp or FR monitors :)

Edit: yeah the XL/markII sound the same and will, as far as I know, get the same updates.
 
<kidding mode on>
and now... XL+... with a better LCD!!! :lol
think the "old good time": 1 amp (always the same one), some pedals (always the same) and your guitar.
In the XL you have more room for cabs IRs and patches.
While in the II you have ONLY an hangar full of amps, cabs, fxs, now in the XL+ you have 2 hangars for cabs IRs and patches, plus a better LCD.
Oupss... and... yep... don't forget the noise floor... 'coz in the II the noise is ON the floor... and in the XL+... the noise is UNDER the floor!!! :mrgreen
<kidding mode off>
The only real limit about the II to me is the patch-exchange limit coz the II can't load the XL and XL+ patches. Worth the +500bucks?
It's a debated theme... are we shure that nobody can put together some code lines for a sw converter?
Don't think so!
 
My understanding is that the XL goes from 0 to 60 a bit faster - which could be significant if you want to play faster... or at the raceway (or the entrance ramp to the highway).
 
Another thing that people keep forgetting about the Axe XL vs the Axe II is that the XL has X/Y switching on more blocks than the AFX2. To answer the OP's question though, the sound quality is identical. Just more room to store stuff.
 
The XL is newer and will always be newer, so it will have a greater % recaptured on resale if that's a concern.
 
if you plan on selling it, grab a XL.if you need 512 user cabs, grab the XL.we rarely use 12 user cabs lol.if you need the latest lcd screen grab the XL+.they all sound quite nice, II - XL - XL+
 
The XL and XL+ have 2 rear expression pedal/switch inputs, built in FAS Link, more storage memory (a lot more preset and user cab locations), built-in rescue firmware (no replacement EPROMS needed if FW updates fail), more blocks with X/Y switching, optical encoder based value wheel (more durable), lower noise floor (special sauce III input), slightly faster startup time due to flash memory, XL+ has brighter and sharper LCD screen.

All three units have the same CPUs, RAM, converters, etc. so sound-wise they are identical (besides the slightly lower noise floor of the XL and XL+).

The XL and XL+ are backwards compatible in terms of presets. The MK II cannot load presets from an XL or XL+.
 
You're right. Get the Mark II.

The TONAL code base is the same across the platforms. No difference. Only variations in HW account for different releases.

Good luck, and welcome!
 
Sound is the same. I upgraded to xl for 3 reasons. FAS Link, flash memory (never had an issue with my MK I's memory) New encoder wheel (had no issues with my encoder wheel on my MK I either)
 
Yeah I've read around and didn't notice much difference besides memory stuff. The XL uses flash now and holds more presets. Because the mark II doesn't have enough already LOL

So that's literally it? I can update it just like the XL and it sounds exactly the same?
No, actually you can hear the "+" if you listen closely. The only way to get a similar sound from the Mark II is to leave the clear plastic on the screen.
 
Back
Top Bottom