Is the Axe-Fx II XL+ 100% of the way there tonally?

S

squidlips

Member
I've heard some great examples of heavy sounds that are just as good if not better than using actual fx/cabs/mics but I'm still not convinced about it's ability to produce a clean sound.

I'm pretty close to purchasing a Vox AC30C2 to play with my Fender Telecaster American Standard and I was considering using the Axe-FX for effects or effects and cab sims if the Vox isn't producing the sound I like for the song.

Is there any advantage of getting the II XL+ over the first Axe Fx if I'm just using it for effects?

Maybe you could send me some links to clean sounds that you think are world standard?
 
Hi,
I find some of the clean sounds exceptional. Those really hard to get, jangly but thick clean sounds. Using a Tele or a strat mostly.
What is your setup?

Thanks
Pauly
 
Yeah I'd have to say through IEM or FOH you can't tell a difference anymore. And more important the fell of a real tube amp is there and has been for a while. You won't get that amp in the room feel unless you have a nice cab on stage.
 
If my ears were 100% then I could answer this with 100% accuracy... having said that, and as far as I am concerned, the tone, feel, and everything else from the Axe FX is unsurpassed.
 
oh man, you're wondering if you can get cleans with the axe fx?

Short answer, is hell yes.

My background in music is eclectic and as such I have a bit of experience working in a few different genres. Stevie Ray Vaughan-esque thick cleans (sometimes with another amp running a little dirtier) is just one of the awesome clean tones you can coax out of the Axe FX.

Hell, with over 250+ amp models in the damn thing, you can't go wrong when it comes to producing clean tones. Vibrato Verb, ODS Clean, Shiver Clean, USA Clean, 59 Bassguy etc etc etc etc fucking etc. I'm not listing the options as a means of merely showing off the options, but to explain that with the axe fx, you don't just have a lot of options, nor just one great sounding amp. With the Axe FX you get the wonders of both camps.

Tonal versatility, with the added bonus of actually sounding good? Can't beat that.


p.s. it's worth noting that i am in no way endorsed by Fractal (im not awesome enough for that), I'm merely a fan boy since the standard days.
 
The AFX is super close.

The noise it makes is spot on, however it still compresses things a tad too much in terms of the waveform it makes.

That said, you'd have to be some sort of guitar tragic to really spot it. The sound that comes out of speakers is generally going to be the sound that you want. It can just be a tad tricky to drop it into a mix and get some life out of it.

That said, I'm not sure if that's a problem with the AMP modelling or if it's an inherent problem with using Cabinet Sims.
 
i have a handwired vox ac15h1tv with NOS tubes and london power scaling. which sounds great but to be honest my axe fx 2 through matrix gt1000fx and same speaker (alnico blue) or matrix NL12...sounds better. still there is smth with the simplicity of an amp. plug an play...and you dont mass around and tweak for hours...
 
I am not into Voxes at all, so I am speaking to the general case, but FWIW, if you are a technically minded, deep dive into tweaking type person (some people absolutely are NOT). My experience with the current incarnation of FAS gear is that it is BETTER than traditional gear because you have an insane amount of control over both the dynamic response via deep editing parameters and frequency response via EQ and signal chain control. I don't miss anything from my prior tube based main rig.

And even if you are not into the whole deep edit deal; that is what is great about the current gen: the core functionality still sounds great and is so on point with minimal effort that most of the time it is plug and play, and again, if you are micing your traditional amp but are not into fiddling with mics and don't own a zillion cabs it can still sound better and more consistent for the non-tweaker than a traditional setup.

So, I think for a lot of the folks here it is 100% or more.

Now, if you go on other forums where there are a lot traditional gear hounds and ask you will find LOTS of guys who say "I <tried|owned|played|switched from> <Axe|Kemper|Helix|etc> and it still does not hold a candle to my *real* <brand name> amp. They sound pretty good on Youtube/Soundcloud but my <blank> is it." So, a lot of people are not able to set things up to their liking or cannot overcome the psychology of it (I think this is underestimated by many); but for whatever reason it is still a personal choice. Their opinions are just as valid as anyone else's, we all have to form our own.

Anyway, going forward, I will never have a non-digital main rig. I am probably going to keep the traditional amps I own because they are fun and have their uses but digital is at the point where I cannot abide the limitations of traditional gear and it saves me a ton of time. I was always sending amps off to be modded or putting EQs in the loop, etc.
 
My pre-AxeFX rig was a Boogie Lonestar and a big board full of boutique pedals. The Lonestar is legendary for its dimensional clean tone, and that is why I toured / recorded with it for so long. When I got the AxeFX, I spent some time learning to program my presets, then really delved into working with the Lonestar model. It's so good that I sold my actual Lonestar, along with all my pedals. The other amp I use frequently for clean tones is the Bogner Shiva (clean) model. I often record in studio that has a fantastic Shiva, and I've used it when tracking. Honestly, the AxeFX model is so good that I don't bother firing up the physical amp when I record there. I just show up with my AxeFX and a laptop to run Axe-Edit.

So, would I attest that the AxeFX is 100% there ? I don't know to evaluate that. To my ears and hands, the AxeFX models are idealized versions of what physical amps can do, rendered in a way that is absolutely reliable and consistent. When re-tracking parts, I hate to think of how many hours I have spent attempting to recreate settings from a previous session when using a physical tube amp. On the AxeFX, it's a preset. I just recall the session and it's exactly the same. I always capture a dry track, so I can even re-amp the entire post-edit session if I want to.

For my purposes, the AxeFX is 100% there. I don't own a tube amp any more.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom