Looking to invest in an Axe FX 3 - need advice.

[Budda]

If you want more effects and effects routing options, its worth it for that alone imo.

Use your current pedals in tandem with wild routing and processing in the box out to the real amps (or via usb to your daw) and enjoy the insanity. Because it can get insane in a great way.

 

[themarqueeyears]

And that's just it for me, and what I was trying to get across earlier. If you needed access to world class effects and amps, the AxeFX is just perfect. If your heart is set on rebuilding your exact board and set up, warts and all, then I'd just find a way to use that. If you are perfectly happy with your current set up but not married to it and it's exact idiosyncrasies then all my hesitations on recommending the AxeFx III evaporate. It's not hard to create a patch that's as good as what ever it is you may have, I just think that a perfect clone (while possible) could easily take you years and resources that might be better spent on making music.

Thank you for those thoughts.

I have no experience of either of these two solutions but I find myself wondering which will feel better ....

1. My tube amps and pedal board plus a load box (X Load/Boss TAE/ Suhr RL)

2. AFX3

I keep thinking as the AFX3 is a complete solution, I'm sure the designer has made the modelled amps and FX feel more natural with the IR cab simulation section than adding a load box to a hardware tube amp?

When I engage the Iron Man II on my Tone King Imperial (and that's only an attenuator) it takes on a spongy feeling - I've not heard anyone complain the AXF3 feels spongy.

My situation may change in the future, so I can store my analog kit and use an AFX3 as a solution for my present situation.

The thread has been very useful, I can see my initial hybrid approach makes no sense - so I'm not going to waste my time going down that rabbit hole.

 

[Kriig]

I use both amps and AFX. Amps into Suhr RL into AFX or AFX by itself. Or just amps into cabs.

Also do some cab/mic, but it's more practical without the cab when recording.
I'm about to get delivery of a RedSeven Duality 100RS, so my amp days are not over, and will order a parallell mixer,
so i can run the AFX3 for fx in a w/d/w setup too.

For me at least, one setup does not kill the other. I love both.

 

[themarqueeyears]

I use both amps and AFX. Amps into Suhr RL into AFX or AFX by itself. Or just amps into cabs.

Also do some cab/mic, but it's more practical without the cab when recording.
I'm about to get delivery of a RedSeven Duality 100RS, so my amp days are not over, and will order a parallell mixer,
so i can run the AFX3 for fx in a w/d/w setup too.

For me at least, one setup does not kill the other. I love both.

Well that's good to hear.

What analog pedals do you use and are they before the AXF or in an FX loop with the AFX?

The routing on the Axe FX 3 unit is very, very impressive!

 

[Budda]

With the axefx, its entirely up to you if it feels spongey or not.

 

[Bertotti]

If you buy and axe fx it is inevitable that at some point the desire to use it with a tube amp will happen. It just too damn fun not to try every possible set up. It seems some decide it is all they need and sell all their analog gear off others keep a bit some just enjoy both. In the end it’s just another way to make sound, I didn’t say music that takes more talent and practice, it’s all a blast to play with.

 

[millman]

Thank you for those thoughts.

I have no experience of either of these two solutions but I find myself wondering which will feel better ....

1. My tube amps and pedal board plus a load box (X Load/Boss TAE/ Suhr RL)

2. AFX3

I keep thinking as the AFX3 is a complete solution, I'm sure the designer has made the modelled amps and FX feel more natural with the IR cab simulation section than adding a load box to a hardware tube amp?

When I engage the Iron Man II on my Tone King Imperial (and that's only an attenuator) it takes on a spongy feeling - I've not heard anyone complain the AXF3 feels spongy.

My situation may change in the future, so I can store my analog kit and use an AFX3 as a solution for my present situation.

The thread has been very useful, I can see my initial hybrid approach makes no sense - so I'm not going to waste my time going down that rabbit hole.

I do think the full modeled solution is more natural than the load box solution. Because load boxes apply a fixed impedance curve to the Amp. If your cab you play through has the same impedance you won’t tell the difference. If it has a different impedance you will know it. With a Fractal you can change the speaker impedance curve to match more closely with the IR you are using.

If you use your rig for recording, you’re already used to listening for the the mic’d cab sound. Even if you listen to the cab live and in the room while playing. Ultimately, the sound you are listening for to get the track right is the mic’d cab sound in the track you’re mixing. Personally, I like the sound of a mic’d cab more than the harshness and loudness of a cab in the room. If you can retrain yourself to just expect the sound of the amp/cab through a mic when playing you’ll be set with the AxeFX.

 

[Bertotti]

I do think the full modeled solution is more natural than the load box solution. Because load boxes apply a fixed impedance curve to the Amp. If your cab you play through has the same impedance you won’t tell the difference. If it has a different impedance you will know it. With a Fractal you can change the speaker impedance curve to match more closely with the IR you are using.

If you use your rig for recording, you’re already used to listening for the the mic’d cab sound. Even if you listen to the cab live and in the room while playing. Ultimately, the sound you are listening for to get the track right is the mic’d cab sound in the track you’re mixing. Personally, I like the sound of a mic’d cab more than the harshness and loudness of a cab in the room. If you can retrain yourself to just expect the sound of the amp/cab through a mic when playing you’ll be set with the AxeFX.

This is why I use a Fryette PS100, way more natural and I can mix and match loads.

 

[themarqueeyears]

Just one more question.

In terms of buying a load box to accompany buying an Axe FX 3.

Does the Fractal X Load work better than (for example) the Suhr RL on the basis it's by the same company and also the IR section of the AFX3 knows what to expect (so to speak) in terms of impedance curves etc when processing signal coming from the X-Load?

Or is it irrelevant and the Suhr RL will work just as well (for example)?

Thank you.

 

[Bertotti]

Just one more question.

In terms of buying a load box to accompany buying an Axe FX 3.

Does the Fractal X Load work better than (for example) the Suhr RL on the basis it's by the same company and also the IR section of the AFX3 knows what to expect (so to speak) in terms of impedance curves etc when processing signal coming from the X-Load?

Or is it irrelevant and the Suhr RL will work just as well (for example)?

Thank you.

I have not used or played with either. The reactive technology or lack thereof is something to consider. Having 8ohms only would be a problem for me. I went with mine for several reasons because it would impeadance match different amps to cabs, used an a tualy reactive load to attenuate and functioned as a bi or power amp. I use it all. I would think either of your choices would function well but seeing as you want to use it with a fractal product I would be inclined to go fractal. I would make a list of needs and wants and see which fills the bill best. Both are 8ohms only and 100 watts max, if that matters.

 

[millman]

Just one more question.

In terms of buying a load box to accompany buying an Axe FX 3.

Does the Fractal X Load work better than (for example) the Suhr RL on the basis it's by the same company and also the IR section of the AFX3 knows what to expect (so to speak) in terms of impedance curves etc when processing signal coming from the X-Load?

Or is it irrelevant and the Suhr RL will work just as well (for example)?

Thank you.

The AFXIIi won’t “know” what impedance the impedance will be applied at the load box. Without a load box, in the Amp block, you can tell the amp model what impedance to simulate. None of that applies when using a physical amp and load box. It will use the impedance applied by the load box at the box before the signal returns to the AxeFX.

Many people use either option successfully, however.

 

[millman]

It will use the impedance applied by the load box at the box before the signal returns to the AxeFX.

One more thing on this. The Suhr applies a 4x12 GB impedance curve. So, a 4x12 Greenback IR would be “closest” to the impedance applied by the load box. The Fractal has two voicings a UK and US. I believe the UK voicing of the LB-2 is basically the same as the Suhr. I am not sure what the US voicing impedance is based off of. However, given there is the ability to have two different voicings on the Fractal option, I’d personally go with that option over the Suhr.

 

[themarqueeyears]

The AFXIIi won’t “know” what impedance the impedance will be applied at the load box. Without a load box, in the Amp block, you can tell the amp model what impedance to simulate. None of that applies when using a physical amp and load box. It will use the impedance applied by the load box at the box before the signal returns to the AxeFX.

Many people use either option successfully, however.

Ah ok thank you - I've miss understood how it works, thank you for clearing that up.

 

[themarqueeyears]

One more thing on this. The Suhr applies a 4x12 GB impedance curve. So, a 4x12 Greenback IR would be “closest” to the impedance applied by the load box. The Fractal has two voicings a UK and US. I believe the UK voicing of the LB-2 is basically the same as the Suhr. I am not sure what the US voicing impedance is based off of. However, given there is the ability to have two different voicings on the Fractal option, I’d personally go with that option over the Suhr.

Thank you, I'm thinking the same thing and will probably grab the Fractal X Load.

The more I read, it seems Fractal are very good a creating a complete system end to end, so the fact they even do a load box, means they have designed it for the very purpose of combining a tube amp into the AXF3!

 

[giantslayer]

My 2 cents is that going all Fractal is easier and more convenient than integrating with the amp head and/or pedals. Try to make the all digital approach work first and then you can stick with it if you are happy vs trying to rebuild from scratch for the “what if.”