Standard can keep up with the Ultra. Impressed!

Slate

Member
Since I have been running my Ultra for the past 2 years it has been flawless. But with a tour coming up this year decided to buy a backup.
Been pondering standard but most threads say the ultra patches may be too much, etc. Decided to save $500. $500 is $500 and a backup that may never get used?

Got my standard today and racked it. AxeEdit is nice as it updates both at the same time. My Ultra is the primary and Standard in the midi thru. All I had to do was load the patch then save it and it saves to both automatically. Nice!

A far as the patches all but one imported. And to my surprise they were only 10% more CPU on the standard with 14% being the max on one patch.
The patch that did not load actually loaded but gave me a cpu warning. That patch was a super bloated dual amp, cabs, etc which I was just testing.

To my surprise none of my patches used any Ultra specific blocks.

So to those who pondering buying the standard. Don’t ponder just buy it. I do not use dual amp and cab setups in one patch, but I do have tons of effects since I like to have the stomp like access on my pedal board. The Standard handles them fine.

In hind sight I would have purchased a Standard if I had known how close in cpu they are. If you’re a synth guys or super dual amp patches (the standard will do them but trimmer) then you need the Ultra. But for the average player I think the Standard is awesome.


Within 5 minutes I had it racked and my ultra patches saved to it. Man talk about simple.
 

Attachments

  • IMGP1688.jpg
    IMGP1688.jpg
    175.5 KB · Views: 142
No matter how many state of the art, all inclusive rack units a person has, there will always be room for a TU-2 on the pedalboard.

FWIW, I bought the Ultra for the multiband compressor, the extra pitch block, and other effects only the Ultra has.
 
Back
Top Bottom