Ultra guy went nuts for the II.

BillHoudini

BillHoudini

Member
Hello guys!! I've been an Ultra user for several months now (10 to be exact), but I can't help myself anymore. I've been convincing myself that I don't need the Axe Fx II, but I can't hold this little evil voice inside me. Should I sell my Ultra and hope for a low priced used II, or should I ignore this little voice and keep on going with the Ultra?

Can you share your experience with me, especially FAS users that jumped from the Ultra to the II. I ask for feedback because it's a huge financial step for me and it will be difficult to gather that amount of money. :)
 
I love my xl! but love my Ultra also! I would not want to go with out if I sold the ultra and then could not find a II in my price range! I would hide a few dollars every week until I could buy a XL+ then decide about the ultra later! just my opinion!!!
 
You likely don't need to upgrade if you use the Axe with real amps. But if you use the amp models, then you should upgrade. There is a huge difference in the amp models.
 
Thanks for the quick feedback. I use the amp models, because I get my sound through monitors. I use the whole package, amps-cabs-effects.

I won't sell the Ultra until I find a II in my price range. :)
 
I agree with what everyone said above. I still have my standard as a backup, but the Axe 2 is amazing. I noticed you are in Greece. I am Greek myself, but born in the USA. My dad was born and raised in Athens.
 
Oh that's great. I have some Greek relatives living in San Francisco,US. The bad thing about living in a European country is that you pay more in order to get Fractal Audio products, new or used.
 
Unfortunately I don't the cash for a brand new Axe Fx II. I'm looking for a used one, around 1700-1900 dollars (1500-1750 euros) either in Europe or US.
 
I never owned an Ultra, but judging from where I came in at FW 5.07 and to where Fractal is now with 18 is amazing. It's stunning how good it is, different from a tube amp.. but still equally as good. I'm in love with my amps but much of the time I would just like to practice at a volume that doesn't bother my ears at all. Going through A7X monitors is convincing enough and I enjoy it. It's a desert island item, you don't want to go without any longer.
 
You should make a list of things you like about the II that the Ultra doesn't offer, then decide if it's worth the investment.

Also, some more stuff you should consider first:
1) Are you a gigging musician or a producer? Or even both? If you're doing records frequently, the upgrade is worth it for the improve amps and IRs alone.
2) What is the quality of your other equipment? I'm asking this because the Ultra sounds pretty good and it might be worth investing into a fix of other weak links first. Especially your monitoring. If your monitoring sucks, chances are it would be a better investment to improve on that first instead of going for the II.
3) Do you feel the sound of the Ultra is limiting you? Do you feel like you can not achieve a certain sound you desire with the Ultra? Do you think the amps don't sound good to you? Did you maybe have a record that you're trying to replicate but you couldn't? If none of that applies, chances are it's still not worth the change.
 
Are you unhappy with your tones? If not then there's no real reason to upgrade other than that 'evil voice' trying to convince you that you need the latest and greatest.

I had an Ultra and I finally upgraded to the II a year or so after it was released. My reasons for upgrading were not because I could probably get 'better' tones, but because the II had USB (which was badly missing from the G1 boxes) and because of the potential that it had with the constant updates. I came in around fw5 and there wasn't a big difference between the two as far as tones go. Three years of constant development has made that difference a lot bigger today.

I'd say that if you can't resist the voice, save up for a II and when you have enough go for it.
 
Thank you guys for your interest.

First of all, I'm mostly a recording musician, with a few gigs now and then. I'm not a tone purist, I don't get mad about little details and stuff like that, I just enjoy a good rich tone.

My main "problem" with the Ultra is that a few of my favourite amps (Bogner XTC-Mesa Boogie Rectos-Soldano SLO) are not very accurate, at least compared to the II. I listened to some XTC presets of the II and I was blown away. No comparison for the Ultra.

To be fair though, I'm pretty satisfied with my JCM-5150-JMP presets and all of my clean sounds. Overall I think that I miss the tone upgrade in every amp because G3 technology took the Axe Fx II 10 steps ahead of Ultra and also the frequent upgrades ensure that your tone will get better every time. Also, since I'm not a sound engineering expert, I can get a lot of help by the Axe Fx II community, which is far more active than the Ultra's. I learned everything by myself about the Ultra, due to the lack of active Ultra members.
 
BillHoudini said:
Thank you guys for your interest.

First of all, I'm mostly a recording musician, with a few gigs now and then. I'm not a tone purist, I don't get mad about little details and stuff like that, I just enjoy a good rich tone.

My main "problem" with the Ultra is that a few of my favourite amps (Bogner XTC-Mesa Boogie Rectos-Soldano SLO) are not very accurate, at least compared to the II. I listened to some XTC presets of the II and I was blown away. No comparison for the Ultra.

To be fair though, I'm pretty satisfied with my JCM-5150-JMP presets and all of my clean sounds. Overall I think that I miss the tone upgrade in every amp because G3 technology took the Axe Fx II 10 steps ahead of Ultra and also the frequent upgrades ensure that your tone will get better every time. Also, since I'm not a sound engineering expert, I can get a lot of help by the Axe Fx II community, which is far more active than the Ultra's. I learned everything by myself about the Ultra, due to the lack of active Ultra members.
Click to expand...
The constant updates can actually be a double-edged sword. If you don't artifically restrain yourself from constantly upgrading, you'll find yourself revisiting all your presets on a regular basis just to "fix" the sound of all changed models again. With the Ultra, you basicly don't have to worry about that anymore. Your sounds stays consistent with no new firmware on the horizon.

That being said: if you're more a recording guy, you'll love the II for the USB and Ultra res IRs alone. The greatly improved amp modelling is just the icing on the cake. Tones sound a lot more "raw" and "unprocessed" than in the Ultra. You'll probably need to apply more post-processing effort to make them sound like a typical record tone...
 
ThelmoRego said:
I think the mark 2 is on sale for around 1900 right now
Click to expand...
Not in Europe it isn't... Buying in the US and taking it with you creates a problem when you need service... Which is fantastic through G66, but, especially with the low Euro, getting very expensive.

Anyway. Yes, the II is way mucho betterer than the Ultra. I also got in from FW 5.x from owning an Ultra before and I was on the fence for a number of firmwares. Direct comparison when I sold my Ultra with the prospective owner was that the Ultra sounded warmer and more pleasing, although maybe not as "real". But since I believe FW14.x the exuberant feeling I got from the Ultra came back in spades and G3, FW 18.07 has me extatic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom