Well you got one less person getting the axe fx II

[BigD1977]

Not necessarily. Evolution is a gradual thing, and like in life, it is all about where you came from, (your parents) and where you are going, (still human, but with a better taste in clothing) and if you listen to, and are influenced by more than one artist, (where you came from) you will come out the end with a blend of the parts these artists you enjoy the most, (where you are going) and an evolution of style has rightly occurred.

However, there are those that strike out on their own, doing their best to go against the flow, and not sound like anything else, and if they are successful, (very rarely, as there will always be hints of your influences) then this is style MUTATION!!! This is along the lines of having a radiation leak near your guitar, and it turning into Spiderguitar!!! lol

Both are very justly useful, and accepted forms of musical advancement, and almost every developed artist uses both of these techniques to some degree. For instance, I am VERY influenced by a wide range of artists, to numerous to even name, yet I still have my quirks that I have came up with all on my own, making my style unique enough to sound original, yet not so original that people can't pick out my influences, even ones I never thought about until it was pointed out to me. Which is a good thing if you want to make music into a career. lol

LOL!!! I never considered the difference between evolution and mutation before, not that I considered them the same, I just always tended to lump them under the one word.

My main point is that to recreate the sounds of the past can lead to an obsessive quest for a persons favourite tones, and this is crippling, musically, as the person in question may be passing over something that might just be the key to their needs.

 

[Guitar-Tiz]

LOL!!! I never considered the difference between evolution and mutation before, not that I considered them the same, I just always tended to lump them under the one word.

Really? It was like a day one physical science thing in like 7th or 8th grade for me. :lol It's actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in any kind of evolution, as every modern theory presented, thus far, that even suggests we "evolve" they actually describe mutation, which is not even in the slightest bit the same as evolution.

My main point is that to recreate the sounds of the past can lead to an obsessive quest for a persons favourite tones, and this is crippling, musically, as the person in question may be passing over something that might just be the key to their needs.

Sure, but then we have one less guy at Battle of the Bands competing for that sham of a music contract Ernie Ball offers, so who really cares! :lol J/K I know what you mean, though, but for some of us, those guys are great time savers, as they have already done the obsessive research for us, so if you want that Classic UniVibe sound, without having to find, and shell out for a real UniVibe, then we just ask them, so they actually make up for it in the long run.

 

[javajunkie]

when I said i heard more than one guitar i meant for harmonies not delays ....truth be told the harmony and delays on the axe fx sound great to me ....I really don't care for the chorus the most then it would be the flanger after that ....the flanger sounds good just not as good as my pedals and the chorus does'nt even come close to analogman or retrosonic chorus ....also the tremolo seems weak to me too

You'll be happy to know that over the last few month Cliff has had access to a ton of nice vintage/boutique choruses, flanger, and phasers (including the retrosonic chorus ). I can get some quite nice chorus from the Axe-fx. I have a large number of analog (and digital) pedals so I can compare them side by side. The secret to the chorus/flanger is to turn OFF the auto-depth. It is a lot hard to control that way but you can dial in the effect in much greater detail and get sounds you would otherwise not be able to do.

 

[javajunkie]

BTW, if you haven't try the trapezoid waveform on the trem. It win't give you give me shelter but it is cool in its own right. You can get some interesting and cool trems by taking a wave form (I like trap but others work). Mess with duty and depth. If you want to make it a little less predictable you can add a modifier to the duty cycle. To make it more dynamic you can attach an envelope to the depth.

 

[BigD1977]

Really? It was like a day one physical science thing in like 7th or 8th grade for me. :lol It's actually a pet peeve of mine. I don't believe in any kind of evolution, as every modern theory presented, thus far, that even suggests we "evolve" they actually describe mutation, which is not even in the slightest bit the same as evolution.

Funny you should say that, I'm reading a book about the very same thing, but maybe it's a discussion for another kind of forum.

LMFAO @ the second part of your reply.

 

[cobbler]

BTW, if you haven't try the trapezoid waveform on the trem. It win't give you give me shelter but it is cool in its own right. You can get some interesting and cool trems by taking a wave form (I like trap but others work). Mess with duty and depth. If you want to make it a little less predictable you can add a modifier to the duty cycle. To make it more dynamic you can attach an envelope to the depth.

I need to hang out with you for like a month. Got a spare room?

 

[TaylorMacPhail]

It really is that much of a step up from the ultra sort of like taking off the condom!

hahaha this should totally be Cliff's official response to all the "Is the Axe Fx II really THAT much better than the Ultra?" questions

 

[jb70]

You'll be happy to know that over the last few month Cliff has had access to a ton of nice vintage/boutique choruses, flanger, and phasers (including the retrosonic chorus ).

now this has peaked my interest!!!!

 

[kickatch]

And this is a case of an effect being used on a popular song and people trying to emulate it, even if the effect is flawed, which is pointless if evolution of style is to occur.

i'm not trying to evolve on this one because i play it in a cover band and i would like it to sound like the record ...i've had no luck getting the stones vibe on that song with the tremolo

 

[kickatch]

haha - nice try. Suspect you're trolling, but in case not ...

You asserted the tremolo is weak, I gave you a hint, and now you're still asking for more. The ball's in your court now. Have you tried my suggestion? What did you learn? Share what works for you and what doesn't. Another hint: Start with maximum depth.

But I think you imply some interesting and often discussed points:

(1) The AxeFX is not for everyone

(2) No box can emulate every sound ever created

(3) If a box makes a sound you like, use it, whatever it is

(4) The powerful routing, effect combinations and dynamic realtime control that's possible in the AxeFX deliver effect sounds not possible in any other box. New sounds are yet to be discovered as well!

what's this crap about trolling ...i'm not trolling i'm serious when i say i have'nt got the stone vib with the axe fx tremolo ....why is it that people take offense when someone thinks that the axe fx is not perfect

 

[javajunkie]

what's this crap about trolling ...i'm not trolling i'm serious when i say i have'nt got the stone vib with the axe fx tremolo ....why is it that people take offense when someone thinks that the axe fx is not perfect

None here, I understand. I run into those myself. Sometimes I am able to figure a way to do it in the axe-fx other times I like the other fx better but not enough to add it to the rig, other times I think it is worth it. The Axe-fx is just one tool in the shed (granted it is like the untra deluxe super swiss army knife tool ).

That being said you really can get some cool chorus, flange, phase stuff out of the axe-fx. It has some of my favorite chorus/flanges in it. And I own a TON of chorus, flanger, phaser pedals. I like them all for different reasons.

 

[maxdown]

It really is that much of a step up from the ultra sort of like taking off the condom!

hahaha this should totally be Cliff's official response to all the "Is the Axe Fx II really THAT much better than the Ultra?" questions

I'm glad I pulled out early.

Ahh ..... Now that line a few posts later by Don makes sense ... shame on you Don! ....

 

[MaxTwang]

I like lime slushies, but my blender just doesnt have enough modeling capabilities, of the different bar and resort blenders Ive used.

Do you find your blender makes your lime slushy too fizzy? When there's a modeling issue, it's usually too fizzy. I found a blender at Costco that makes my slushies smooth and creamy without being fizzy.

Everyone knows it should be smooth and creamy without being fizzy.

 

[cobbler]

Do you find your blender makes your lime slushy too fizzy? When there's a modeling issue, it's usually too fizzy. I found a blender at Costco that makes my slushies smooth and creamy without being fizzy.

Everyone knows it should be smooth and creamy without being fizzy.

The VitaMix II blows away the VitaMix1!!!

 

[Admin M@]

It might be time for some new threads, people.

 

[symphx]

Do you find your blender makes your lime slushy too fizzy? When there's a modeling issue, it's usually too fizzy. I found a blender at Costco that makes my slushies smooth and creamy without being fizzy.

Everyone knows it should be smooth and creamy without being fizzy.

honestly it turns the ice in to snow clumps and the liquid is separated!

 

[steadystate]

It might be time for some new threads, people.

You're right. Waste of time. Last post deleted.

 

[Manning]

The VitaMix II blows away the VitaMix1!!!

Meh - that sounds like someone trying to justify their purchase. The Vitamix II is good, sure, but "blows away" the Vitamix I? I don't think so. Both the Vitamix I and the Vitamix I+ have plenty of life in them.

Yeah the new motor is faster and there are also the new pomegranate, kumquat and bacon slushies (which I wouldn't mind having) but I refuse to believe that the Vitamix II is that much of a step up.

 

[Scott Peterson]

Meh - that sounds like someone trying to justify their purchase. The Vitamix II is good, sure, but "blows away" the Vitamix I? I don't think so. Both the Vitamix I and the Vitamix I+ have plenty of life in them.

Yeah the new motor is faster and there are also the new pomegranate, kumquat and bacon slushies (which I wouldn't mind having) but I refuse to believe that the Vitamix II is that much of a step up.

I have a Blendtec and use it every day.

 

[Guitar-Tiz]

I have a Blendtec and use it every day.

Oh yeah, well I have a 50 year old ClassicMix, and you simply don't get the same kind of reliability, and power out of these new fangled devices as you do with a ClassicMix. It's 50 years old, has one knob with 2 settings, it's made of real glass, and metal, plus it will grind nails into a slushy if you feel so inclined. Your plastic pieces of amateur garbage couldn't keep up with it if they were grinding water!

(PS. All comedy aside, I actually do own a very old classic Oster blender! And it could very well grind up nails! :lol )