Why do we stray?

t0aj15

Power User
I just don't get it, some time back at the birth of both the AX8 and the FX8 there were several folks who quite simply rejoiced at the combination of the two and what was to be had by the combining of the best of both, and then all of a sudden the entire idea just seemed to die.
I just got back into my own AX8 > FX8 connection and to be honest I have NO idea why I strayed, because it absolutely rocks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ole
I've toyed with using them together, played a bit at home with them and loved it, but for live use I would like to use one to control the other. I've gathered that the FX8 would be the one to control the AX8 since the AX8 only receives MIDI CC. Problem is I'm so MIDI ignorant that don't really even know what I just said, I'm basically starting at square one. I go through periods where I'll do some reading but get distracted with what I'm able to do with the AX8 alone. I'm hoping someday to at least understand how to get them to work together even if I never use them that way.
 
Yea for what I do I can't imagine needing an fx8 on top of an ax8. But I can see the appeal for some people I suppose. Granted, I swapped my ax8 out for an axefx2, so I don't really have a horse in the race anymore.
 
For me the AX-8 was incredibly constraining, limiting me by the limitations of its DSP power. But I came from the XL+, and when you're used to that, the AX-8 can feel incredibly cramped. I reckon if I had come from the Pod HD to the AX-8 first I'd probably be raving about it. So in that vein I can see some sense in combining the AX-8 with the FX-8, like in using the AX-8 for amp and cab sim, and some effects before the amp, and the FX-8 for all the DSP intensive effects that usually come after the amp. Of course, you'd end up with a more complicated bigger rig, so you might as well forgo that hassle and go for the XL+ and MFC combo instead. And now the III.
 
For me the AX-8 was incredibly constraining, limiting me by the limitations of its DSP power. But I came from the XL+, and when you're used to that, the AX-8 can feel incredibly cramped. I reckon if I had come from the Pod HD to the AX-8 first I'd probably be raving about it. So in that vein I can see some sense in combining the AX-8 with the FX-8, like in using the AX-8 for amp and cab sim, and some effects before the amp, and the FX-8 for all the DSP intensive effects that usually come after the amp. Of course, you'd end up with a more complicated bigger rig, so you might as well forgo that hassle and go for the XL+ and MFC combo instead. And now the III.

Yeah I can see that. Pod-HD to AX-8 is actually exactly what I did before moving up to the XL+. Once in a while I would run into the DSP wall, but 99% of the time I just had to delete a block I wasn't using, or reduce the quality of a reverb or something which made no audible difference to me anyways. I was able to set up a few presets that let me get from clean to crunch to high-gain to lead, basic complement of FX (verb/delay/drive) and it would work out. But before I got rid of it I started realizing that switching scenes wasn't much difference gap-wise than switching presets, so I just started doing a preset per tone, then using scenes for just switching FX & stuff like that around.

I just don't do a whole lot with my presets that are CPU intense...one or two drives, amp/cab, verb/delay/chorus.....maybe an EQ here or there, but those usually get deleted. So the ax8 was sufficient and the XL+ is so much overkill that I started running the other guitarists dry tone through there for some processing & direct recording.

To each their own, just seems crazy to me. And I agree by the time you put an ax8 & fx8 together, I'd rather just buy an XL+. I guess the only exception would be if the ax8 were sufficient to grab and go for certain gigs, and the fx8 was also to be utilized with a traditional amp for other gigs, and then because you already have both....go ahead and combine them, why not?
 
Back
Top Bottom