Will there be an Axe Fx 2 Ultra?

quark said:
Well, if I'm not mistaken the architecture of the Tiger Shark is nearly a decade old ( I could be mistaken ) but if that's true, that is ancient in terms of microprocessor development cycles. I doubt that Analog Devices considers the Tiger Shark to be the ultimate DSP chip. How soon before a DSP replacement for the Tiger Shark comes out? Who knows, but if that were to happen, then there would be motivation for Fractal to design a new box around that chip. Isn't that how the Ultra came into existence ... new chip, new capabilities, new box and the rest is history. And it didn't take the Ultra long to be developed once the new chip was available either. But who knows ....
Click to expand...

I read where Cliff had ported the Axe-Fx code to a quad core i7 (check the gearpage I think where I read it..?) and it only ran about the speed of the ultra.... and most guitar processors are bragging about their power with only a sharc in them which is a more dated DSP technology. If 3 years R&D went into the Axe II I would imagine that it would be at least a similar cycle for something else completly new. Except for awesome firmwares :)
I think we need a floor unit that would run one of the new amp models and maybe 6 effects blocks instead of 12 at a time...12 is ok too, keep the hardware focused on live gigging. price it less than $1000 and I think most people would be saying... line 6 what???
 
Sammetal91 said:
Unless someone makes a chip that Cliff will gas for, the Tigersharc is still king. A very old king. Not everything new is better. Example: Nintendo still works no matter how long you leave it on, the Xbox 360 gets the red ring of death if you leave it on for a day. Then again, it OS made by Microsoft....
Click to expand...

How old do you think the base technology for Intel processors are??? Its a horse and carriage with a jet engine. If we see a new Tigersharc it will most likley be increased clock speeds and/or more cores. I think the Axe-II hardware will have a long life cycle :)
 
Excuse the stupid question....but isn't the Axe FX II essentially an Ultra on steroids?? I am assuming it has ALL of the functionality and features of the Ultra with twice the power. Correct?
 
mickdoo22 said:
Excuse the stupid question....but isn't the Axe FX II essentially an Ultra on steroids?? I am assuming it has ALL of the functionality and features of the Ultra with twice the power. Correct?
Click to expand...

Yea my thoughts as well! What could an Ultra II offer that the Ax II doesn't? There is no lack of room for Amps, Effects, ext, so what could reasonably be added that the Ax II couldn't accomplish with an update..to be honest i would prefer quality over quantity with what we have any day!!

It would be cool to see just one flagship product and maybe something at half it's price for those in that price bracket.
 
Last edited:
It's time for a bar-b-que guys

There are some minds in here that are running seriously OCD and/or ADD. (Said lovingly brothers)

Cell phones - PCs - Macs - Cars - Motorcycles....

The list goes on, it evolves and re-evolves naturally. Something fits someone, and in some cases, some get laid to rest many many years later. Others become highly prized. Want my 1996 Matchless Chieftain? Sorry, I will never sell it. You can play your emulation, I will care for and occasionally re-tube mine and revel in it's magic tone from time to time. Absolutely do not ask me to sell my 1989 Martin DC-28, or 1979 Taylor 555 - 12 string. (oh no, they have released new models of these too)

Even if a new model comes out some day down the road, (which of course will happen at some point) will it suddenly make the current model cease to function? Like when the new super cool Mustang came out, did the last generation just stop working and become worthless? I have a nice mid level Mac in my studio. (MAC says it is outdated as it was made two months before the Intel chips came aboard) If you look at Mac's website, you will find several, vastly varied levels and configurations of processors, all currently and simultaneously available right now. None of the FAS AXE series are truly outdated. In effect, the std. is now selling headed toward the $1,000 mark on eBay. You can get an Ultra for around $1,600-$1,800. (Soon to drop a hundred or two, once II is released). Or, you can buy the II. They all work well for someone. The top of the line MAC now can do certain processes thousands of times faster than mine. (MAC Considers their boxes to have a two year lifespan). But, I can record pristinely on my 5 year old box. - I have a MOTU 896HD that is over 7 years old. It is awesome. I could never see myself needing more for a long time now. But more is there if I actually need it. I don't need the newest, most powerful MAC just because it happens to exist. It is all relevant. SLOW DOWN and light up the Bar-B-Que, crack open a beer, get out your real acoustic and enjoy your weekend doing something that someone actually even remotely cares about my brother(s). Seriously, everything is going to be OK. (And that new tune you write will be much cooler than whining on this lame thread)

This thread is like a stubborn splinter that you just can't quite get at.
 
In order to justify a bigger faster AxeFXII there has to be a need for it, i.e., the AxeFXII has to be lacking in performance in some manner or else you'd just have wasted clock cycles. It'd be like buying a Ferrari to go check the mail at the end of the driveway IMHO.

Of course I didn't think that the Ultra was going to be replaced either so I am not a reliable source of information.

But unless he finds a way to add more chips, discovers a faster DSP or writes code that can't be run on the AxeFXII it's PROBABLY not that likely.
 
After following most of these threads, I think it it pretty clear that the Axe II is the next step in line for Cliff's creative and technical genius. To aspire to this level is a labor of love. The business will take care of itself. On the side, something like a floor unit seems to dub down this greatness. In keeping with the motto NO COMPROMISE , if technology affords itself, we can all expect constant striving to this end. The Axe II I'm sure will be great for a time... perhaps several years and for that i am thankful. I also hope Cliff's thirst for pushing the envelope never dies. If one day he awakens with a revelation that smokes the Axe II ( and yes i realize this is not yet released) Then again i am thankful. Thats progress!
I for one would not want to sell an inferior product based on my own abilities for the sake of money or appealing to a larger audience. I think it is quite apparent this unit could not be at a better price point. Unfortunately, as painful as it is, not everyone will be able to yet afford it, as much as i'm sure Cliff would like it it to be more affordable. I could buy a hundred of these units but choose to wait 6 months to a year and choose to work on my crappy playing for now. Peace Out from your trusted self appointed voice of reason!
 
I think that you can still create different products with a 'no compromise' mentality. Many people have expressed an interest in a floorboard axe-fx and pushing something like that at a lower price point would not be a compromise; I think it would be an endeavour that many people seek. Not everyone uses amp sims, not everyone wants to go into a full rack setup. For those individuals, an Axe-FX floorboard, or effects only Axe-FX would be the 'best of the best'! Not me, though! I want the Axe II (but that's just because I plan to do a lot of recording, etc., so it's the best option). Personally, I hope Cliff gives us some time to delve into it before the III comes along haha.
 
Meaning no disrespect. really! Any floor unit or otherwise with less capabilities ex no amp models or just amp models or fewer effects etc IS a compromise from the beast we now have. This appeals maybe to a larger audience because it is at a lower price point but does not appeal to maybe someone like Cliff with creative genius. Yes, maybe many would be satisfied with a lesser beast and maybe a lot of cheddar can be made. Thats fine if your interested in making money. Not fine if your into pushing yourself and the envelope of invention. I do think it is funny how you admit that you wouldn't want such a unit but rather the NO Compromise Best!. My point exactly dude! This is not just about money. It is about being the best. Creating the best. I do not think Fractal should have to apologize by coming out with a cheaper unit to satisfy the masses. Just my opinion. Hope someone can agree. Peace out!
 
Agreed.

a) If Fractal were interested in pursuing a floorboard I think they would have by now
b) What could Fractal possibly gain by trying to compete with Line6?

But what do I know?

Cheers.
 
There would be no harm done if Cliff were to introduce an Ultra II, Extreme II, or whatever he may call it. Like in the first generation products, there was a Standard and there was an Ultra. It would not be any different. There were two price points available to consumers. The higher price point offered those consumers a little more. It's business. It didn't make Standard owners like their units any less. They are both still very amazing units. Nobody knows what the future holds. Get the II, keep what you have, dream about the next thing, or whatever. Whatever you decide, make music TODAY.
 
creek_devil said:
There would be no harm done if Cliff were to introduce an Ultra II, Extreme II, or whatever he may call it. Like in the first generation products, there was a Standard and there was an Ultra. It would not be any different. There were two price points available to consumers. The higher price point offered those consumers a little more. It's business. It didn't make Standard owners like their units any less. They are both still very amazing units. Nobody knows what the future holds. Get the II, keep what you have, dream about the next thing, or whatever. Whatever you decide, make music TODAY.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody is arguing that he could create an Ultra II, just that he probably would not do so without good reason. As Shasha points out, until/unless the algorithms exceed the available memory and/or processing power in the "Standard" II, there's no real benefit to creating another model in the lineup. There was a major difference between the Standard and Ultra in terms of what Cliff could do. The biggest difference between the two TigerSHARC processors was the additional memory, not the 20% clock speed increase. In the Axe-Fx II there is already plenty of both memory and processing power for just about everbody's everyday needs.
 
In my mind there is NO doubt, that there will be an ULTRA II.

Reason:

1. Users will keep finding things that could improve the AXE II. ( It would be nice if.....)
2. Ingeneers like the Fractal-dudes cant help but invent new things. :)

But maybe it wont be within the next couple of years.

Floor unit? why not.
What would they gain to compete with Line6? More sales! No doubt the AXE would floor(he he) the HD models.

Kind regards from Denmark on the first day of summer.
AAEN
 
I don't think there will be an ULTRA. Where are they going to write ULTRA on the II faceplate? :D
 
Last edited:
Basic development of the Axe.

cliff designed the original standard around teh best available DSP chip - a 500Mhz TigerSHARC. Shortly before - or just after the Axe was released, a new version of the TigerSHARC was released. It was the same chip design, but with a faster 600MHz speed - and more memory onboard.

Cliff took advantage of this chip - as it was esy to do so (same basic chip design). He used it to add things the original Axe was not capable of due to chip limitations.

Cliff evolved G2 sims - but they needed mroe power to run. At this time he didnt see a way of using multi chips to share the load - and there were no more powerfull chips availalbe.

Cliff solved the "miulti chip" issue enabling him to use dual chips. One for the sims so he could run his G2 modells - and another for FX. As a buy product this leaves moads of processing power to fine tune the sims, irs or more FX.

As the "multi chip" tech would work for 3 or 4 chips - but cliff has not used them its a fair guess its because:

a. The Lag of more chips it too much

b. Its too costly - given the chips are $300 each - a 4 chip processor would have a cost price $600 more than the AFX2.

c. While its possible, there is no gain from it. He can run everything he wants too with 2 chips.

So - the future. If a new TigerSHARC comes out at a greater speed - cliff "could" just drop those into the AFX2 to produce an AFX Ultra 2 - however Why? its not like the Standard, where there were things missing that he wanted to include. Alternatively a new processor family is developed. In this case it will be a new arcitecture, and new code. Cliff would have to start from scratch (which he didnt do in the Ultra - or even the AFX2). This would mean a development time somewhere between the times for the Standard (5-10 years) and the AFX2 (3 years).

Upshot? an AFX Ultra 2 would be possible ONLY if a faster TigerSHARC was released - but it would not add the functionality the Ultra did, and would take a year AFTER the chip is released (and there is no known developm,ent of such a chip). An AFX3 wopuld also be possible but would be 4-6 years after such a chips specs are released (or an actual chip for cliff to work with). Again no such chip is currently "known about" (at least by us mortals).

So - my take. No AXE Ultra 2 as there is space on the AFX2 to add anything cliff feels the need to add - and no AFX3 for 4-6 years.

The Caveat is - Ive been wrong before :( I didnt think the AFX2 was an option when the countdown started - primarily cos cliff had stated using two chips wouldnt work. So its cliffs fault I was wrong cos he hadnt provided us with the correct/up to date information :)
 
paulmapp8306 said:
Basic development of the Axe.
Alternatively a new processor family is developed. In this case it will be a new arcitecture, and new code. Cliff would have to start from scratch (which he didnt do in the Ultra - or even the AFX2). This would mean a development time somewhere between the times for the Standard (5-10 years) and the AFX2 (3 years).
Click to expand...
Well, maybe not exactly from scratch, the algorithms are already developed, converting them to a new architecture might be laborious but would not take 3-10 years. Also, a new architecture frequently opens up new possibilities even if they were not immediately apparent ... I believe Fractal had many 'aha' moments while working on the Standard and Ultra, a new architecture would just open the possibility for more 'aha' moments. Don't see why they wouldn't go for it if the possibility ever arose. But, all is speculation ... love my Ultra ...
 
"Will there be an Axe Fx 2 Ultra?"

NO. :) Why? Because there is no space left on the front panel for the word "ULTRA".

axe-fx-ii-front-panel-600.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom