XL or MKII,,,that is the question

grumpops

grumpops

Inspired
I don't use my Axe Ultra (I) for recording.
I'm a live player, weekends, in casinos...it's my job (But if you really love what you do, do you ever actually "work"?) But I digress.

I was upset, at first, when the Ultra II came out.
Now, what are we, two iterations further down the road, I'm looking at doing the upgrade to the latest and greatest.

THe question becomes...
Is the extra, roughly $400, worth it to me to get the XL or just get the Ultra MK II???

I get it that there's a butt ton of extra presets...I already use perhaps 10% of the presets in the Ultra and create my own for whatever I'm doing. (I think I have 50 different presets I use in a four set night...mostly variations on the same theme but when you're playing covers, one tries to recreate guitar sounds as accurately as possible.
I also use the synths a lot too....Probably have seven or 8 of those.

ONE of the things I'd like to get rid of is...MY CABINET...less to carry makes me happy...lol
THe Cab sims in the Ultra are good, but they always render a bit tinny at FOH so, it's a pair of Sennheiser 609 Cab mics and a BLackstar 2 X 12 (Got rid of the Marshall 4X12 thank goodness..closed back tended to fart a lot on the Marshall sims when palm muting)

I guess the bottom line for what I'm asking is.
With the exception of the extra preset storage....are the two devices really that much different or different at all as far as what they're capable of?
 
No Ultra. The Axe FX 1 came in Axe FX Standard and Axe FX Ultra. Then then Axe FX II came along, initially as the Axe FX II, then then Axe FX II Mk2, and finally the Axe FX II XL. So you are actually comparing an AxeFX II Mk2 vs AxeFX II XL. That said, you have guaranteed preset compatibility with the XL, despite the innards being essentially the same from a processing perspective, the regular II can't load XL presets, but the XL can load II presets. You also get the extra bells and whistles like much more user cab space - which is very nice! And you won't have to wait, the XL is in stock, the II has a wait list of a couple months usually. Is that worth the price difference to you? It was for me, but we're all different.
 
The XL is the future and the Mk2 the past. All the future presets people will post will be the XL variety. If I were buying today I'd go XL, but alas I have two Mk1s and will await the next thing after the XL.
 
Unless you find a deal on a used II go XL, Just because it has all of the extras does not mean you have to use them. I have a II not sure which but I don't care the processing is the same as are the sounds. As Luke posted above until the next evolution of Axe I will stay with the one I have now I have no reason to sell what I have to step to an XL. I'm not a power user and hardly use what's available in the II. The sound and most notably the feel is worth the move to a 2nd Gen unit whatever it is.
 
Tanks

Yah, mine is Generation 1 Ultra, from when it was the Axe Effects standard and the Axe Effects Ultra.
Ok...was just wondering....I suppose, even though I don't use an MFC (don't like the layout...I use a midi buddy to change patches and a Roland FC300 to make real time midi changes for efx and a solo boost) I suppose the extra $400 for the XL is worth the fact that Cliff added enough dedicated, and currently unused space for a lot of future enhancement.

The one thing that's always made me crazy is...if you scroll through presets...no two of them have the same volume and some you have to turn off the compressor to even hear them...
 
Luke makes a good point about future presets, but as Sixstring pointed out, a lot of us are happy enough with our II's to not justify the jump to an XL... pick your poison.

As for actual differences, besides extra preset storage (which it sounds like doesn't interest you much), there's a lot of extra user IR spaces... if you had a separate IR for each patch you make, assuming the ~50 you mentioned, you still wouldn't use all the spaces in the II, let alone the XL. So, I think that would be lost on you as well.

IIRC, there's some kind of physical upgrade with the input, but I have had no problems with mine on the II... haven't experienced an XL first hand to compare, so someone else should chime in on that.

The Ultrares IRs are, IMO, phenomenal. Especially with the ability to mix multiple IRs in CabLab... I think an FRFR solution might be where you want to focus your attention going into a II/XL.

My $0.02, the XL is ideal for the studio cat or "power user" who needs quick access to all those presets/storage. Everyone else "gets by" with a II just fine. Is the latest/greatest worth $400 to you? Only you can decide.
 
Rotti said:
Luke makes a good point about future presets, but as Sixstring pointed out, a lot of us are happy enough with our II's to not justify the jump to an XL... pick your poison.

As for actual differences, besides extra preset storage (which it sounds like doesn't interest you much), there's a lot of extra user IR spaces... if you had a separate IR for each patch you make, assuming the ~50 you mentioned, you still wouldn't use all the spaces in the II, let alone the XL. So, I think that would be lost on you as well.

IIRC, there's some kind of physical upgrade with the input, but I have had no problems with mine on the II... haven't experienced an XL first hand to compare, so someone else should chime in on that.

The Ultrares IRs are, IMO, phenomenal. Especially with the ability to mix multiple IRs in CabLab... I think an FRFR solution might be where you want to focus your attention going into a II/XL.

I will probably send the Ultra back to NH to have the encoder replaced and then sell it on eBay.
Oh, some comic relief....I just saw an Ultra II XL on ebay for......$3,200...

My $0.02, the XL is ideal for the studio cat or "power user" who needs quick access to all those presets/storage. Everyone else "gets by" with a II just fine. Is the latest/greatest worth $400 to you? Only you can decide.
Click to expand...

You folks sure aren't making this easier...LOL
No, I'm not what one would call a power user..I don't spend my days creating patches.
If the only true difference is the amount of user preset spaces and the different inputs/outputs...but EVERYTHING else is exactly the same...then the MKII is probably for me.
On the other hand...My ultra is getting tired...I have to use Axe Edit to make changes now since the encoder wheel has gotten a case of the flue and is real good decrementing a value, not so good going up!!! lol

I prefer not to wait forever and it's starting to sound like the deciding factor may in fact be..I can get the XL now...and will have to wait a few months for the MKII
 
I went to the XL simply for the future. (from the AxeFX II) I figured it's a fair bet it will be needed for certain things in the future. If not, that's OK too. Cost me the same as you are talking about-$400 more after the sale of my AxeFX II (MKI). I am glad I did-no regrets.
 
One of the big selling points that got me to upgrade from the II to the XL was the built in "anti-brick" feature.

I too suspect that while the II will still be supported, the XL upgrades will get even more attention from FAS. Cliff has already doubled our pleasure as to presets and IR space since the XLs release, and I got a feeling some more goodies are coming our way soon in terms of SW advancements that the II won't benefit from...
 
From my experience with the II and now the XL, I'd say the input 'secret sauce' alone in worth the $400...it's VERY quiet. The type of memory used, along with the additional space, is a huge bonus. Plus, what does Cliff have up his sleeve for the use of some of that memory?!
 
  • Like
Reactions: svl
I have the II mk1 and am waiting for the III (or whatever it will be called) since the XL was/is a relatively smaller step forward in capability. I expect the III will take a leap. I don't mean to dis the XL as for many the additional feature are definitely worth it. I just think the next version may include a next gen processor which would allow for a "leap" in capability (as the II did with dual processors vs the single processor in the Ultra)

When is the question, but I'm in no rush as the II will give me loads of fun for the foreseeable future.
 
As you sound like you dial in your own patches competently and have a busy gigging schedule I'd suggest you try for a good deal on a used Axe 2 (mk2 preferably). There should be a few out there due to owners wanting to upgrade to the Axe 2 XL.

Then play it/earn with it until the wheels fall off ..... by that time there will possibly be a totally new unit from FAS to decide upon.

Spend a little of the money you'll save to get the Ultra serviced back at Fractal and sell it on in good working order to recoup some dosh .... or keep it as a backup unit.
 
Yah, that's the plan.
Since I need the new one now, not three months from now, I'll go ahead and get the XL, send the Ultra back to New Hampshire, and then sell it..
Hell, there's an XL on eBay right now for $3,200...I actually wrote the seller asking why this unit is so special since from the factory it's only $2499.
 
Hate to bust your bubble grumpops but the XL is actually sold out at the moment. You need to get on the notify list. I am going thru the same decision your are.
 
After owning the XL for a couple of months now I wouldn't want to give up its expanded memory.
It has proven to be very handy.
 
svl said:
One of the big selling points that got me to upgrade from the II to the XL was the built in "anti-brick" feature.

I too suspect that while the II will still be supported, the XL upgrades will get even more attention from FAS. Cliff has already doubled our pleasure as to presets and IR space since the XLs release, and I got a feeling some more goodies are coming our way soon in terms of SW advancements that the II won't benefit from...
Click to expand...

This. No Eprom hassles.

Plus, no one has mentioned the XL has a few additional X/Y capabilities. You can actually do a little bit more with it from a pure capability standpoint.
 
sprint said:
I have the II mk1 and am waiting for the III (or whatever it will be called) since the XL was/is a relatively smaller step forward in capability. I expect the III will take a leap. I don't mean to dis the XL as for many the additional feature are definitely worth it. I just think the next version may include a next gen processor which would allow for a "leap" in capability (as the II did with dual processors vs the single processor in the Ultra)

When is the question, but I'm in no rush as the II will give me loads of fun for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Same here. I wont be buying an XL as I don't need one. The II more than meets my needs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom