I guess it's time to reveal this. It is *drumroll*....
... the other way around. So in both of these "which one is first" clips it's Ultra first and II second.
Now this was not 100% comparable since post EQ will give the Ultra more low end dynamics. You might be fooled by the waveform especially in the fade out part which has a bump in the Ultra clip because of the low end EQ boost. So... post EQing an amp can make it more dynamic.
If you want proof then both of those clips are being played in the video and just listen to the mid-gain clip f.ex. I play it in a different way than Irotlas does.
So I don't think this comparison was measuring which of these units is better (that would be the II ofcourse) but more about showing that you can make them sound the same, if not by tweaking then going the lazy route and match EQ them.I think I might match EQ me some of the amp models from the II.
Whoa dude! No offense meant, I thought I was making a friendly suggestion. Now my feeling is all hurt.
You say 'Clearly' but many casual readers don't know what 'Match EQ' is, let alone that they'll need a DAW and tech skillz. Many will just watch your video and conclude "Wow, the Ultra sounds just like the II", period, and think they'll be able to do the same.
Yes, sorry my bad.
The video has no match-eQ, right Clark? Otherwise there would be no point in the video
No I am very sure the gain structure is from the unit. The 9.0 Firmware update from Axe fx II makes somethings more crisp and even sounding since the amps are updated/tweaked with more options we can trigger and pick attack possibly adjusted if I remember correctly.. (Which I find a lot of people on the forum are giving ideas already for the Scenes option since their so pleased by this feature and wondering whats in store to come from then.. ) The pickups are just designed to pickup the signal, when realistically the gain was there that whole time for the amplifier or unit, it just is to add the dynamic EQ's to make them more responsive to your playing. (Could involve headroom for which Magnets used) and for your taste of what you prefer, I hate getting into detail. As for the focused sound I hear, I am suggesting that because the inifinity (used them in my Ibanez I have right now and another Ibanez with dizmario's) Has a more compressed sound. The Infinity's which people say it sucks the tone when realistically I don't find that is why. I got an LTD EC-1000 with JB's and I can hear the playing and responsive sides of both focused and wide and the other more compressed If I talked in the most non-confusing way to put it because I hate talking specs. Don't forget the wood too, but that is the contributing factor to the decay is why. Some people on this forum has told me they prefer Ultra for some High-Gain Amps, Which I find hard to believe, but some own the II as well. I guess its all personal preference, I know my friend who owns an Ultra and I played it yesterday and its great, but the II I find has much more options and shaping, and capabilities of effects and changing them and added accessories. And nearly for myself... I find this an all-in-one-unit to do everything while its still not completed becoming the best thing out there. but the Ultra sure is far capable of enough for most average players to do more than enough, until the II gets on Firmware 11 I will not judge entirely or say anything about my II or conclude my opinion; it is a great unit for what it does for me right now.Personally I wouldn't say dynamic range was a big difference between these units. We tried dropping the volume and playing lightly and both units performed extremely well. However it's pretty clear that I seem to have more gain in all comparisons... could be that Ultra has more drive in comparison or simply the my Les Paul is higher output or I play louder...
