# Differences between Axe-Fx Ultra, 2, & XL



## Catjive2 (Feb 9, 2016)

What are the differences? Im thinking of buying an axefx but i cant actually find specs on the differences between the 3 versions. 

Please don't comment "Just get the XL, its better." 
Because that won't help. 

Say if I was to get a good deal on the Ultra, what would I be missing out on that the 2 or the XL offer? Would I be missing out on a number of amps and effects, or is it just processor power?

P.S. Im STOKED to finally get one and join the family!!


----------



## NixerX (Feb 9, 2016)

more memory + CPU

If you don't need 700000000 cab IR's and every single effect at once all running at ultra res you will be fine with an Regular AxeFX 2.

I've been happily bashing on a basic bitch II for 3 years,


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Feb 9, 2016)

The newer the unit the more updates it'll get down the road. The Standard and Ultra aren't going to be getting updates and improvements going forward, and with the rate in which Fractal develops software it's looking like the II won't have as much coming down the tube as the XL. As the software advances it takes up more and more memory and processing power. 

Not to say the older units aren't awesome as is, because they totally are, but if you want to get in on the newest models and effects you'll need a newer unit.


----------



## Hachetjoel (Feb 9, 2016)

i'd say if you can swing it get at least the II the standard and ultra have the older modeling for the amp sims, and i just dont think they can compete.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Feb 9, 2016)

The Ultra is the old Axe-fx model with the old modelling and tech, its not supported anymore but people got very good tones out of it so it still holds up today. Downsides it has no interface so you will need to buy one and a midi to USB for transferring updates, Axe-edit, patches and IRs. It also only has 10 IR slots which is a big downside if you like third party IRs which most people do. 

The II and XL use the latest modelling technology and are currently supported, new firmware updates come out every month or so. 

The II and the XL are the same apart from these:


> The Axe-Fx II XL has the same DSP and amp modeling capabilities as the Axe-Fx II Mark II, but offers expanded memory, new I/O ports, and other upgrades detailed below:
> 
> 
> Built-in FASLINK&#8482; port for connection to MFC-101 Mark III over conventional XLR cables.
> ...



The XL + has a brighter display than the XL model.


----------



## Catjive2 (Feb 9, 2016)

Honestly I have a mesa over sized so I don't need a cab sim.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Feb 9, 2016)

Catjive2 said:


> Honestly I have a mesa over sized so I don't need a cab sim.



Do you have a power amp too? You'll need one if you plan on running your cab.


----------



## Catjive2 (Feb 9, 2016)

I will be getting a matrix probably after buying the fractal.


----------



## remus1710 (Feb 9, 2016)

i m in the same situation as u are... i m looking to buy an axe fx... i have the money to buy the ultra but after doing some research i found out this things that convinced me i need the 2 or above... maybe it will help u:

1. the 2 has the newer modelling technology 
2. the 2 is still supported by fractal and they are still pushing updates
3. the 2 has an audio interface and u can record direct 
4. the 2 has axe edit and u can make ur patches there... (i don t like knobs and small screens)
5. the newer the version the ( 2 mk2, xl, xl+) the more it ll be supported by fractal
6. patches on the ultra don t work with the 2

hope this helps


----------



## mnemonic (Feb 9, 2016)

All versions of the Axe FX II (II mk 1, II mk 2, XL and XL+) all use the same modeling tech, same DSP, etc. so they will all be supported as long as eachother. 

The differences, if I recall correctly, are as follows:

Mark II - got a new quieter fan. 

XL - improvements listed by Lorcan Ward - mostly stuff useful for 'power users,' like more cab slots, new plug on the back for the controller, etc. 

XL+ - new screen controller, since the old one was discontinued (but due to it having a different controller, the firmware has to be slightly different so it needed to be differentiated from the XL). 


remus1710 makes good points about the standard/ultra - namely, no USB (need an interface to record and MIDI to connect to axe-edit), no headphone jack (need headphone amp to use headphones with it), and older modeling tech. 

There are quite a few "Standard/Ultra vs Axe FX II" threads on the Axe FX forum, and loads of comments from people who still own and use both that can compare them for you. Last I looked, the general consensus was that they were very similar at launch, but the II's firmware updates have made it much better sounding and much more user-friendly than the Standard/Ultra ever was. Not to mention loads more amps in the II. But they all emphasize the Standard/Ultra is still a great piece of gear.


----------



## Shask (Feb 9, 2016)

mnemonic said:


> . Last I looked, the general consensus was that they were very similar at launch, but the II's firmware updates have made it much better sounding and much more user-friendly than the Standard/Ultra ever was. Not to mention loads more amps in the II. But they all emphasize the Standard/Ultra is still a great piece of gear.



Yeah, the II was the same as the Ultra when it first came out, as far as software. However, 21+ major updates later over 5 years, it is completely different.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Feb 9, 2016)

Shask said:


> 21+ major updates later over 5 years, it is completely different.



5 years! I can't believe its been that long and we are still getting free major firmware releases packed with new amps every month or so. 

Cliff has also said a few times that there is a lot of life left in the II so it will be a long time before the eventual III model comes out.


----------



## laxu (Feb 10, 2016)

Catjive2 said:


> Honestly I have a mesa over sized so I don't need a cab sim.



As long as you're aware that you won't get the most diverse sounds out of the unit this way. The cab sim is actually a big part of the tone of the amps. It will still sound just fine thru your Mesa but different amp models will just sound more similar than they would if you used cab simulation.

The Axe-Fx Standard was good enough to make me ditch my tube amps but the Axe-Fx 2 with its current firmware is just much, much better in every way. The hardware user interface is a bit crap on both (and the new AX8 isn't much better) but having Axe-Edit makes it all better.

Right now I'd either buy a used Axe-Fx 2 (any version is fine, I have the Mk I) or the AX8 as it sounds the same as the 2 but with some limitations. Should be fine if you don't care about the more esoteric effects.


----------



## Shask (Feb 10, 2016)

Lorcan Ward said:


> 5 years! I can't believe its been that long and we are still getting free major firmware releases packed with new amps every month or so.
> 
> Cliff has also said a few times that there is a lot of life left in the II so it will be a long time before the eventual III model comes out.



Right now there is really nowhere else to go hardware-wise. The Axe II has 2 of the fastest available DSPs for a realistic price. The hardware has kind of hit the limit to what is available.

The interface could be replaced with fancy color LCDs or whatever, but that isn't that important, IMO versus the tone/feel.

I think there is going to have to be a major advancement before the II will be replaced. Something major, like the next generation technology that will replace the IR.


----------



## Catjive2 (Feb 10, 2016)

remus1710 said:


> i m in the same situation as u are... i m looking to buy an axe fx... i have the money to buy the ultra but after doing some research i found out this things that convinced me i need the 2 or above... maybe it will help u:
> 
> 1. the 2 has the newer modelling technology
> 2. the 2 is still supported by fractal and they are still pushing updates
> ...



wait so the Ultra isnt able to connect to axe edit?


----------



## remus1710 (Feb 10, 2016)

let me put it this way... it s more complicated to connect to axe edit with ultra... u have to run an older firmware of axe edit and some users are reporting problems with the connection and so on...


----------



## Shask (Feb 10, 2016)

Catjive2 said:


> wait so the Ultra isnt able to connect to axe edit?



You can, but you have to use an old archived version of Axe-Edit. Axe-Edit was pretty buggy back in those days. It was scrapped and re-written after the II had a ton of issues with it.

You also need to use an interface with MIDI in/out.

So, Ultra MIDI in/out to interface, interface to PC, and then old version of Axe-Edit.


----------



## Elric (Feb 10, 2016)

Catjive2 said:


> wait so the Ultra isnt able to connect to axe edit?



It works fine as long as you have a MIDI interface and the correct version of the editor. I use it all the time. I have a II and an Ultra and use both frequently.

If you are just buying one but are budget conscious and do not need the cab sims I would recommend looking at a used II mk1/2 they are still being updated and supported and are really only limited by their IR slots/memory vs the XL/XL+ They are not really deficient in any way from a sound standpoint relative to the newer flavors.

That said the Ultra is brutal as a straight preamp into a power amp / cab rig. It's just that you'll always be a second class citizen from a support/update standpoint and it does not have the newer tech of the II series. If you get a chance to demo one do... for what they go for now, there is literally no better piece of gear, IMHO. 

Otherwise the newer unit maybe a safer choice since it is state of the art.


----------



## Catjive2 (Feb 12, 2016)

All of this has been super helpful! Thank you to all. I'm just gonna wait a little longer and save for the 2. I dont wanna join the family at a disadvantage just to have an actual axefx.


----------

