# Axe fx ultra or II or real amp



## honeybadger (Aug 28, 2011)

Axe fx ultra or axe fx II. ultras Way cost way less, but im worrying about it maybe becoming outdated, or if fractal stops making updates for the ultra. the axe fx II obviously doesnt have the same problems but cost a bit more. What do you guys think I should do. OR I could skip out on axe fx and get either a powerball, fireball, dual rec or tremoverb. Just let me know what you think i guess. 

my band plays in c# right now if that helps. also here is a link A link to my bands page if you want to check out a song and recommend what would soudnd
best with our music.


----------



## SirMyghin (Aug 28, 2011)

I like real amps, if you get an ultra/II you will also need to get a powered cabinet or power amp also, make sure you factor that into your budget.


----------



## honeybadger (Aug 28, 2011)

I would be using a mackie 1531 as to play out of if I get an axe fx


----------



## gilsontsang (Aug 28, 2011)

I like the idea of axe fx but seriously whose going to use all the amp / effects models? I rather get a real tube amp and just stick to the tone I like


----------



## JMP2203 (Aug 28, 2011)

gilsontsang said:


> I like the idea of axe fx but seriously whose going to use all the amp / effects models? I rather get a real tube amp and just stick to the tone I like



+1


----------



## xtrustisyoursx (Aug 28, 2011)

Sounds like you don't know what you want. A powerball, fireball, dual rec, and trem-o-verb are all vastly different amps.


----------



## Taylor2 (Aug 28, 2011)

gilsontsang said:


> I like the idea of axe fx but seriously whose going to use all the amp / effects models? I rather get a real tube amp and just stick to the tone I like



People who play more than one type of music perhaps?
People who operate a studio?
People who are creative?



OP : You're asking us to make a decision for you. Do some research and compare features versus what you will be doing with it.

If you play one type of music with no effects, then no. Don't buy an Axe-FX.
If you play many different types of music and are prepared to use it in the studio, then why not.


But keep in mind that the Axe-FX is for tweakers and people who know what and how to manipulate a tone.
Not for someone who just wants to plug in and play.


----------



## yingmin (Aug 28, 2011)

gilsontsang said:


> I like the idea of axe fx but seriously whose going to use all the amp / effects models? I rather get a real tube amp and just stick to the tone I like



The point of something like the AxeFX isn't to use every model and effect available, but to give everyone the choice of what to use. You might buy one and only ever use one or two different models and a handful of effects, but that doesn't mean that it's wasted. You're getting what you want out of it, probably for a little less than buying those actual amps and effects would cost, and there's a lot less upkeep and less to carry around. There's also the flexibility: if you play in different bands, you might want a different tone for each. The AxeFX can give you as many different amp/cab/effects combos as you want or need for different situations.

That said, I'd still go for a physical amp, personally.


----------



## Joelan (Aug 29, 2011)

I just grabbed an Ultra and it's versatility has already come in handy. I got asked to session for a post-hardcore influence band so I could dial in some tones for that, whereas the tones I would normally use are very different.

The reasons I grabbed the Axe-FX in the first place though was really because I didn't want to bother with tubes, wanted something I could easily record direct, and it's very portable. The versatility is really just a bonus.


----------



## Overtone (Aug 29, 2011)

Havent heard the ii at all, but my take on the first gen is they sound amazing in live settings compared to regular amps when it comes to metal but not rock, and that on cd i still prefer regular amps as well, unless bulb made it 

Also pretty sure that as long as fractal sticks around there will be great support for the first generation axe fx


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 29, 2011)

xtrustisyoursx said:


> Sounds like you don't know what you want. A powerball, fireball, dual rec, and trem-o-verb are all vastly different amps.



This. 

It sounds like your just picking stuff out of a hat. Have you tried any of the amps/processors you're listing?

Go play a lot of amps. Buy the one you like the best.


----------



## oliviergus (Aug 29, 2011)

I'm kind of in the same situation, deciding on a real amp or Axe FX standard. 
The positive thing about the Axe FX is that you can record with it, and play with it live/rehearsal, versatility, weight. 

The last piece for me is that I want to know the feeling between a real amp and the Axe FX, becuase its mostly going to be used live/rehearsal. So I want the "pressure" to be or something? Since i'm playing metal. 

I don't know really... Its a hard decision.


----------



## wlfers (Aug 29, 2011)

xtrustisyoursx said:


> Sounds like you don't know what you want. A powerball, fireball, dual rec, and trem-o-verb are all vastly different amps.



+1

I was to tell you what I'd do in your situation, I'd buy my Ultra-Lead. But seriously, you gotta figure what you want/need. It's a generic answer but it's true nonetheless. 

Are you recording, just performing, big into patch creation and tweaking, run external effects, midi switch, consume dairy, amp channel switch, etc. 

What do you run now and what do you like/dislike?


----------



## Joelan (Aug 29, 2011)

oliviergus said:


> I'm kind of in the same situation, deciding on a real amp or Axe FX standard.
> The positive thing about the Axe FX is that you can record with it, and play with it live/rehearsal, versatility, weight.
> 
> The last piece for me is that I want to know the feeling between a real amp and the Axe FX, becuase its mostly going to be used live/rehearsal. So I want the "pressure" to be or something? Since i'm playing metal.
> ...



If you struggle to get the feel out of it, a tube poweramp will probably do it for you. I really like the Axe-FX through both types of setups. A poweramp and cab definitely makes it sound and feel more like a traditional setup, but FRFR is really cool too, just different. It's more like what you expect from a produced recording. I like it personally, probably because I've never owned a tube amp.

That's just my personal experience anyway, from owning it for a few weeks. I can only really look forward, seeing as I upgraded from a SS practice amp haha.


----------



## oliviergus (Aug 29, 2011)

Joelan said:


> If you struggle to get the feel out of it, a tube poweramp will probably do it for you. I really like the Axe-FX through both types of setups. A poweramp and cab definitely makes it sound and feel more like a traditional setup, but FRFR is really cool too, just different. It's more like what you expect from a produced recording. I like it personally, probably because I've never owned a tube amp.
> 
> That's just my personal experience anyway, from owning it for a few weeks. I can only really look forward, seeing as I upgraded from a SS practice amp haha.


Sry but a tube poweramp is out of my pricerange.. I'm going for a Rocktron velocity 300 if I go for the Axe FX. Ive never owned a tube amp either.. Will I even recognize and say "this sounds digital" if I just play the Axe FX alone with no other amp to compare with?


----------



## VILARIKA (Aug 29, 2011)

oliviergus said:


> I'm kind of in the same situation, deciding on a real amp or Axe FX standard.
> The positive thing about the Axe FX is that you can record with it, and play with it live/rehearsal, versatility, weight.
> 
> The last piece for me is that I want to know the feeling between a real amp and the Axe FX, becuase its mostly going to be used live/rehearsal. So I want the "pressure" to be or something? Since i'm playing metal.
> ...



If your really worried about the "feeling" between the Axe-Fx vs a tube amp, just buy a power amp for the Axe-Fx. Your not losing that "amp in the room" feeling and you still have a setup that is easy to travel and record with. You also have a vast amount of features and effects at your command, so versatility is covered. You can't do lots of these things with a typical metal amp and cab setup. Just decide what works for you best!


----------



## atticmike (Aug 29, 2011)

An axe fx, no matter whether it is revision one or two, will never be able to compete with a real amp's range & depth. 

I think that the axe fx 1 & 2 is great for people that are doing lots of recording or gigs on a regular basis, keyword: mobilty and reasons of technical simplification.


----------



## VILARIKA (Aug 29, 2011)

atticmike said:


> An axe fx, no matter whether it is revision one or two, will never be able to compete with a real amp's range & depth.



Have you heard the Axe-Fx in person, or played one? I'd like to say that whether the Axe-Fx can "compete" with a real amps range & depth is totally based on the listeners perception of the sound.


----------



## atticmike (Aug 29, 2011)

VILARIKA said:


> Have you heard the Axe-Fx in person, or played one? I'd like to say that whether the Axe-Fx can "compete" with a real amps range & depth is totally based on the listeners perception of the sound.


 
Yup I did and not only I am a dedicated musician, I also record a lot in studio environments and nothing can compete with a natural, well saturaed real-tube sound. 

Of course there may be unbearable tube amps out on the market that eare easily replaceable by an axe fx but this rarely takes place. 

No one would ever record their work with a modeler unless they lack the means / money / knowledge to do so. 

Why bands such as born of osiris would record their tracks through an axe fx ultra is beyond my cognition. You're instantly prone to technical / modeling updates which automatically degrades the sound you recorded your album with.


----------



## JPMike (Aug 29, 2011)

To me Axe Fx is a really good piece of equipment, it saved me from neighbours, relatives, gf complaining. It's modeling capability it's really good, I mean, I believe you can compare it to a tube amp but of course, only the tube amp can produce the sound it produces. 

We have to acknowledge though, that the Axe Fx can get pretty close. 

It's a matter of personal preference what you want and need. Sometimes, I miss my Diezel so much, but I got something else instead that satisfies me the same way.

You have to keep in mind, what you need it for, is it for recording, giging, practising, anything. Gather all your factors and be wise to choose. Both ways, have their own advantages and disadvantages.


----------



## atticmike (Aug 29, 2011)

JPMike said:


> To me Axe Fx is a really good piece of equipment, it saved me from neighbours, relatives, gf complaining. It's modeling capability it's really good, I mean, I believe you can compare it to a tube amp but of course, only the tube amp can produce the sound it produces.
> 
> We have to acknowledge though, that the Axe Fx can get pretty close.
> 
> ...


 
approved 

I just can't stand people saying that axes are superior to real tube amps, ridiculous 

Sooner or later, this bubble of isolation will burst


----------



## JPMike (Aug 29, 2011)

atticmike said:


> approved
> 
> I just can't stand people saying that axes are superior to real tube amps, ridiculous
> 
> Sooner or later, this bubble of isolation will burst



Hehe!! 

A lot of people are ignorant.


----------



## budda (Aug 29, 2011)

honeybadger said:


> Axe fx ultra or axe fx II. ultras Way cost way less, but im worrying about it maybe becoming outdated, or if fractal stops making updates for the ultra. the axe fx II obviously doesnt have the same problems but cost a bit more. What do you guys think I should do. OR I could skip out on axe fx and get either a powerball, fireball, dual rec or tremoverb. Just let me know what you think i guess.
> 
> my band plays in c# right now if that helps. also here is a link A link to my bands page if you want to check out a song and recommend what would soudnd
> best with our music.



Huntsville Ontario Canada?

What can you actually go out and try?


----------



## honeybadger (Aug 29, 2011)

Well thats my biggest problem. Ive tried all the real amps listed and love them all. some for the versatility and some because of the straight tone. I play 2-3 times a weekend usually tour a tad bit( hopefully more) so I play alot. The last 3 weeks my set up as been guitar->pod hd 500->BBE maximizer->power amp of 6505+-> vader. And while it feels pretty good and beefy like the real amp its just not as hi fi has I want it to be. it isnt lacking feel i think I just cant tweek it very much. Its just too limited. I can prolly buy axe fx ultra try it and if I dont like it sell it on ebay for just as much as i bought it or more , so I might end up going that direction. 

Also I cant try it out because no one in my area has a axefx.


thanks for all the replies you guys


----------



## atticmike (Aug 29, 2011)

Bear in mind that the demand of the ultra is now nothing compared the axe II 

But yeah, you'll probably either make it a zero zero or loose a tad of money.


----------



## JP Universe (Aug 29, 2011)

Get an Axe Ultra and don't look back, find out what tone you really like in the next couple of years and then get your dream amp, use the Axe for effects! It's basically your rig now but a whole lot better!


----------



## kenken27 (Aug 29, 2011)

Like many have said before me, the Axe-FX is good for keeping your neighbors at bay, quick recordings, and can come in handy while touring. With that said, a real amplifier will always perform better than the Axe-FX, period. You mentioned you've never played a real tube amp before so I'm guessing this is your first time buying a high end amp right? If you're not able to transport an amp while touring, or mic a cabinet for recording due to where you live, and you want to do all of these things with relative ease, I would buy the Axe-FX. If you're looking to find your sound and hear the most beautiful tones possible, buy a real amp. It's simply unbeatable. A/B the Axe-FX and a great boutique amplifier and it might sound the same playing Meshuggah influenced single note riffs, but play a full bar chord or record with it and the difference is night and day.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 29, 2011)

Taylor said:


> People who play more than one type of music perhaps?
> People who operate a studio?
> People who are creative?


 
Not to discredit what you have to say in anyway. I don't know enough about the AxeFX to do so... But couldn't all three aforementioned people achieve the three things you said with one amp they've found to work for them? I guess the studio part--to me--would be an exception, though.


----------



## JPMike (Aug 29, 2011)

I'll be brief, since you don't know what tube amp you want, go for the Axe Fx either Ultra or II. You won't regret it. It has enough amps, cabs, effects, etc, to choose from. 

So when you find out what you use more, go get that tube amp and make your tone even better on that direction.


----------



## honeybadger (Aug 29, 2011)

kenken27 said:


> You mentioned you've never played a real tube amp before so I'm guessing this is your first time buying a high end amp right? .


 

I play a 6505+ everyweekend lol ive played all the amps i listed . I just cant decided


----------



## Taylor2 (Aug 29, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> Not to discredit what you have to say in anyway. I don't know enough about the AxeFX to do so... But couldn't all three aforementioned people achieve the three things you said with one amp they've found to work for them? I guess the studio part--to me--would be an exception, though.



What if someone plays in a country band and a metal band?
Name me an amp that does both *well*.

*The point is*, you have more than 50 amp models to choose from.
You have every type of effect you can think of ever using in any normal situation.
You have the option of bypassing a real cabinet in place of an impulse, so you don't have to mess around with microphones if time is tight.

No 'real' amp can do this. 

I supposed you could run preamp out on a head, but then what's the point? Can't do it live...


I'd still take a real amp head in it's place, but when I'm in the studio and book three different styles of band, it's easier with close to the same results to have the Axe.
Rather then own 6 different amps.


Versatility. That's the Axe's game.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 29, 2011)

JPMike said:


> I'll be brief, since you don't know what tube amp you want, go for the Axe Fx either Ultra or II. You won't regret it. It has enough amps, cabs, effects, etc, to choose from.
> 
> So when you find out what you use more, go get that tube amp and make your tone even better on that direction.


 
Solid call.


----------



## TaylorMacPhail (Aug 29, 2011)

Too many people are treating tubed amps as the default or end-all-be-all of choice for amps. If the Axe Fx produces some good tones you are happy with, especially if you can go from death metal to country with a click of a switch then why NOT get the Axe Fx, who cares if it's tubed or not. As the Axe Fx gets better and better, tube snobs will gradually become extinct 

Like others are saying, get an Axe Fx (standard would do you well enough), and find the tones you like, and if and only if you still see the need to get a tube amp, then find one that sounds like the tone you created on the axe fx. If not, then keep being happy with your Axe Fx and you can laugh at your buddies who are breaking their backs carrying their tube gear


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 29, 2011)

Taylor said:


> What if someone plays in a country band and a metal band?
> Name me an amp that does both *well*.


 
Could we not go there? That's a convo that can go on forever and more than likely start some shit... But the rest of your points are good ones as far as the AxeFX being far more efficient in a time crunch or in a situation where the neighbors might have a problem with the noise you make.

I'd called it overkill in the past, but I think that was more my wallet talking than anything--"Lemme just pick an amp I like from what it has to offer... Order one that only does that and pay that fraction of the price."  

But clearly that's not realistic at all. Thanks for clearing that up. 

I really wasn't into the AxeFX before, but I'm kind of considering it now after reading through this thread.


----------



## Speculum Speculorum (Aug 29, 2011)

I have reservations about even posting on here, as I am sure that this thread will inevitably turn into two camps of posters napalming each other to death on "the better choice". Me? I'm taking the middle path.

Both options are really great. You can't go wrong with either an Axe II or a high-end tube amp. It's really all about what fits your needs. If you need a really loud rig that will stick in the price range > $2,500, go with an amp. Granted, you still need effects and all the cabling and things to go with it. So... spend wisely.

I chose the Axe II for a few reasons. For starters, I'm going to be in a situation where I will need to practice, play, and record at weird hours (like in the middle of the unholy night or insanely early in the morning) in an apartment. This is how it will be for a few years, if not several years starting in about one week. I simply cannot be playing and getting great tones through ANY tube amp at the volumes I will be looking at. Period. I can play through headphones with the Axe if it is absolutely necessary. When I play through my 6505+ in my current garage at a volume of 3, you can hear it blocks and blocks away from my current living space.

Second, the thing sounds awesome. Sure, it takes some time and knowledge investment in order to understand how to use it, but that can be learned and acquired through a few days hard work. Oh well. Especially when you are talking about recording, you no longer have to deal with mic placement, mic type, cabling, etc that you would with setting up a live rig. Basically, the tool is only as good as it's master. Some of the guys around here that use Axe's (Nolly, Misha, Kurku, many many more) get great tones that I dare say rival any tube amp recording.

Third, which is a reflection of the last sentence - I can do what I want, when I want, how I want - with one unit. I need a wide variety of sounds because I do a wide variety of things, and I do those things by myself. I've decided that I can't count on other musicians in my area. This is not because I'm some sort of elitist virtuoso, but because the people in these parts of the good ol' US simply lack that music theory knowledge to play the material I write. I'm a bit of a weirdo and a trained music composer. I have a vision of the sound that I want and I attack at it. I'm not very interested in working with other people right now. I work a full time job and don't have a set schedule, hence I will be working at very odd times when other musicians will either be out drinking/partying or sleeping post-drinking/partying.

Hands down, the Axe II gives me the proper tools for my situation. I will be able to upload great sounding tones and tracks onto the wide inter-webs, to share with folks of similar vision throughout the world. I can do so in a sane and reasonable way regardless of where I am situated.


----------



## wlfers (Aug 29, 2011)

Btw I remember you mentioning you wanted a more hi-fi sound. If you go the tube amp route, Engl and Fryette are good choices. Both articulate and unforgiving though the Engl is more saturated.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 29, 2011)

^ When you say "saturated" what exactly do you mean?


----------



## wlfers (Aug 29, 2011)

I mean "saturated"

The gain starts to sound so almost immediately on my engl when turning the knob. My gain is at 9 oclock while on the vht it is at a good 2 oclock.


----------



## Andretti (Aug 29, 2011)

youtube the Axe FX vs Engl powerball (or fireball can't remember which he was playing). I was actually impressed by how great the Engl sounded when compared to the Axe FX, I had an Engl (rip) but im still debating rather or not I'm gonna sell limbs to afford the Axe Fx. Axe Fx blew me away in every way but at the end of the day, that price tag makes me think "on second thought ..mmnaah" lol


----------



## TomAwesome (Aug 29, 2011)

Either route could work given what little we know about what you need out of your amp. If you want one or two great tones and are able to play loud enough to get the most out of it, you'll probably be happier with a tube amp. If you're looking for a lot of versatility and tweakability, the Axe-FX won't disappoint.

Don't worry about the Ultra being outdated. That doesn't make it sound any less good. If firmware 11 sounds amazing today, it will sound just as amazing in five years.


----------



## Bevo (Aug 29, 2011)

budda said:


> Huntsville Ontario Canada?
> 
> What can you actually go out and try?


 

He needs to track down Metal "J" and buy that boy some beer in exchange to try his gear!


----------



## kenken27 (Aug 29, 2011)

Sell your soul and buy both the Axe-FX and a real amp. Do it for lord Satan. No, fuck that. Buy a solid state amp, haha. Seriously, take your Peavey 6505+ and A/B it with an Axe-FX if you get the chance. Pick whichever one sounds better. Problem solved. Unless you're wanting to record quality guitar tracks at low volumes and with ease, then buy the Axe-FX. That's the only reason I would ever use one. It's honestly not that hard to mic a cabinet at a show. If your Axe-FX happens to blow up when you're playing live you're fucked. If an amp goes out you can borrow one from another band or buy a cheap used 5105 as a backup. The Axe-FX was built by tube snobs in order to emulate tube amps. The Axe-FX is and will ever only be an emulation. It's like the difference between wanking off and having sex. One's obviously better, but the other is easier. Your choice. Anybody want to argue about digital and analog recording now? Kidding.


----------



## atticmike (Aug 30, 2011)

About versatility and being able to play different styles of music with the same amp, you are not necessarily stuck with an axe. Real tube amps such as the Boogie Mark V or Roadster / Road King are indeed really versatile. Also, you can get it for the same price as the axe fx and get to have a "real" amp that is not prone to software updates, meaning you could use it for the rest of your life with some of the sweetest tones ever unless your style of music changes into something that can't be covered by one of these amps which would be undoubtly beyond me. 

I'm not against the axe, nor do I loathe it. However, if you want an axe fx so bad, go for a new Axe Fx II instead of taking advantage price-wise of the standard / ultra generation. Sooner than you think, software updates will make use of their upgraded processing power and therefore cast a shadow on the standard / ultra you won't be able to live with 

The axe fx is also good for people that either want to meticulously tweak their models / visions to the skirts of existance or use people's presets because they don't know how to work a tone which is kind of required whenever you get a tube-amp.


----------



## TubeTone (Aug 30, 2011)

I would advise the OP to go out and listen to some amps he listed before jumping to conclusions. 

There are tons of people on the Internet who played on everything you listed (myself included), but in the end your taste is all that matters.


----------



## 4Eyes (Aug 30, 2011)

what about a tube preamp? you can use it with some decent audio interface for silent practicing/recording or whatever and you can use it with power amp and cab when you need gigging


----------



## Taylor2 (Aug 30, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> Could we not go there? That's a convo that can go on forever and more than likely start some shit... But the rest of your points are good ones as far as the AxeFX being far more efficient in a time crunch or in a situation where the neighbors might have a problem with the noise you make.
> 
> I'd called it overkill in the past, but I think that was more my wallet talking than anything--"Lemme just pick an amp I like from what it has to offer... Order one that only does that and pay that fraction of the price."
> 
> ...



For sure for sure.
But you get the point I'm trying to make.

Everyone has different needs. I just pulled that example out of my ass.


----------



## TaylorMacPhail (Aug 31, 2011)

> It's like the difference between wanking off and having sex. One's obviously better, but the other is easier.



So i'd buy the axe fx, you can't get any STI's nor can you get anyone prego


----------



## F0rte (Oct 3, 2011)

What exactly is the wait time on the Axe FX II anyway? I've been thinking about going for one, but im not sure if I should haha.
I've used the Ultra, and it was extremely helpful for clean sound, and it was a lot cheaper overall.
Say I just used an amp and miced it, you might have to mess a lot with different mics and use different ones depending on the tone your using or the guitar. It all depends.

When I miced, I spent close to $4,300 on different types of mics until I found what I wanted and that was AFTER I found the amp I liked.

I enjoyed micing and recording that way, but I just didnt like how the air moved while with the Axe FX is smooth, clean and I can dial in literally anything I could possibly want without spending so much money on other things.


----------



## Andromalia (Oct 3, 2011)

Well...

-The main axe 2 selling points is twofold imho and doesn't have anything to do with tone generation.



You get an included sound interface. That means three less cables (counting the midi ones) and a guaranteed compatibility, using a sound interface designed specifically for the axe fx.
Reamping. If, like me, you use the axe fx at home, you'll soon grow tired of play, tweak, play, tweak, play, tweak. with the axe FX it's record a track and reamp it and tweak it at your heart content without having to touch your guitar anymore. You can tweak with your guitars in the whole daw mix. Much less hit and miss method.
Those are the reasons I'm buying one instead of staying with my standard. I have sold all my other gear now, bit this didn't stop me from buying a tubemeister head for kicks, as it is simpler to just get ot the rehearsals with it as my new band is using a rented place where we don't have the same cab everytime and we're still at the point of learning to play with each other and laying up songs, tone isn't the main goal for now.

Tonewise my standard is still very nice, it has come a long way with the latest firmware and is still very fine.


----------



## StupidDav (Oct 3, 2011)

Just to add my opinion into a thread already over-saturated in opinions-

I bought an Axe Ultra about 3 months ago, "upgrading" my previous rig which was a 6505, so not particularly versatile. I bought the Axe FX not expecting to ever upgrade the firmware inside: I knew the Axe II was coming out in a couple of months, which would apparently render my Axe "obsolete".

My point is that amp modellers in the vein of the Axe FX are not like computers, they are more like amps. They will not become obsolete with new revisions, just like guitar amps will not become obsolete, because they sound at least 95% "there" with most people.

Just because there is an Axe FX II, doesn't mean my Axe FX Ultra patches will turn to shit.

Go try everything you can. I bought my Axe having never used one, but I had listened to just about every Axe FX video on youtube  I wouldn't personally recommend this, but I took a gamble. There will probably be slightly more people with an Axe over in the States rather than here in the UK so you'll have more of a chance finding one.


----------



## walleye (Oct 3, 2011)

gilsontsang said:


> I like the idea of axe fx but seriously whose going to use all the amp / effects models? I rather get a real tube amp and just stick to the tone I like



ive used about 60/70 so far. they're all unique.


----------



## emgguitarist15 (Nov 8, 2011)

You can argue all day about which is better but when Petrucci, Vai and Broderick are all playing the Axe Fx, it's kind of hard to disagree.


----------



## incinerated_guitar (Nov 8, 2011)

emgguitarist15 said:


> You can argue all day about which is better but when Petrucci, Vai and Broderick are all playing the Axe Fx, it's kind of hard to disagree.


 
Petrucci uses his for effects, along with Broderick, and I believe the same even goes for Vai


----------



## rectifryer (Nov 8, 2011)

Diezel.


----------



## SirMyghin (Nov 8, 2011)

incinerated_guitar said:


> Petrucci uses his for effects, along with Broderick, and I believe the same even goes for Vai



Never seen any of those guys using it for everything, just the effects.


----------



## SnowfaLL (Nov 9, 2011)

I say if you can find one tube amp that does what you want.. get that. Only get the axe-fx if you can't find one amp to do what you need.


----------



## incinerated_guitar (Nov 10, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> Never seen any of those guys using it for everything, just the effects.


 
But when youve got the money, why not? haha


----------



## Rook (Nov 10, 2011)

I don't know why people feel they have to sit in a 'camp' when it comes to this...

I've done plenty of recording, loads of live playing and used to sell amps for a living; expensive tube amps from Fender, Blackstar, H&K, whatever down to cheap stuff. I always used to be a bit of a purist when it comes to tube amps because that's what you're told.

I've also spent thousands on very high end tube amps. 


Now I have an Axe FX Ultra, which I bought to use for recording and for the FX with my (at the time) beloved Mesa setup, set it up 4CM straight away and loved the delays, overdrives, etc etc. I will add the reason I have a Roadster is because I do play varying styles and I like my sound to be able to progress with me.

Once I read how to make some decent presets, about all the amps inside, and how to set the setting on the Axe itself to suit running into a tube power amp I thought I'd give it a go. I rolled through all the presets first... Nothing particularly stood out as impressive, far far better than all the countless other modellers I've tried over the years, there's a distinctively better feel to it than modellers, and a very natural sound to the whole thing.


This is important.

I then made *my own* preset, with the knowledge of how to do this, a clear sound in my mind that I was aiming for, and a good idea of what all the amps and stuff were, so there was no guess work or stumbling onto things. I thought it would be fun to go for the recto model as my setup was effectively still 4CM (I was just bypassing my head's preamp) and dialled in the really dry, medium gain rhythm sound I've always tried to get out of my Roadster using various boosts. 

Not only did I first dial in the sound of my Roadster in its current state, I then used the extra control of the Axe to take a load of the bass out of the preamp section (similar to how you would on a Mark series) and post a post gain stage EQ to put it back but without the mud. I then boosted, put noise gate after the boost and adjusted accordingly. All sounds very good indeed, I was very happy with the sound I'd made but thought 'I don't want to have it this dry all the time in case I do leads'. I save a copy of the preset to the next block, put some bass back in the front end, add some gain, take out the noise gate and put some delay afterwards.

There in one click, I go from tight, crunchy rhythm to high gain with delay changing about 3 pedals and numerous setting on the 'amp' in one click.

There was absolutely no change in feel. I'm very conscious of how amps feel because I tend to use a lot of dynamic in my playing, I've tried tonnes of amps out too (Bogner, VHT, ENGL, Diezel) and always stuck with my amp for that very particular feel Mesa have, and never for a second did I miss that playing the Axe like I have with everything else I've tried.

I then decided the next day I wanted to try some guitars out in a shop a long way from me, but they weren't a Mesa dealer. I took the Axe along, plugged it into one of their PA speakers in their Pro Audio section, flipped a recto cab model and the power amp modelling on and there in that shop were pretty much the exact sounds I'd been playing with the day before. No remembering setting, no heat head unit to carry, no pedals, no cranking it up to make it stop sounding like ass.

Everyone that has tried my Axe FX through my now FRFR setup has said (and its the only one thing that *everybody* has said) is 'wow, it even feels exactly like my [Marshall, Peavey, ENGL].

I'm not, however, in the Axe FX camp, but I am selling my Mesa for it (I wouldn't if I didn't need the money haha). If someone comes out with some different technology next week that uses analogue refrigerator control systems and Windows 95 I'll go for that, or a box that uses hand forged iron tubes from ancient times, if it sounds better I'll ditch it and move on - I'm known for it. I cannot however read all these things people on here are saying about it not feeling the same, this isn't just discreet wave functions like on the pods and such that basically say 'when the level is in this region, boost this, cut this, and compress by this ratio', they're continuous algorithms, which tube amplifiers basically are. If you put one thing in and get another out, why does the process matter? 4 is 4 whether you add 2 and 2 or 3 and 1.

I hate to say it as a lover of tube amps and all that heritage, but I genuinely feel that digital is something that can be embraced, and to me is superior. As far as I'm concerned, and yes everyone has their views, it doesn't matter is Axe FX sounds the same as other amps or not, it sounds very very good indeed, is unmatched in versatility, requires no maintenance, doesn't need to cool down or warm up, isn't fragile, doesn't need voltage conversion in other countries, can't be broken by not being plugged in, can be used with headphones, sounds good at low volumes and consistent as you increase the volume (depending on your amp of course), isn't affected by mains voltage (mains can vary by 20-30V, which makes getting a consistent sound out of tube amps a nightmare), weights 10lbs, fits under one arm (or in a should strap rack bag), gets better over time (updates!).... I don't know how people can not understand the benefits of Axe FX.

And in my opinion, if you even use more than 1 amp or cab model on the Axe, you've benefitted. Each amp/cab model for a 'real' setup will cost you thousands a piece. Axe FX II here costs £400 less than a new Mesa Boogie amp.

Oh and I wasn't gonna mention other peoples posts, but 'doesn't sound good for rock'? Fly to England and I'll show you my JCM800 patch, it'll make your face melt or your money back.


tl;dr Don't be in a camp, try the Axe FX as it seems to suit your needs, and take everyone's opinion (mine included) with a pinch of salt. People aren't black and white, what people say and think about things are influenced by how they feel and blah blah blah. Also try plenty of tube amps though, buy what you like the best.


EDIT: Wow, that turned into a rant!


----------



## Camer138 (Nov 10, 2011)

Fun111 said:


> I don't know why people feel they have to sit in a 'camp' when it comes to this...
> 
> I've done plenty of recording, loads of live playing and used to sell amps for a living; expensive tube amps from Fender, Blackstar, H&K, whatever down to cheap stuff. I always used to be a bit of a purist when it comes to tube amps because that's what you're told.
> 
> ...




Congrats.. that was the longest and most amazing post I have read on any forum.. I think you've sold me on an Axe FX


----------



## GuitaristOfHell (Nov 10, 2011)

In my opionion ( I've been negged for stating this in previous threads. but I am going to anyway).
Okay so this is just MY opinion you can differ that's fine. I personally like the real tube amps. The Axe FX doesn't cut it for me. At times they can sound close such as the Ola video of the Mesa Dual vs. the New Recto Sim. The actual Mesa to me has more punch, a little middier, and less compressed. That's just me though. If that doesn't bother you than go for whatever. Go for the tone you really want.

If you're into the whole effects thing why not? I personally use minimal effects. OD, Wah, Reverb, and sometimes Delay or Rarely Chrous. But that's about it. If I was into more effects I'd still get the Mesa and then get a pedal board and put a shit load of nice stuff on it. Yeah, you'd need a power supply to reach and that can be a bitch but I'd rather do that. Mesa, Pedalboard, and then the effects. Do what YOU want though so take what I say with a grain of salt mate.


----------



## rectifryer (Nov 10, 2011)

Fun111 said:


> I cannot however read all these things people on here are saying about it not feeling the same, this isn't just discreet wave functions like on the pods and such that basically say 'when the level is in this region, boost this, cut this, and compress by this ratio', they're continuous algorithms, which tube amplifiers basically are. If you put one thing in and get another out, why does the process matter? 4 is 4 whether you add 2 and 2 or 3 and 1.
> 
> 
> EDIT: Wow, that turned into a rant!


 
IMO That turned into a bad example since what you claimed the pod was doing was, in fact, an algorithm. I see your point about the axeFX being continuous, but you are implying its analogue if that were the case. That is just false. The AxeFX has analogue to digital converters just the same as the pod minus the sampling rate. 

I have no doubt about the integrity of your experience, I just wanted to point out that contrasting the pod from the AxeFX by grouping the AxeFX with tube amps doesn't work using the metaphor you provided.


----------



## Rook (Nov 10, 2011)

I think you're reading what I say a little too literally.

Ok, tye algorithms are not truly continuous, of course it's discrete it's digital, but they operate to 10^3-10^4 levels, not 10. Axe FX is also not entirely time invariant as far as I know, it takes into account what has already happened, instead of just being entirely causal.

I'm also not referring to the A/D D/A conversion at all, nor sampling, nor bit rates, purely the algorithm that turns your guitar's raw pickup sound into a guitar amplified by a fender twin or whatever.

I think you knew exactly what I meant tbh 

A few other things.

First, I'd reserve judgment on amp models until you have it in front of you plugged into an amp and speaker, recordings and headphones don't give you the full deal.

Finally, I'm not trying to sell the Axe FX, merely put an argument forward without a vested interest or prejudice, or preconceptions. Obviously I am a bit biased because Axe FX is a choice I have made.


----------



## Animus (Nov 10, 2011)

Taylor said:


> What if someone plays in a country band and a metal band?
> Name me an amp that does both *well*.
> 
> .




The Rivera Knucklehead series of amps.


----------



## TemjinStrife (Nov 10, 2011)

Also, my Budda Superdrive and my Sunn T50C both do great for clean country, rock, shred, doom, or aggressive heavy music. They may not sound like a few dozen different amps, but they cover pretty much any tone I need and cost me less than an AFX Standard.


----------



## JPMike (Nov 10, 2011)

I totally agree with Fun111, so far he is in the best position to justify the answer he gave. Since he has experienced through different amps and types of combinations for tone. And I am sure quite a few people in here too

People miss the point here, you have 2 different things, A real amp and Axe Fx. 
The Axe FX is not here to replace any amp, it's here to provide you with many options in one affordable price, oh yes, affordable. 

When you buy an amp, you know you going for a certain type of tone, even though people say, "My amp can do this and that", it's still the specific brand of amp known for that tone. You can play metal with a plexi, by using different overdrives, distortion pedals or whatever you wanna call it. But after all that plexi has that SPECIFIC tone.

When you go for an Axe FX, you know you're buying an arsenal of amps and effects, in a small package being able to be modelled at around 80%. The Axe FX OBVIOUSLY will not deliver the 100% of a specific amp but will get you close.

Being an owner a few high end amps myself, including, Diezel, Budda, Mesa, ENGL. Each one of them had it's voice, I loved my Diezel VH4 so much, I loved the crisp of the Budda, the rectifier tone of the Mesa and the compressed yet unique voice of the ENGL. But each one of them, was EXCELLENT in one thing and good at others. 

It will take you years, to realise what music you love more to play and what kind of tone you want to go for. We, musicians, evolve so we need our tone to evolve along with us in whatever needs we have at the time. 

Now all these amps, are sold, only thing I kept is my VHT 2:50:2 for my Axe FX. Cause, I can have whatever tone I want and won't need a 2-3 heads to switch to. It solved my problem, of always wanting to get that tone or the other. 

If you buy an Axe FX don't expect to be amazed by the presets, it needs time to tweak it and play around with it, to finaly get what you want and trust me when you do, you won't look back. You going to be saying to yourself, "So glad I bought it", at least what I said. 

People dishing the Axe may be people that see this as a trend and not something like a thing that came to stay. I won't be discussing though, what other options and advantages you can have with the Axe. 

One last thing, I think the philosophy behind the Axe is, a recorded tone.

P.S Both worlds are amazing, wonderful and inspiring. 
And please don't get me wrong, I love real amps and I would love to own one again, but the Axe's versatility is too much to pass.


----------



## USMarine75 (Nov 10, 2011)

^ My Soldano will handle anything apparently... I didn't realize it could do metal until I saw Ola Englund's YouTube clip...

Anyways, I'm in a similar predicament... I'm smitten with the DAR FBM100 and I'm trying to decide between that and the Axe FX while I'm wait-listed... ugh.


----------



## SirMyghin (Nov 10, 2011)

Taylor said:


> What if someone plays in a country band and a metal band?
> Name me an amp that does both *well*.e.



My Mark V does it, quite often at that.


----------



## Animus (Nov 10, 2011)

USMarine75 said:


> ^ My Soldano will handle anything apparently... I didn't realize it could do metal until I saw Ola Englund's YouTube clip...
> 
> Anyways, I'm in a similar predicament... I'm smitten with the DAR FBM100 and I'm trying to decide between that and the Axe FX while I'm wait-listed... ugh.




The way it had been going it will be a even worse wait list than AxeFX to get one of those new DAR products and it's not even released yet and already sold out of all the first runs.


----------



## rectifryer (Nov 10, 2011)

Fun111 said:


> I think you're reading what I say a little too literally.
> 
> Ok, tye algorithms are not truly continuous, of course it's discrete it's digital, but they operate to 10^3-10^4 levels, not 10. Axe FX is also not entirely time invariant as far as I know, it takes into account what has already happened, instead of just being entirely causal.
> 
> ...


 

What I am getting at with the converters, is that the algorithm is _at most_ as accurate as its sampling rate. Thats something a tube amp doesnt have to "worry" about even though even CD sampling rates can still accurately reproduce our entire spectrum of hearing. Personally, I dont think this is really as audible an issue people make it out to be. 

Depending on the scope of the debate, you could say everything is or has an algorythm. I would argue that the layer that algorythm is applied in an axefx is closer to the pod than any tube or analogue amp. 

I am confused as to what you mean by "time invariance" because neither the pod or axefx fit that description. 

I am with you on the whole "results is results" idea, though. I'm not trying to argue with you or accuse you of stealing.


----------



## Rook (Nov 10, 2011)

Stealing? 

Axe FX isn't entirely time invariant, it's causal, there's an interview where Cliff Chase discusses this somewhere. POD's algorithms for overdrive however I elusive are time invariant, i.e if frequency f at level V enters it's compressed/clipped by x amount, regardless of anything else.

And I wouldn't put Axe FX in the same stable as POD, sure it's digital like the POD but that's about where the similarities end.

A/D D/A converters are more than just a sampling rate!

And yeah, anything sampled over 40kHz will be exact as far as humans are concerned, Nyquist rate yo. I don't think it's anything to do with being 'as audible', it is utterly inaudible, but this isn't what causes the difference people hear, they just blame this.


I don't wanna come even vaguely close to arguing about this, it totally defeats the whole point in me posting in this thread...


----------



## TemjinStrife (Nov 10, 2011)

The thing is, an AFX through a monitor-type speaker doesn't sound like an "amp in the room." It sounds like a mic'd amp, because that's what it's modeling.

The best I've ever heard an AFX sound was:
-AFX Ultra through a Mesa 2:90 into a Mesa 4x12 with V30s.
-AFX II through a Carvin DCM poweramp into a Mesa 2x12 with V30s.


----------



## rectifryer (Nov 10, 2011)

Fun111 said:


> Stealing?
> 
> Axe FX isn't entirely time invariant, it's causal, there's an interview where Cliff Chase discusses this somewhere. POD's algorithms for overdrive however I elusive are time invariant, i.e if frequency f at level V enters it's compressed/clipped by x amount, regardless of anything else.
> 
> ...


Damn cell phone lol. 

Converters are more than that but that was outside what I was trying to say. I get what you are saying. I didnt know that about the pod. Thats probably why it feels so damn stiff. 

See, I just squeezed pertinent information out a metaphor I couldnt relate to. I feel like I have won at the internet now.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Nov 10, 2011)

Isn't the AxeFX cheaper than some of the amp models it emulates? From that POV it seems like the AxeFX is the way to go even if you *don't* use them all. And when you figure out what you *do* like, I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to sell here.


----------



## pitbulltodd (Nov 10, 2011)

"*Axe fx ultra or real amp?"

*Axe Fx Ultra all the way


----------



## Chris (Nov 10, 2011)

I have all 3 rigs in question right now (An Ultra, an Axe-Fx II, and a "real" amp, a 6505+). Here's my take:

Tube amp: Find one that you like and it'll never let you down. There's something awesome in the simplicity of a power switch and a handful of knobs, and a tube amp at volume will always put a smile on your face.

Ultra: Just because the II is out doesn't mean the Ultra isn't awesome. It is. It's also about $1000 cheaper than the II, and still a lot more than the average guitarist needs. It sounds great, and is flexible as hell. 

Axe-II: Best of the best, but again, complicated. If you just buy one and flip it on without ever reading the manual, you will be disappointed. 

Modelers also come with an additional bit of decision making, in that you need to decide if you're going to go with a power amp and a cabinet, or a FRFR setup. I have both, but my Axe-II is setup FRFR right now. FRFR will NOT give you that awesome in the room feel that an amp gives you, because cabinet simulations simulate mics at certain distances from speakers. When you're listening to a tube amp through a regular cab, on the other hand, you aren't listening to it with your ear 6" away with it off center of the cone. You're listening to it with your ears, which are a lot more, uh, full range than a cab sim. They feel different. 

That said, turn the sims off and run either Fractal unit into a regular cabinet, and the above becomes a non issue. 

THAT said, there's nothing that says you can't run a cab sim into a cab, or a power amp sim into a power amp. It's just sculpting sound. The Fractal units are flexible, but you get out of them what you put into them. Regular amps are a lot easier to use, and while limiting, have a lot of their own merits that you can't ignore.

My .2c.


----------



## Sepultorture (Nov 11, 2011)

i could chime in with more pros and cons but i've done it so many times with the axe fx that i'd rather just have my say on why i would want to gun for the axe fx

i've been through tonnes of amps and cabs, not as many as some of this forums storied collectors, but enough to know what i do and do not like. first off to what Chris said about in the room, and that one has been debated by many, yes all you need is a power amp and cab and voila, you still have in the room feel with tone flexibility and tonnes of FX. i actually don't like that in the room feel, as the feel and somewhat the tone change as you move around the room, i actually like that recorded tone that is the same as you move around the room. the fact that i can tweak amps beyond what they can be tweaked, add eqs and multi band compressors wherever i want, even you two amps and multiple cabs with any sort of mic and distance, power amp tweaking, global eq, etc. it's far to flexible tone wise and gives me exactly what i want, and for far cheaper than actually going out and buying all that gear, and that is the draw for me. still debating though saving a little and getting a used ultra or go all the way and get the II.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Nov 11, 2011)

Meh..the Axe is a whole bunch of crap I'll never really use. I'd much rather have a real amp. With a good amp head you get versatility, tone, and the tube feel, which are all the things I like. Not to mention tube heads can be modded and tinkered with and that's something I enjoy. I only need a couple of good sounds and my amp does all that. To me it's just a waste of money for the new fad. For some people it has valid use, but I just don't see it.


----------



## Diggy (Nov 11, 2011)

if only every music shop had an Axe II, Engl Invader, Orange TH or RV, Bogner Ecstacy, Diezel VH4, Rivera, Framus, ETC...

and every cab to pair with those..

and every effect pedal known to man..

then I think it might be easier to choose between them.


----------



## Sepultorture (Nov 11, 2011)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Meh..the Axe is a whole bunch of crap I'll never really use. I'd much rather have a real amp. With a good amp head you get versatility, tone, and the tube feel, which are all the things I like. Not to mention tube heads can be modded and tinkered with and that's something I enjoy. I only need a couple of good sounds and my amp does all that. To me it's just a waste of money for the new fad. For some people it has valid use, but I just don't see it.



fad is probably not what this is, fads come and go. modelling and sims are here to stay and will just get better with time, really if the setup works and you don't want other options that you might not use, all the power to yuh (not you in particular mate, but everyone in that boat). it's still a matter of taste and if it works for you do it


----------



## jam3v (Nov 11, 2011)

I've been 'struggling' with this myself lately, and recently purchased an Axe FX II

Ideally I'd just own both my favorite tube amp (Mark V) with a 2x12, and the Axe FX II w/ a good powered monitor for the stage. Unfortunately I can't justify the cost of owning both.

The Axe FX made MORE sense in every scenario: Practicing at home, recording, lugging around to gigs, versatility, amazing multitude of effects including pitch (for drop tuning without lugging around 3 guitars). 

However, I ultimately returned the Axe FX 2 and stuck with the big dumb tube amp. Why? Between girlfriend, job, gym, band, friends, and other responsibilities I literally just don't have the raw hours to spend in front of my computer building tones. 

It's not even that I"m not a tweaker, because I love spending countless hours in front of something trying to figure out / tweak it, but I just don't have the time it would take me to get where I want to be with it.

There's also the associated cost. I had to buy the Axe2 ($2,600) plus a midi controller ($200 for an OK one), monitor for home practice / dialing in ($250 for a crappy one), a monitor for gigging ($800 for a good one), and a 4U rack bag ($80)...

I stuck with the Mark V, but personally believe the Axe2 is MORE than capable. I just don't have the time (or money right now) to get there with it.

Also, I think the Axe 2 sounded MUCH better than the Axe Ultra (I tried both)


----------



## Rook (Nov 11, 2011)

Diggy said:


> if only every music shop had an Axe II, Engl Invader, Orange TH or RV, Bogner Ecstacy, Diezel VH4, Rivera, Framus, ETC...
> 
> and every cab to pair with those..
> 
> ...



I c wut u did thar


----------



## kmanick (Nov 11, 2011)

for someone like myself that doesn't gig anymore and needs to be able to practice late at night at home without waking the kids or the wife and just wants to record , the AXE-Fx makes perfect sense to me.
Do you have any idea how frustrating it is to have to play thru a Mesa mark IV or a 5150 II with the volume on 1 thru a hotplate so I don't wake up my daughter at 11:00 at night?
it fucking sucks 
I'm just torn on whether I should get a Standard, and Ultra or the II?


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Nov 11, 2011)

Sepultorture said:


> fad is probably not what this is, fads come and go. modelling and sims are here to stay and will just get better with time, really if the setup works and you don't want other options that you might not use, all the power to yuh (not you in particular mate, but everyone in that boat). it's still a matter of taste and if it works for you do it



Oh I agree. Not knocking the Axe as a unit in of itself..but for my uses it would be pointless. 

The fad is more towards "I must have this it's the only way to go" for people who'd do well to just have a single tube amp and call it a day. Several products get hyped and overblown and in reality it may be great gear but any and everything has it's downsides. The Axe isn't the holy grail of musical equipment anymore than the Recto, Engl, Marshall, and all the other amps that became the fad of their time.


----------



## Natil (Nov 11, 2011)

kmanick said:


> I'm just torn on whether I should get a Standard, and Ultra or the II?


Used Ultra still ends up $1700ish. If you sigh up the waiting list now, hopefully in spring you will receive a coupon and grab an axe fx 2 for $2200. 
Even if you are not willing to wait, the headphone out, USB connectivity, tweaking dials on axe fx 2 will still worth the retail price. All depends on your needs tho.


----------



## Chris (Nov 11, 2011)

kmanick said:


> for someone like myself that doesn't gig anymore and needs to be able to practice late at night at home without waking the kids or the wife and just wants to record , the AXE-Fx makes perfect sense to me.
> Do you have any idea how frustrating it is to have to play thru a Mesa mark IV or a 5150 II with the volume on 1 thru a hotplate so I don't wake up my daughter at 11:00 at night?
> it fucking sucks
> I'm just torn on whether I should get a Standard, and Ultra or the II?



Swing up my place this weekend dude. I still have both here, and you can take my Ultra with you if you like it. I owe you a good deal.


----------



## groph (Nov 12, 2011)

I'd probably never get an AxeFx because it's far too much for me as well. I'd just find a preset that I like and stick with it and never really explore the unit. I imagine the unit is a godsend to people doing recording and might need another tone to combine with a "real" amp but they can't get their hands on any more "real" amps since the Axe is basically a huge toolbox. Tonally, I've never tried an Axe out in person but whenever I listen to comparisons between Axe models and the actual amp, the actual amp sounds better to me. There could be a million of things going on that make the actual amp sound better, that's a debate I wont get into because I don't know what I'm talking about.

From a philosophical viewpoint, I prefer plugging into an amp rather than even a modeler or some kind of Line 6 POD gear with an interface. All I can say to the OP is to just try things out. There are tube amps out there that are scarily versatile and really can do a broad tonal palette. A 6505 isn't such an amp, but something like a Peavey JSX, Carvin V3, Mesa Marks and Rectifier/Roadster/Roadking are all very versatile amps and I bet Orange Rockerverbs can do quite a lot, including aggressive modern metal tones when boosted. 

The Randall MTS (all tube) series might be something to look into. They are a series of amps that have preamp modules. My RM100 had the clean module, the Ultra (a Randall kind of high gain that was kind of Dual Rectifier-like), the Treadplate (a dual rectifier model), and later I bought the Plexi, which is a Marshally classic kind of tone. I sold the amp because it was too much for me and I never played it, but there are modules out there for basically every tone. Randall made ones to emulate various Fender clean amps, Vox, Mesa dual recs, Bogner Ecstasy, Marshall JCM800, Marshall Plexi, and a slew of artist signature modules like the 1086 by Dan Donegan of Disturbed, it's kind of a 5150 sort of tone apparently.


----------



## malufet (Nov 12, 2011)

It really depends on the player, If you own a studio or have a cover band, Axe fx will be good for you. I'm the simple plug and play type of guy so a mesa is good enough for me. Touring might be a problem, I would not buy another axefx as backup.

From what I've seen on youtube, most of those axe fx users have really fake tone, only a few have great tones. It might have been the tweaking or the sucky youtube audio.


----------



## rectifryer (Nov 12, 2011)

Well, considering I can buy 3+ decent tube amps (used) for the price of an Axe Fx + power amp, I think I will stick with the real thing. 

Mesa DRs are around 900
5150s are around 600
Pickup a seperate amp with versatile cleans ~500
Buy some rack effects.... 

Yep, still around 2200 for just the retail of an axe fx II.


----------



## flint757 (Nov 13, 2011)

I have a question for people here. I'm considering doing one of 2 setups in the next month or so. EIther the axe-fx ultra (used) and a Mesa Mark IV (used) for the power amp running axe fx as preamp and to throw things around maybe even the mark iV with the axe fx as an effects processor. Second option is axe fx 2 and that's it (new) since I wouldn't be able to afford much else. So the question is should I get 2 for the price of one or is the axe fx 2 worth its weight in gold?


----------



## Andromalia (Nov 15, 2011)

Paying Mark IV prices for a poweramp doesn't seem the best financial operation ever to me.


----------



## TemjinStrife (Nov 15, 2011)

Andromalia said:


> Paying Mark IV prices for a poweramp doesn't seem the best financial operation ever to me.



Except a used Mark IV can be had for less than a VHT 2/90/2


----------



## flint757 (Nov 15, 2011)

TemjinStrife said:


> Except a used Mark IV can be had for less than a VHT 2/90/2



very true except that isn't the only thing I'm using the mark IV. I'd use the mark IV with axe fx as effect processor for metal, but for other things run axe through power amp. And then recording obviously direct.

And very true about it being cheaper or at the very least same price. For my setup too I don't want it to be sterile I want my equipment to color my sound a bit since I know certain things I like I wouldn't mind and if the axe is as good as people say then I imagine you can dial some of the color out if you didn't like it.

Still on the fence about everything, but I think Im going the axe fx mark IV route for the myriad of options it would give me. IE plug and play setup, complex setup, recording simplicity, great effects and unmatched (IMO) metal tone.


----------



## walleye (Nov 15, 2011)

Andromalia said:


> Paying Mark IV prices for a poweramp doesn't seem the best financial operation ever to me.



art sla 2 is $200 in america and sounds amazing


----------



## TemjinStrife (Nov 16, 2011)

flint757 said:


> very true except that isn't the only thing I'm using the mark IV. I'd use the mark IV with axe fx as effect processor for metal, but for other things run axe through power amp. And then recording obviously direct.
> 
> And very true about it being cheaper or at the very least same price. For my setup too I don't want it to be sterile I want my equipment to color my sound a bit since I know certain things I like I wouldn't mind and if the axe is as good as people say then I imagine you can dial some of the color out if you didn't like it.
> 
> Still on the fence about everything, but I think Im going the axe fx mark IV route for the myriad of options it would give me. IE plug and play setup, complex setup, recording simplicity, great effects and unmatched (IMO) metal tone.



Sounds like a best of both worlds. That way, if you like the real amp better, you have it and a great FX box. If you like the AFX Mark IV model, then you should be able to sell the Mark for what you paid for it.


----------



## flint757 (Nov 16, 2011)

TemjinStrife said:


> Sounds like a best of both worlds. That way, if you like the real amp better, you have it and a great FX box. If you like the AFX Mark IV model, then you should be able to sell the Mark for what you paid for it.



spot on sir spot on...based on prices I'm seein I could probably make a profit with patience.


----------

