Is the Axe-FX just a passing fad?

[TomAwesome]

Definitely not a fad. All of the advantages of any other modeler apply (consistency, low maintenance, more versatility in less space, etc.), but the Axe-FX is pretty far ahead of the game at the moment. It also has power amp modeling that is really effective. I've always been a fan of modelers, but I used to insist on at least having a tube power section. Now I run an Axe-FX into a solid state Carvin PA amp and a guitar cab, and it sounds much better. I love the things I can do with the amp models that I couldn't do very easily or effectively with a real amp. If I want to replace the tonestack with an active EQ or the tonestack from a different amp, I can do that. I can bias the power tubes as hot as I want without fear of damaging something. If I want more or less sag from the power amp, I can adjust it to my liking at the turn of a knob. I can basically mess with pretty much any important part of the amp to make it sound how I want it to.

Will something better eventually come along? Probably. But to think that the Axe-FX is just the newer, shinier version of the same old thing wouldn't quite be accurate. Also, I sincerely doubt that Line 6 will be the company to outdo Fractal, since their modeling tech hasn't really progressed in any large way since the POD 2.0.

 

[InAbsentia_]

You never did answer my original question - have you actually used it?

Yes, I have. Admittedly not for a long period of time. It was a 'Standard' and not an 'Ultra' although I think the only difference is the processing power. No one said it's bad, it's great. But it's not worth the price. It's not worth even half the price. And what it boils down to is, Fractal is milking it's customers for all their worth because it's being marketed in a way that shows them as being revolutionary and entirely different from any sort of digital technology out today when in reality a free ampsim can give it a run for it's money for the grand price of $0.

 

[drew_drummer]

Well like I said... show me. I don't buy what you're saying. I don't really care about authenticity... I care about good tones. You're gonna have to be more forthcoming with evidence - not just blurting "free amp sim free amp sim"

 

[muckypup1]

Yes, I have. Admittedly not for a long period of time. It was a 'Standard' and not an 'Ultra' although I think the only difference is the processing power. No one said it's bad, it's great. But it's not worth the price. It's not worth even half the price. And what it boils down to is, Fractal is milking it's customers for all their worth because it's being marketed in a way that shows them as being revolutionary and entirely different from any sort of digital technology out today when in reality a free ampsim can give it a run for it's money for the grand price of $0.

Well like I said... show me. I don't buy what you're saying. I don't really care about authenticity... I care about good tones. You're gonna have to be more forthcoming with evidence - not just blurting "free amp sim free amp sim"

Everyone always bitches about the Axe FX saying that amp sims can produce better results... I want to hear some proof then!

 

[drew_drummer]

Everyone always bitches about the Axe FX saying that amp sims can produce better results... I want to hear some proof then!

+1

 

[kev]

Its all about the air again for me. Im figuring no device will ever model a beastly high gain tone because of that, but for most stuff it seems to be ok.

I'd be interested to run a software sim/axe fx into a cab and record it though. I've been thinking recently that my fascination could just be with the sound of a recorded decent live speaker. Therefore, i'm pretty interested to try a modelled amp into a real cab and see what the result is. (probably me overlooking the beauty of the toobz to be honest?!)

 

[drew_drummer]

Kev, through a cab in a room, the Axe-FX sounded no different to an amp to me. I don't know what it is like recorded as I didn't do that... I just played it.

 

[kev]

When I get back from work I shall have to do some serious hunting down of clips I think Drew. That 14 day thing sounds like a potential plan.

 

[ParsonsMatt]

–noun
a temporary fashion, notion, manner of conduct, etc., esp. one followed enthusiastically by a group.

If this doesn't fit the Axe-FX and it's community like a glove, I don't know what does. Seriously, everywhere you go: VHT 2/90/2 + Axe-FX. It's a fad, a fad of epic proportions.

And 5150+recto cab isn't...?

 

[crillemannen]

How many people in this thread have actually USED an Axe-FX?

I checked it out yesterday. This guy was running it with a VHT poweramp and a Marshall 2x12. It sounded absolutely killer. I will be buying one I hope at the end of the year.

I would not say it's a fad. It's the next step in digital guitar gear, that is all. Those other things were not fads either - they were just made obsolete by better sounding stuff.

Now you might be willing to go further and say.. "okay... well this whole digital malarky is a fad" ... and I'd say.... well... fads don't last for decades.

It's just a different way of getting a tone you heard in your head, that is all.

But then he is using it as an normal AMP, i thought the thing with these where that you just could plug it in and go. Not spend an additional 2k to make it sound good. THen i would rather spend that much money on a new Amp.

 

[RemoWilliams]

I was thought a fad wasn't labeled as such until it was over and judge by how long it last compared to its beginning. Hell, I always thought the deathcore-all breakdowns thing was a passing thing, but that was like has been going strong for almost five years (give or take).

 

[kvoid]

I thought that's what the algorithms were for? To reduce the processing element. I doubt it's a very hard task for programmers to exactly replicate say an ENGL or the like from schematics, it's just the inefficiency of the code that's stopping them.

No algorithms are better thought of as cooking recipes, to borrow from Knuth who is the God Emperor of the field. They're the heart of any program, they're the logical procedural solution to a given problem. I'm not in any way acquainted with DSP algorithms since they were not part of my CS curriculum but I presume they're a few orders of magnitude more complicated than a bubble sort By the way look up some simple search/sort algos on wikipedia they have cool illustrations gifs that will visually explain how those things work if you're interested

From my understanding, an algorithm takes large chunks of code and compresses them into 'shorthand' which makes for easy processing.

No we programmers have something called lexical analysis which lets us write "shorthand" instructions in what we call "high-level languages" (C++ for the most part if we're talking DSP and/or VST). The "interpreter" translates this to machine specific "Assembly language" which is not very different for AMDs and Intels but is vastly different for something like the Blackfin in an AxeFX (a dedicated DSP processor). The assembly language is then translated into machine code (0s and 1s) because that's the only thing that a processor can understand. The assembly instructions themselves can be thoroughly optimized and usually, stuff like a tube model algorithm will be written in Assembler in the first place as the performance of one written in a high level language like C++ even with the SSE3 instructions, but without assembly code optimization, will leave much to be desired. The Wave Arts Tube Saturator that Jarkko mentions was written in assembler. I don't really know how much further it could be optimized without changing the algorithm itself in this case which would effectively mean a completely different programming approach.

I don't know where we stand exactly in the tube modelling department on home computer processors but if the Tube Saturator is anything to go by two 12AX7s can definitely pummel a top of the line AMD 1090T into submission at 24 bit depth and 96 KHz. Ultimately the problem is that I don't think something like a Bassman, or worse a 5150 can be parallelized so as to have each of the cores modelling a tube and some other caps, resistors or whatever. The output of one tube is the input of another, in the preamp at least. So they have to be emulated in sequence. Again I stress I don't know shit about DSP processors but I do know our graphics card are massively parallelized DSPs withe normous power that would put everything to a crying shame but they're built to calculate triangles. I have hard all attempts at making Nvidia's CUDA accelerate audio processing have been fruitless. perhaps when the big guns of the tech like Nvidia and ATi take us recording enthusiasts and pros seriously. But that's likely never since gamers will always far outnumber us.

Sorry for going on a tangent I'd appreciate if someone smarter would take the time to correct any heinous errors I may have committed.

 

[Mattayus]

Just a fad. Ya need da tubez.

It has them, doesn't it?
I dunno, I used to be from the school of thought of "does it really matter how we GET the tone, so long as the tone is cool?" but these days I've come to realise that it's not the tone that is 'better' from a real amp, it's the 'energy' and 'life' that springs forth from mic'ing something up.

 

[P-E]

And 5150+recto cab isn't...?

Quite a good point you've got here.

 

[drew_drummer]

How does it feel in the room Drew? I've messed around with a pod through a tube power amp and it recorded pretty good, better than with impulses but it was nasty to sit in the room with, I use my engl e530 with the same power amp and it's inspirational to play, the responsiveness and pick attack just can't be beat. I want that punch in the chest. If the axe-fx can deliver that tube preamp experience then together with a tube power amp it could be a winner.

Dude. Honestly.. through a decent poweramp and a cab.. it feels just like an amp!! You guys really need to play through the Uberschall model. It's just fat as all kinds of fuck.

But then he is using it as an normal AMP, i thought the thing with these where that you just could plug it in and go. Not spend an additional 2k to make it sound good. THen i would rather spend that much money on a new Amp.

Yeah, but he didn't spend an extra 2k to make it sound good, and the Axe FX sounds good just going straight into the analog inputs on a recording interface. For playing live you can also send it into the board.

But I'm just saying how this guy demo'd it to me. It sounded immense.

 

[Plankis]

How about this Marsha Clip?

 

[drew_drummer]

Yup. I heard that one yesterday too.

 

[Sacha]

So it's a 'fad' because you think it costs too much?

It's already been out for well over five years I believe, it's just recently coming into the mainstream attention. It still sells used for about the same as it costs new, that's crazy for any piece of gear!

Even if it didn't have any amp modelling at all, it's still the best guitar FX unit ever made IMO, and i've owned most of them. Sure it's expensive, so are Eventides, so is a huge pedalboard or a rack full of other FX processors it can handily replace.

I'm sure more / better / cheaper amp modelling will always be coming, you can wait forever if you always wait for the next thing. The Axe-FX will always be a useful and versatile tool in a guitar rig, for both live and recording.

Edit: not even to mention the outstanding customer service and just fucking cool story of the company

 

[guitarguru777]

You know Drew there has something that has really bothered me about this entire thread and the way you post. Not 1 person on here has backed you up saying that the AxeFX isn't a fad, and every time someone says its not you act like a whiny little bitch.

Lets look at it this way ...

Vintage gear is worth so much cause its USABLE tone, and its what DEFINES tone. The AxeFX / Pod / Vamp / (insert modeler of choice) will always be a passing trend cause it DOES NOT replicate those amps 100%. Its a great tool for using live and can get tones very close to the original but not exact. The AxeFX is great for those of us who cant go out and buy a 5150 + Powerball + JMC800 + Rectofier + Uberschall and spend close to 10k on amps and cabs. Those of us who can afford that will always buy the real thing over the "modeled" version.

As for artists endorsing stuff and saying "this is the best ever", ya of course it is up until this point / until they reach its limitations / something better comes along.

If you want to convince yourself its not a TREND go right ahead, but in 10 years the Marshall Plexi and Peavey 5150 will still be around while the AxeFX is going to be $100 on Ebay. Thats just the way it goes, get used to it.

 

[Ascendant]

All the good Line 6 developers LEFT Line 6 and formed other companies.

Huh? Do you have any source at all that proves this? And in that case, what companies did they form?