Is the Axe-FX just a passing fad?

[Melb_shredder]

wow... this thread is just going nowhere... and seriously... there's some pure stupidity for the sake of stupidity going on in here. It's really not that hard to understand. The 5150 may sound however it sounds etc, but that sound is UNIQUE to the 5150, the 5150 is the amp you attribute with that particular tone. You don't have to like it, it just IS that way though. The AXE - FX ... MODELS the 5150 tone. So when you hear it, you're not MEANT to think, OH an AXEFX, you're meant to think OH 5150! So don't try to argue any different, because it's wrong, PLAIN wrong. It doesn't sound exactly like a 5150, and that's fine. Because for live use, the difference is probably neglegible and it's handy as it has satisfactory amp simulation, with apparently, state of the art effects. And that's great. But you must be plain simple to argue that the 5150 and the AXE are both fads blah blah... the 5150 is a unique amp that has been used for many years due to ease of use, favourable tone and character blah blah. Just like the recto for heavy modern rock, just like marshalls for old school rock blah blah. they paved the way.

The axe doesn't pretend to change the playing field, it's not bringing a NEW amp into existence. Yet again, it's another modeller. Just of better quality with more gadgets. And guess what, don't get to upset, but it will be surpassed. Because better digital technology will come around, and there will be more convincing models.

But the 5150, the SAME peavey 5150 will be used countless times.... on countless recordings.

Now that's not saying the AXE is bad, I'm not on the side of AGAINST the axe. I'm just not that stupid to pretend its some unique amazing life changing piece of gear... it's just a better quality modeller with great effects built in. If I toured, I'd use it live, in a heartbeat. Why would I bother lugging my 10 space rack around when the axe would sound fairly similar, and people in the crowd wouldnt care??? They wouldnt...

But when I go into the studio, I'm aiming for my tube amps, mic'd up exactly how I want it to get the perfect tone for me. Why would i cheapen it by recording with an approximation of the amp I want to use??? I'll use THE amp i wish to use, and when im on the road, ill approximate the studio with a MODELLER which SIMULATES to some degree the real thing...


really... it's not a hard concept. for both sides of the argument... :S

 

[The-Zeronaut]

i think Axe fx is the perfect studio tool
get an axe fx , a tube power amp and a mesa cab (or a marshall..whatever you like more)
and you will have
70 really well done amp simulations
70+ top notch effects

and for the people that says for 2000 thousand dollars you can get an used 5150 and a dual rec ...

TRY DOING THAT IN EUROPE...

if i buy a new 5150 and a dual rec here it would cost me:

mesa boogie dual rec 100watts 2399 euros (3,154 $)
peavey 6505+ 1222 euros ( 1,606 $)
MESA BOOGIE RECTIFIER4X12STD 1222 euros (1,606 $)
=
4843 € or 6,368.5 $

Now go with the axe fx ultra rig:

Axefx ultra 2199 € ( 2,891.6$)
Mesa boogie 50/50 1469 € (1,931.7 $)
MESA BOOGIE RECTIFIER4X12STD 1222 euros (1,606 $)
=
4890€ or 6,430$


DIFFERENCE IN PRICE
47 EUROS OR 61.7 DOLLARS


im not talking about QUALITY of the sound...
i think the axe will give you about 80-85% close to the real amp...(im talking about using a real cabinet not impulses)

the only thing to decide is...
what do yo prefer...quality or quantity?

 

[rlcramer]

I'm obviously in the minority here, but if you take the Axe-FX for what it is, I think it really has the capability of having its own unique voice. I know I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but think of the Djent guys. The Axe-FX is a GODSEND for that type of tight, percussive tone that those dudes like. It's the same as the Recto. 15 (20?) years ago when Nu-Metal came out, everyone was shitting on the Recto and how one-dimensional it was, how everyone who used one was a Korn ripoff, etc. Now it's one of THE 3 or 4 holy-grail metal amps.

I don't know why people can't just deal with the Axe-FX as another box with its own sound. I like the way it sounds, but I sold mine because I'm a terrible tweaker. But think of putting something like a Pod in Sturgis's hands. Or someone like Sora01 here who makes the Axe-FX sound killer IMHO. There will always be people who can make any amp sound great, and the Axe-FX is no different. To shit on it because it doesn’t have tubes is pretty ridiculous. Think of all the classic tones that were recorded without tubes – Death, Pantera, etc. A guitar player should be allowed to find his own unique tone, without all of this tube-elitism. Yeah – I like the way a tube amp sounds, but that doesn’t mean the whole rest of the world needs to do what I say, or risk being called a fad-follower.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

But I hardly think that 5 years and 10 firmware revs later that you can call something a fad.

Bobby

 

[Brett - K A L I S I A]

and for the people that says for 2000 thousand dollars you can get an used 5150 and a dual rec ...

 

[The-Zeronaut]

dude i live in canary islands....getting those amps (used) here is nearly impossible
i would have to use ebay ...and that means...shipping fees and taxes

it would be cheaper than new amps ...of course...
but nothing compared to the deals i have seen on ebay usa and craiglist



but getting to the point...
i think a real amp will sound better than the axe fx...
but like i said before...
what do you prefer (for the same price):
2 awesome amps
or 70 really well done amp simulations?

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Honestly, who really gives a shit? If it works for you, awesome...if it doesn't, awesome as well. What is the point of arguing whether it will be phased out or not? If you don't like the tones it offers, business ethics of the company, then simply don't buy one! I haven't heard one in person yet, but am very interested. It's amazing how many pages these threads turn into LOL.

Joe

 

[slashvanyoung]

Calling the Axe-FX a "passing fad" isn't appropriate in my opinion. While the unit itself may be technically outdated a few years down the line (just as the PODs are now), digital modelling itself will continue to get even closer to "the real deal" with advancing technology while offering options that analogue gear can't provide.

Whether the quality of the modelling will ever be on par with the actual units or - maybe even more importantly - opinion leaders will accept them to be, is completely open as of know.

The outlook for modellers isn't too bad though if we take their growing acceptance, development and usage into consideration. The actual fact that people argue so heated about their quality or non-quality therefore, is a testament for how far the technology has gotten.

The original POD was a revolution for digital modelling. For the first time there was a unit which made people, on a large rscale, consider twice if they bring their huge, prone to error, rigs on tour. The quality of the sounds was good enough, or not BAD enough, for people to "compromise" their tone for absolute convenience. No, the quality was actually good enough that people even started to consider having the modellers on their records. And if that wasn't enough, people even started to appreciate the POD for it's very own sound because - in retrospective - the unit isn't quite a truthful representation of the modelled gear.

But the POD not only revolutionized digital modelling, it also set off an ongoing (open ended?) evolution of hardware and software modelling. And as far as hardware modellers are concerned, the Axe-FX is now the state-of-the-art epitome that the POD was back then. And in a few years another unit might be...

So while single units get outdated, the question should rather be: Is digital modelling just a passing fad? And personally, I don't know any definition of the word "fad" that digital modelling would still qualify for after all these years.

-----

Specifically regarding the Axe-FX: I think it's modelling capabilities are about on par with the crème de la crème of the current software modellers, maybe slightly ahead. But as with the software modellers, I think the REAL bottleneck is the cab simulation. When you hook up the Axe-FX or a state-of-the-art plugin to a tube power amp and a cab, the results are deceivingly close to the originals and simply really good. Unfortunately, the vast recordings we hear are done with impulse responses.

I'm quite confident that advancing hardware will at some point give software developers the means to develop solutions that'll yield better results than static impulses. Technology like Nebula is already headed in that direction, just not quite there yet.

And yeah, the Axe-FX costs serious money while there are great plugins to be had for free. But with the Axe-FX, you're not only paying for the work the programmers and all the staff put into the product, but also for a hi-tech hardware unit carrying the technology that isn't produced in ridiculous numbers. A unit that is very much appreciated by the people who want the Axe-FX for their live setups, a not-so-small number of the user base.

 

[Plankis]

How about this Marsha Clip?

Why am I not surprised this one got ignored?

 

[drew_drummer]

[/SIZE]
Why am I not surprised this one got ignored?

 

[JeffTD]

[/SIZE]
Why am I not surprised this one got ignored?

Because it's obvious that the first clip is the Axe and the second is the real amp - the speaker movement is like night and day with those kinds of tones.

If you were to play 5 different 5150s, you'd see that they all sound different.

I'm not going to get into this, but this is a totally retarded argument. They'll sound about as different as different picks or string brands would.

 

[supahd]

[/SIZE]
Why am I not surprised this one got ignored?

Is that an Axe vs the real thing clip? EDIT; looks like it

I have an Axe and don't give a poop whether it'll be deemed as a passing fad or not, it works great for my needs and is constantly evolving. On that note I'm a gear/gadget whore and like to try out/check out the latest and greatest.

 

[JeffTD]

I have an Axe and don't give a poop whether it'll be deemed as a passing fad or not, it works great for my needs and is constantly evolving.

Would you be able to post a clip of it mic'd up through a poweramp/cab, bychance?

 

[supahd]

Would you be able to post a clip of it mic'd up through a poweramp/cab, bychance?

I was using it in that configuration but currently it's direct to my recording interface. I don't own any separate power amps at this point either, when I did try that in the past I preferred running the Axe into a FRFR system over a power amp/cab. I'd be happy to try this if I can figure out a way to do it properly.

 

[drew_drummer]

They'll sound about as different as different picks or string brands would.

Both of which have a massive impact on the sound of a guitar. What's your point again?

 

[Plankis]

Yeah I bet it was the speaker movement that was the tell. Which one did you prefer?
I think they're incredibly similar to each other. With drums and bass playing in -6--9 dB rms I wouldn't have heard the difference.

 

[SkybluestudiosBEN]

While the guitar amp/cab makes a huge difference so does an awesome mic pre and I really feel you lose the 3D image with all this digital guitar stuff.

 

[JeffTD]

Both of which have a massive impact on the sound of a guitar. What's your point again?

Massive? Negligible - it's the last 10-15% of the tone. The meat is in the amp. You can start tweaking tubes and the bias if you really get antsy with it, but having owned no less than SIX 5150's myself, I can tell you that they really don't sound that different from one another.

Yeah I bet it was the speaker movement that was the tell. Which one did you prefer?
I think they're incredibly similar to each other. With drums and bass playing in -6--9 dB rms I wouldn't have heard the difference.

I preferred the second clip, and while they are similar, once you double tracked that and put it in a mix, the guitars would have a really static, high mid washiness/fizz to them that is a tell-tale sign of AxeFX gtrs/impulses.

Again, this thing CANNOT replace a mic'd cab for recording rhythm gtrs, because, so far, NOTHING can. Prove me wrong and I'll buy one - seriously.

 

[Melb_shredder]

^ bam! Good point. Anyway to each their own. What works works. The nature of the amp obviously lends itself to certain things more, at least in the metal world. Any axe fx owners here willing to attempt the doomsday machine or end of heartache tone for me?!!! *no but I got this sweet meshuggah tone*

Hehe, now I'm just playing the devils advocate )

 

[kev]

hahaha

 

[Machinated]

i cant believe people get so worked up about other peoples gear. i havent heard any clips from an axefx that have floored me, but that doesnt take away from people enjoying them for their own uses.