So who's playing an Axe-FX?

[toneboy]

I'm not going to bother to debate the bit depth, quality of number of the processors but none of that really matters to me.All that matters to me is how it sounds.

Originally Posted by eviltwin

Second, the AxeFX is a modeller, plain and simple. I still fail to see why you would want to replace something, like a fully programmable twin tube preamp, when the real deal is as reliable...

At this point, MP-1s are getting pretty old (at least mine are) and becoming less reliable without being overhauled.

...and in the end provides the tone people are looking for.

I like the sound of my MP-1s but it just gets "that sound". It's not a Marshall or a Fender or a Dumble or a Mesa.

A modeller is just a modeller, a substitute for the real deal.

I won't disagree with that. It comes down to convenience and cost but the bottom line is does it sound good and feel good to the player? If it does, that's all that matters.

Lastly, listening to the clips on youtube (I know sound quality can be affected by that) it doesn't seem to be that far ahead of GT8 or Line6 stuff, and lagging the 1101...

I've owned the GT-8, the GT-Pro and the Line 6 Gearbox. It light years head in terms of how it responds to dynamics.

[toneboy]

Originally Posted by eviltwin

1101 at NAMM: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-EE0eDPGgw

In the video, it appears that he's running through or at least into a Fender amp, correct?

BTW, even ignoring the the amp models, the 1101's effects are very limited compared to the Axe-FX whose effects are in the same class as the Eventide Eclipse (which I own right now) but when comparing the amp models on paper, the Axe-FX offers significantly more tweakability for the user.

The parameters for the amp models in the 1101 are:
- Amp Gain
- Bass
- Mid
- Treble
- Amp Level.

The parameters for the amp models in the Axe-FX are:
- Bright
- Drive
- Boost
- Bass
- Mid
- Treble
- Presence control
- High Cut
- Depth
- Deep
- Damp
- Sag
- Master Volume
- Low Cut Frequency
- Bright Cap
- Tonestack Type
- Warmth
- Thump
- Tone Frequencies
- Transformer Match
- Transformer Low Frequency.
- Transformer High Frequency.
- Tone Location
- Power Tube Bias
- Presence Frequency
- B+ Capacitance
- Sag
- Speaker Resonant Frequency
- Stabilizer

The names of most of the these parameters may seem superfluous at first glance but when you read the manual and understand how they affect the sound they become incredibly useful for fine tuning your tone.

The simple fact is a modeler that costs $1500 - $2K should be better than a modeler that costs 1/3 to 1/4 as much...and it is. Whether or not it sounds better is subjective. Heck, I don't like the sound of an Air Norton or EMG-81 but but a lot of other folks do.

[axemanrio]

Originally Posted by toneboy

The parameters for the amp models in the Axe-FX are:
- Bright
- Drive
- Boost
- Bass
- Mid
- Treble
- Presence control
- High Cut
- Depth
- Deep
- Damp
- Sag
- Master Volume
- Low Cut Frequency
- Bright Cap
- Tonestack Type
- Warmth
- Thump
- Tone Frequencies
- Transformer Match
- Transformer Low Frequency.
- Transformer High Frequency.
- Tone Location
- Power Tube Bias
- Presence Frequency
- B+ Capacitance
- Sag
- Speaker Resonant Frequency
- Stabilizer

That is precisely why I don't like digital units and sold my GSP1101 in 2 months, I found myself spending way too much time "fine-tuning" my sound with all these crazy parameters Don't get me wrong, the GSP1101 blew me away with it's quality and I will buy one if I ever play in a cover band again, but for writing music I prefer my amp and pedals for their simplicity and tone.

[toneboy]

Originally Posted by axemanrio

That is precisely why I don't like digital units and sold my GSP1101 in 2 months, I found myself spending way too much time "fine-tuning" my sound with all these crazy parameters

The parameter list you quoted is from the Axe-FX and the GSP1101. My point was that the GSP1101 has far less parameters to being with which makes it much more difficult if not impossible to fine tune your sound.

Besides, with any modeler, when you create a patch you have to start simple with just an amp and a cab. Using a modeler take a whole differently mentality and it's not for everyone.

[axemanrio]

I know that was the list for the AxeFX, GSP1101 has it's own set of parameters that affect your tone drastically with one small change... the input/output settings are a good example on the GSP, it can take you days to get it perfect. And then when you plug in to a different setup/amp, you have to figure out what sounds best again. My point is there's way too many parameters to tweak your sound and you will spend a significant amount of time trying to get it right.

Then again, I guess it's how you look at it... when I want to shape my sound I'd rather work with 3-4 controls. And you're right, modelers are not for everyone as I've had my share of multi-effects units for over 8 years because I wanted to sound like my favorite artists. Times change and now I want to sound like me so the GSP didn't really do it for me even though I tried.

[Vim Fuego]

Here's petrol on the fire...
You should be able to reproduce the sound of *any* amp, valves or otherwise with only 16bits of resolution and 44.1kHz sampling..... and the reason is that's what CDs use and you can easily recognise a good amp tone or otherwise on one of those!
And you should be able to do the simulation because it works well enough with mp3s which are only an approximation to the real thing.

The real problem is of processing to achieve sufficient quality, so far it's been good but not perfect. The Axe-Fx probably isn't perfect either, but it seems closer than most.

For my 2p, mostly for no good reason... give me a big heavy amp with warm bottles in it any day!
Jim

[toneboy]

Originally Posted by axemanrio

... the input/output settings are a good example on the GSP, it can take you days to get it perfect.

I can't speak for the GSP1101 but it only took me a few seconds to get the input/output settings on the Axe-FX set up correctly.

My point is there's way too many parameters to tweak your sound and you will spend a significant amount of time trying to get it right.

That completely dependent upon the person. I don't expect to have to spend that much time trying to get it right. I got really close to what I wanted in a few hours.

Then again, I guess it's how you look at it... when I want to shape my sound I'd rather work with 3-4 controls.

It all depends on how deep you want to go whether it's a modeler or a tube amp. Heck, there are plenty of folks who own tube amps that want one brand of tube in this socket and another in that socket and so on and so on. Tweaking any gear can be as simple or as complex as one makes it.

And you're right, modelers are not for everyone as I've had my share of multi-effects units for over 8 years because I wanted to sound like my favorite artists.

I gave up a long time ago trying to sound like anyone else but me.

...now I want to sound like me so the GSP didn't really do it for me even though I tried.

Well, anything you plug into should sound like you anyway.

[rastachild]

gotta say i do like the sound of the axe fx on those clips. may not be exactly like a tube amp, but it's close and it sounds good. but the price is what turned me off as i would never gig with it, but just use it for home practice and direct recording. and for that functionality, the gsp1101 is more than sufficient at $400. tone is definitely subjective, but the tone i've heard from the axe fx does not justify the price, for me at least.

[GilkyBear]

Originally Posted by toneboy

I gave up a long time ago trying to sound like anyone else but me.

You shouldn't have to try to sound like yourself

[eviltwin]

Originally Posted by Vim Fuego

You should be able to reproduce the sound of *any* amp, valves or otherwise with only 16bits of resolution and 44.1kHz sampling.

I think we've already covered that and it's not entirely correct:

1) 16bit is indeed CD quality but 0,5% of the people can hear 18bit resolution. Philips electronics (who set the CD standard with Sony) actually found this out after they had written the CD bluebook, so for the later DCC standard they tried to up the resolution to 18bit, unfortunately that standard never got anywhere.

2) AD/DA on the Korg A1 is 16bit. (to be DAT compatible)
The GSP2101/2112/2112 were 18bit.
The current generation of units, including both the AxeFX and 1101, are 24bit.

3) for DSP internally the signal path needs to be much wider, this is why all Digitech machines (2101,2112 1101, DSP24 etc.) are 48bit internally. The AxeFX is only 32bit.

Originally Posted by Toneboy

parameters for the amp models in the Axe-FX are:
- Bright
- Drive
(..)

again you're making the AxeFX appear better than it actually is in comparison to the 1101.

1) you're talking about parameters, but forgetting voicings, both have about 40 different amps models (from an RJC120 via a Plexi to a Legacy or Übershall.) but the 1101 has 25 cabinet models as well. In the AxeFX you will need to tweak those yourself. The AxeFx does have more parameters than the 1101's five param. But 40*25 is 1000 amp models for the 1101!

I know there are amps with more than 5 parameters, but many of these, as well as the AxeFX params, are nothing more but interactive EQ, which IS available on the 1101.

2) what the AxeFX basically allows you to do is adjust the preamp voicings, tubes, power tubes, cab m/trafo matching etc. But modifying the power section on a Bassman gets you in JTM45 or Plexi territory, modifying a JCM900 moves you towards Soldanos, etc. Why not simply choose the Plexi or Soldano preset?

Also a lot of parameters in the powersection and cabinet voicings are irrelant if you're plugging into a tube poweramp, which is still how a lot of people (me including) prefer their setup.

Some of the AxeFX' params actually simulate worn tubes or mismatched speaker impedances, which are really quite pointless.

3) Both the AxeFx and 1101 offer stompbox simulations separate from the amp model (~20 distortion types, giving 20.000 voicings on the 1101)

So if you want Vai, on the 1101 you can easily select a TS808 into a Legacy (both available) for Vai's current tone, or TS9 into JCM900 for PAW type sounds.

If you want Slash select JCM800, want Maiden, add a ProCo in front of the JCM800. Petrucci? use a distorted Mesa, Metallica? Clean Mesa with MT2 in front.

A Plexi will give you the Who, add a Fuzz Face in front and you've got Hendrix...etc.

The Fuzz Face originally only had two knobs, why would you want to tweak that with seven parameters, like on the AxeFX? The 1101 simply offers the two original controls (fuzz+volume)

On the AxeFx you can do the same things, but then you can also tweak it to get the JCM900 to sound as if it's got 6L6 tubes, or run it into 50s era paper coned 10W cabinets and you can get the Fuzz Face sound but with other op-amps, I mean come on...who asked for that?

the 1101's effects are very limited compared to the Axe-FX whose effects are in the same class as the Eventide Eclipse

I'd like to know where you got that idea from? The effects are as powerful and of the same quality, but with less tweakability. Digitech tried the full tweakability route on the 2101 and as it turned out customers simply didn't want that level of flexibility. For example the 1101 uses 6 reverb voicings with 4 parameters, while the 2101 had 7 reverbs. The most complicated of which had 23 parameters (!), it's easy to see why they dropped that.

Originally Posted by rastachild

the gsp1101 is more than sufficient at $400. tone is definitely subjective, but the tone i've heard from the axe fx does not justify the price, for me at least.

Indeed, the 1101 already does way more than some find necessary (see axemanrio) it can do 99% of what the AxeFx offers, at 25% of the price.

[The Euphor]

From what I've read. AxeFX is the only real option, as long as you got time and interest in spending some time with your patches.

There is one easy way to settle this. Post soundclips!

[toneboy]

Originally Posted by eviltwin

1) you're talking about parameters, but forgetting voicings, both have about 40 different amps models (from an RJC120 via a Plexi to a Legacy or Übershall.) but the 1101 has 25 cabinet models as well. In the AxeFX you will need to tweak those yourself. The AxeFx does have more parameters than the 1101's five param. But 40*25 is 1000 amp models for the 1101!

The 1101 has 33 amp models and the Axe-FX has 64

The 1101 has 22 cab models and the Axe-FX 41 plus 10 slots for users to load in their own cab IRs.

2) what the AxeFX basically allows you to do is adjust the preamp voicings, tubes, power tubes, cab m/trafo matching etc. But modifying the power section on a Bassman gets you in JTM45 or Plexi territory, modifying a JCM900 moves you towards Soldanos, etc. Why not simply choose the Plexi or Soldano preset?

Because if allows the user to fine tune their sound as much or as little as they want.

Also a lot of parameters in the powersection and cabinet voicings are irrelant if you're plugging into a tube poweramp, which is still how a lot of people (me including) prefer their setup.

...but with the Axe-FX, a lot of folks are not running through a tube amp and guitar cab. Their running FOH and powered monitors.

Some of the AxeFX' params actually simulate worn tubes or mismatched speaker impedances, which are really quite pointless.

Getting the sound you want, that inspires you to play the music you want is never pointless.

The Fuzz Face originally only had two knobs, why would you want to tweak that with seven parameters, like on the AxeFX?

Maybe because it sounds ok that way it is but with a little tweaking it can sound incredible to the user.

On the AxeFx you can do the same things, but then you can also tweak it to get the JCM900 to sound as if it's got 6L6 tubes, or run it into 50s era paper coned 10W cabinets and you can get the Fuzz Face sound but with other op-amps, I mean come on...who asked for that?

Some folks like to tweak and mod their gear to get the sounds they want. Some folks are perfectly happy with stock gear. Neither way is better than the other. As long as you are happy with your gear, that's all the matters because then you will be inspired to make the music you want.

The effects are as powerful and of the same quality, but with less tweakability.

No, they're not. The 1101 doesn't even have a basic stereo delay let alone a multi-tap delay nor does the 1101 offer parallel effects processing, the only internal modifiers it offers are (2) LFOs - no envelopes, no ADSR which the Axe-FX does offer.

Let's use the classic wah pedal as an example. The 1101 has 3 wahs and that's it. If one of those 3 wahs sound good to you then you're all set and that's great. Conversely, the Axe-FX doesn't have any specific wah models. The user can specify the low range, the high range and the Q which allows them to get pretty much any wah sound out there.

Digitech tried the full tweakability route on the 2101 and as it turned out customers simply didn't want that level of flexibility. For example the 1101 uses 6 reverb voicings with 4 parameters, while the 2101 had 7 reverbs. The most complicated of which had 23 parameters (!), it's easy to see why they dropped that.

Some people want more flexibility than others. For the price range and consumer that Digitech designed the 1101 for, those people don't want that level of control which I completely understand. If the user has a slew of parameters that they really don't know who to use, they can easily get a bad sound which means they will not be happy with the unit. Some guitar players want things simple and others want to more control and flexibility. Again, neither viewpoint is right or wrong.

Indeed, the 1101 already does way more than some find necessary (see axemanrio) it can do 99% of what the AxeFx offers, at 25% of the price.

The 1101 cannot do "99%" of what the Axe-FX does. It may do "99%" of what you and some others want but the Axe-FX has models, cabs, effects and control then the 1101 does. That's just comparing specs to specs.

But that's why there's a 1101 and an Axe-FX. Some folks have bought an Axe-FX, realized it was much more than they needed and sold it. Other folks have bought 1101s, realized they wanted more and bought an Axe-FX.

To be blunt, I don't know why you dragged the 1101 into this but the fact is the Axe-FX offers more flexibility and power across the board than the 1101. Facts are facts and cannot be disputed.

Now, which one sounds better, the 1101 or Axe-FX is subjective so there's no point in arguing about that. If you like one more than the other, that's great. If the 1101 offers you all the control you want and flexibility you need than that's fine too. Neither box is for everyone.

Oh, and BTW, carrots.

[toneboy]

Originally Posted by The Euphor

From what I've read. AxeFX is the only real option, as long as you got time and interest in spending some time with your patches.

There is one easy way to settle this. Post soundclips!

I posted links to youtube videos in my first post.

[bigmuff]

for DSP internally the signal path needs to be much wider, this is why all Digitech machines (2101,2112 1101, DSP24 etc.) are 48bit internally. The AxeFX is only 32bit.

The 1101 is 48-bit fixed point. The Axe-Fx is 32-bit floating point. Floating point is much higher resolution than fixed point but floating point processors are much more expensive. The dynamic range of 32-bit floating point is nearly infinite in comparison to 48-bit fixed point.

1) you're talking about parameters, but forgetting voicings, both have about 40 different amps models (from an RJC120 via a Plexi to a Legacy or Übershall.) but the 1101 has 25 cabinet models as well. In the AxeFX you will need to tweak those yourself. The AxeFx does have more parameters than the 1101's five param. But 40*25 is 1000 amp models for the 1101!

You do NOT "have to tweak those yourself". The Axe-Fx has 39 cabinet models, 64 amp models and 11 microphone models. You can also load your own cabinet impulse responses into 10 user locations. Do the math.

2) what the AxeFX basically allows you to do is adjust the preamp voicings, tubes, power tubes, cab m/trafo matching etc. But modifying the power section on a Bassman gets you in JTM45 or Plexi territory, modifying a JCM900 moves you towards Soldanos, etc. Why not simply choose the Plexi or Soldano preset?

Simply wrong. By modifying the various parameters you can create your own amp. You can take the Soldano model and modify it. Your argument makes no sense.

Also a lot of parameters in the powersection and cabinet voicings are irrelant if you're plugging into a tube poweramp, which is still how a lot of people (me including) prefer their setup.

Some of the AxeFX' params actually simulate worn tubes or mismatched speaker impedances, which are really quite pointless.

And those same parameters are totally relevant if you're using a solid-state power amp or going direct. Again, another senseless argument.

There are no parameters that simulate worn tubes. You can adjust the transformer matching and this is a very powerful tool. Amp designers voice their amps by adjusting this.

Indeed, the 1101 already does way more than some find necessary (see axemanrio) it can do 99% of what the AxeFx offers, at 25% of the price.

The 1101 can only run one modulation effect per preset so you can't even run a phaser and flanger at the same time and you have no control over the location of the modulation effect. The Axe-Fx can run at least 12 effects simultaneously in any order with any combination of series or parallel routing. The Axe-Fx is vastly more powerful. The 1101 is a decent product but to suggest it rivals the Axe-Fx is delusional.

bm

[newbieguitarmaker]

Originally Posted by The Euphor

From what I've read. AxeFX is the only real option, as long as you got time and interest in spending some time with your patches.

There is one easy way to settle this. Post soundclips!

The easiest way would be for everyone to just give me their Axe-Fx's lol