I keep reading threads and listening to clips where people are profiling or wanting to profile the AxefxII.
I owned an Ultra and have owned an AxefxII since about the day it was released.
It sounds incredible for a modeler, but there ARE absolutely small, noticeable differences between a real tube amp and an AxefxII...at least when it comes to recording. I say this because I've done quite a bit of a/b comparisons on my own. ...not trying to get the Axefx to sound exactly like the tube amp, but more just listening to the overall sound and characteristics of each to determine if one sounds more "alive" and real. The Axe has some incredible tones, but when it comes to sounding dead on as alive and 3d as a tube amp, even it falls a few percentage points short. It's not huge, but if you're recording, you want the absolute highest quality you can get...right?
Moving on...so...I'm confused as to why some guys are seemingly more or as interested in profiling another modeler than trying to get their hands on some incredible tube amps. A profile of a model is basically 2 generations of digital emulation stacked on top of eachother. Modeling has come a long way, but it's not to the point yet where this kind of methodology will result in profiles that sound dead on like the real thing, tubes glowing and volume cranked.
I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade. I just think the end results will be more real, believeable and enjoyable if the profiles are of actual well-mic'd tube amps and not from other modelers.
Am I the only one thinking this?
cheers,
Steve