Ok, so I know this is a loaded question that really boils down to personal preference, but I am looking to buy some new gear.
Right now the amp I am jonsing for is a Mesa Boogie Lonestar. Right now its the amp that fits a sound I have in my head almost perfect.
But, I am wondering if I just sink the dough into the Axe-Fx instead. Im assuming I can get pretty damn close to the Lonestar and its pretty close to the same price minus the power amp.
But is the first gen Axe-FX decent compared to the II? I cant afford a II anytime soon, but I dont want to sink the dough in the first gen standard if the II is light years beyond it.
I would probably buy the Lonestar and save my dough for the II at a later point.
Just looking for $00.2 from those that have tried both of them.
Personally, I feel that an Ultra will get you close, VERY close, but the II is just a much better unit overall. You have more capabilities and just overall better sounds. I also found it much easier to dial in sounds, at least after FW 7.0 came out. If you just prefer an amp/pedals setup then do that. But if your priority is your tone being as PERFECT as you can get it, plus wanting versatility on top of that one sound you really love, then get the AxeFX II.