Kitarat: kitarakamat ›

AX100 vs AX50:stä hyvää juttua...
 
http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showflat.php?Number=916166
 
There is no difference in the triggering circuitry of the AX100 Mk II and the AX50. The packages differ in external features and firmware capabilities only: sustain and expression pedal inputs (100 only), built in soundboard (100 only), racked (100) versus half rack space (50) box, fully editable front panel (100 only), patch chains (100 only) and virtual midi ports across USB (50 only). Having said that, most of this will not matter in your application
 
* You should have no problem configuring both the control and footpedal of the FC200 to talk to either axon unit, so the external pedal inputs on the AX100 are probably unnecessary.
 
* The patch chaining on the 100 is nice, but won't make much sense if you're using a FC200. And you can mimic this with the soft-synth host.
 
* I've never used the soundboard on the 100 - I don't think it sounds good enough.
 
* The proper 1u box is a definite usability/roadworthiness advantage to the AX100. On the other hand, with a rack shelf and a 50 and a matching half-unit audio interface you could squeeze your whole rig into a single unit of rackspace, whereas an 100 based rig will need at least 2u, and probably 3u if you get an AMT8 (see below).
 
* On the 100 everything is editable from the front panel, but as you are using soft synths anyway, you would want to use the editor so this won't matter.
 
* The 'virtual midi' ports are the most important distinguishing feature. With the 100 and a midi footpedal you will need to merge the footpedal and editor midi streams if you want to use your sustain/expression pedals while editing. So if you have a 100, you will need 2 midi ins in your rig which in turn means another midi interface in addition to the one in your audio interface. This won't cost the earth and only needs to be set up once, but it is extra hassle compared with having a 50 and using the dedicated editor connection.
 
* Those virtual midi ports across the USB connection in the 50 are ironically less of an advantage when actually playing the soft synths because you should consider using Brainspawn Forte or Logic Mainstage to host your plugins, and these have midi-rerouting/filtering capabilities to match the 50s virtual midi ports.
 
In my rig I have the AX100, an EMagic AMT8, a MOTU 828 Mk I, a FCB100 footpedal with the UnO chip and a Macbook Pro running Logic Mainstage. Now its configured, it just needs to be switched on, but I had to think about what bits I needed in my rig to get the 'plug-and-play' setup you would take for granted with an AX50. Of course, if you have lots of old hardware synths like I do then having an AMT8 is just brilliant as you can add and edit hardware synths with arguably less hassle than installing a new plugin...
 
So all in all, I'd recommend the 50 over the 100. But in the grand scheme of things, its marginal and won't affect the music you make.