Anyone using a Triaxis into their Mark heads?

[Neptical]

Just an idea ( where it all starts :twisted: )..and feeling out all my options here.

Wondering if anyone around here is running their Triaxis into their Mark heads power section :?: I'm interested in throwing one in my rack but don't feel like getting another power amp ( unless I really have to). So, just wondering how good it runs into the power section of a Mark head - specifically a III. I was going to throw down for an AxeFxII, but I'm not sure anymore..and find the Triaxis may get me exactly where I need to be. Any help on this matter is greatly appreciated folks. Thanks!

 

[Jackie]

I don't know where on this forum I read this, but the 2:90 poweramp is supposedly a "Mark IV" powersection. I think you'd get good results.

 

[Neptical]

Thanks, Jackie! That's good to know. I'm assuming it would work just fine. 8)

Anyone else care to chime in on this, feel free! Thanks!

 

[Shane C]

Hey Neptical, 8)

I used to run my Digitech 2101 preamp into the back of my old mk3 combo and it sounded awesome. And the Triaxis eats the Digitech so Im sure it will sound killer.


Shane

 

[Neptical]

Hey, Shane! 8)

Excellent to hear - thanks! The more I read, the more I'm thinking this might work nice!

 

[SonicProvocateur]

I see what you're driving at Nep. The more and more and more I listen to the Triaxis, the more it sounds like just a Triaxis (both unique, and a separate preamp into a power section). Same for the AFX. A preamp into a power. The more I listen to and play Mark IVs versus my III and throw mic's up against my Mark III I realize it's shortcomings in recording and why the Triaxis, AFX, and IV are better for recording prog (better for me), which is why I can't settle for anything short of a IIC+, it's the whole amp working together at once. The triaxis is going to sound like a triaxis into the mark (x) power section, etc. The good thing is it will retain it's Triaxis clarity.

 

[Neptical]

Hey, Sonic..thanks for the input man.

Yeah, I'm just looking for an extra toy to throw in the rack that would be a useful tool if I ever needed it. I really don't need it or have to have it..but I thought it would be fun to have another preamp in the rig just to add to the tonal palette. I was looking into the Studios and the Quads, but the Triaxis will give me even more versatility if I ever needed it. However, I've done alot of studio sessions with the III and think it records really nice. It made my producer want to bring one aboard...and throw his Rectos in the garbage [ :lol: ]. The last session was not too long ago using my Orange PPCHP8 4x12 cab with one of my IIIs cranked really hard. The tones coming through were nothing short of sweet.

 

[Shane C]

Neptical,

You might wanna re'read my comments on the Triaxis in the post you made a while back on the studio preamp. I'll telling you "the Triaxis is a downgrade" from any real mark amp. TRUST ME :!:

The advantages of the Triaxis are the 1U rack space and midi control of everything it can do, which is amazing! But its a sonic downgrade and a wannabe imitator and it costs more than other amps of BETTER quality. Whats the point of versatility if it sounds worse than what you have already got? If you want versatility get a Quad, get a Mark 4, hell.. get a Nomad! just don't get the Triaxis lol. If your really that curious your just guna have to get one and see for yourself but Im trying to save you the time, the money and the disappointment. :mrgreen:


Shane

 

[Jackie]

Really I don't think hating on a TriAxis like that is justified. I have played a Mark V before and it didn't sound a whole universe better than my TA. Just a question, since I mentioned the V: is the Mark V then not a wannabe imitator? :?

 

[SonicProvocateur]

Really I don't think hating on a TriAxis like that is justified. I have played a Mark V before and it didn't sound a whole universe better than my TA. Just a question, since I mentioned the V: is the Mark V then not a wannabe imitator? :?

I agree. Also, I've played the Quad into a 2:90, a 2:50 and power section of a Bass 400+ and it sounds IDENTICAL to my Mark III. Matter of fact, I though about getting one, just so I would have a whopping 6 channels, but Nep already has 6 Mark III channels available to him, so he's looking for some grail tone, so I see why he's looking at the Triaxis, and to me the Mark V wasn't it. It came close at earshattering live volumes, and would be awesome to record on, but neither definitely deserves hate. It's a quality piece of machine. The only thing is that i've heard the Triaxis lacks some bottom end compared to the Marks, that's why it mates to the 2:90 well when you engage it's multiple modes, that's why I said I don't know how It will sound with a Mark power section...but I also don't know if the V4 loop comes before or after the pull deep function either, i'll have to look at my schematics...

 

[Shane C]

Hey Jackie,

To be clear, there is no hate in my comments. I understand if your defending your gear. I have mentioned the Triaxis's advantages in another post. The Triaxis is a solid preamp!! I am merely stating my opinion based on my experience with these units. And my opinion matches the general consensus.

I personally would put sound quality above all else before versatility and lesser quality, but of course this all depends on the user's needs. If your in a cover band and need a lot of tones instantly at the press of a midi button and happen to favor the boogie sound then the Triaxis just might be the ticket. And if you don't.. then there are better options than a Triaxis.

When I got my Quad preamp I still had the Triaxis, but wasn't sure if I'd keep the it... so one of the things I was considering was the versatility of its program-ability compared to the Quad, but all of that went out the window when I compared them side by side in a tone quality battle. I sold the Triaxis that same week and I don't miss it one bit.

I have never played on a Mark V so I cannot comment on it. I have only read comments from other users and watched videos. And from what I have read and seen, the Mark V can never be a Mark IIC+ or a Mark IV but certainly does a more convincing job than the Triaxis, being that it is a head after all and not just a preamp. Although John Petrucci seems to think that the Mark V's C+ channel is better than his REAL C+ heads! Go figure!


Shane

 

[Jackie]

Yeah you're right, you didn't "hate", I misused the word.
I agree the TriAxis on it's own lacks bottom end badhula, I have to increase the Resonance quite high on my Marshall if I use it as a poweramp.

BTW I don't want to hijack the thread, but I'm really interested in this:

Why would there be a difference between a rack preamp/poweramp combo and a head (I'm talking in general here)? For example over at the unofficial ENGL forum I noticed some dude saying racks sound "flat" and to him it never sounds as good as a head... what the hell :? The way a signal goes from preramp to poweramp is freakin' wire regardless whether it's a head or rack system so I don't know what else could be inferior here.

 

[immersed]

Do your self a favor and run a triaxis thru the fx return of a mark amp with 5 band EQ and the deep pulled. Make sure the dynamic voice is set to zero on your triaxis.

 

[SonicProvocateur]

\
Why would there be a difference between a rack preamp/poweramp combo and a head (I'm talking in general here)? For example over at the unofficial ENGL forum I noticed some dude saying racks sound "flat" and to him it never sounds as good as a head... what the hell :? The way a signal goes from preramp to poweramp is freakin' wire regardless whether it's a head or rack system so I don't know what else could be inferior here.

It's like the difference in tone from going from a 5' wire to a 50' wire from your guitar to your amp. Its all the small differences in signal impedance from hooking up the connections, the additional transformers and capacitors and resistors. While the sonic differences may be small, even negligible, they are apparent. For better or worse to whoever's ears.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Neptical,

You might wanna re'read my comments on the Triaxis in the post you made a while back on the studio preamp. I'll telling you "the Triaxis is a downgrade" from any real mark amp. TRUST ME :!:

The advantages of the Triaxis are the 1U rack space and midi control of everything it can do, which is amazing! But its a sonic downgrade and a wannabe imitator and it costs more than other amps of BETTER quality. Whats the point of versatility if it sounds worse than what you have already got? If you want versatility get a Quad, get a Mark 4, hell.. get a Nomad! just don't get the Triaxis lol. If your really that curious your just guna have to get one and see for yourself but Im trying to save you the time, the money and the disappointment. :mrgreen:


Shane

This is as close to the most bias'd (aka dumb) post I've read on this forum. It's clear you hate the TriAxis, but your argument is not based on fact, just your opinion. I happen to have owned just about all of the Mark amps (except for the IIC+), and the Triaxis hangs right in there with all of the MArk Amps. Does it sound exactly like them? Well, as much as the Mark V sounds like a LSC, Mark I, Mark IV, and Mark IIC+ :roll:

The TriAxis is the best preamp Mesa has made....though I would agree that tonally, the best one ever created by Mesa is the Studio. Still the TriAxis is a great sounding pre that is great for playing live and in the studio.

The interesting part is that the TriAxis takes on more of the character of the amp through which you are running it. I swear that it sounds a lot like my RA100, Shiva, when I run it through those power sections. It retains some it's character, but you could hear/feel the looser nature of the Shiva.

 

[Shane C]

Jazzgear,

Is this not a forum? Are we not here to share and discuss experiences? Im sharing! How exactly am I biased when I don't solely use my own opinion for my conclusions. I have explained the reasons for my conclusions based my own experiences and hours of research reading about other guitarists experiences and opinions to get an overall general consensus on the Amps in question.

I am NOT the first person to say the Triaxis lacks dynamics, warmth, punch and clarity when compared to a Mark head, Studio preamp or Quad preamp. Without these key ingredients the Triaxis falls short of nailing the Mark tone and being on the same level in terms of quality. But that doesn't mean its not a good preamp and that I hate it... I never said that! ANYWHERE!?

You say the Triaxis hangs with Mark heads, I say it doesn't. I'd respect your opinion a whole lot more if you didn't attack me for mine. Calling me stupid and dumb doesn't add to your creditability.

The advantage of the Triaxis lies in the extreme Midi capability and this makes it very versatile indeed, but to someone who doesn't need the Midi options and already owns two MK3 Heads like Neptical does, I would say the Triaxis will not offer tones the MK3 cant already do. Plain and simple.

Neptical and I have been discussing this topic previously so he understands where Im coming from, perhaps Neptical can chime back in and be more specific on his needs in this current discussion.


Shane

 

[Neptical]

:shock:

I was just looking for a simple question answered. :lol:

I was only looking to see if this preamp would pair up good and work well into the power section of my IIIs. If not, well, that's ok too. It's just another tool to use and I don't have to have it. I'm sure all of these amps mentioned are good in their own right, otherwise many of the famous artists we've known to use them surely would never have used them to begin with. I haven't jumped yet, or made any moves - still indecisive.

Thanks for all the input in this thread.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Jazzgear,

Is this not a forum? Are we not here to share and discuss experiences? Im sharing! How exactly am I biased when I don't solely use my own opinion for my conclusions. I have explained the reasons for my conclusions based my own experiences and hours of research reading about other guitarists experiences and opinions to get an overall general consensus on the Amps in question.

I am NOT the first person to say the Triaxis lacks dynamics, warmth, punch and clarity when compared to a Mark head, Studio preamp or Quad preamp. Without these key ingredients the Triaxis falls short of nailing the Mark tone and being on the same level in terms of quality. But that doesn't mean its not a good preamp and that I hate it... I never said that! ANYWHERE!?

You say the Triaxis hangs with Mark heads, I say it doesn't. I'd respect your opinion a whole lot more if you didn't attack me for mine. Calling me stupid and dumb doesn't add to your creditability.

The advantage of the Triaxis lies in the extreme Midi capability and this makes it very versatile indeed, but to someone who doesn't need the Midi options and already owns two MK3 Heads like Neptical does, I would say the Triaxis will not offer tones the MK3 cant already do. Plain and simple.

Neptical and I have been discussing this topic previously so he understands where Im coming from, perhaps Neptical can chime back in and be more specific on his needs in this current discussion.


Shane

I guess we can agree to disagree. It amazes me how we all hear things so different....I suppose our ears are filtered or tuned to a specific frequency range like speakers...Given the same audio content, it will sound different (good or bad) depending on the speaker. This has to be the case. Cause I can't figure out why the disparity in our perceptions of tone.

The bolded text's suggest to me that the Triaxis produces Mark III tones, :mrgreen:

BTW I didn't mean to disparage you by saying the statement was dumb. Smart people do say dumb things at times... I know I do :shock:

 

[Jackie]

The interesting part is that the TriAxis takes on more of the character of the amp through which you are running it. I swear that it sounds a lot like my RA100, Shiva, when I run it through those power sections. It retains some it's character, but you could hear/feel the looser nature of the Shiva.

Oh yea you got that right... I run it though my Marshall's power section sometimes and it sounds just like it is - a Mesa through a Marshall, but it sounds like neither a Mesa or a Marshall.

 

[ziggys]

I own and love a Mark III Red Stripe. I also own and love a Triaxis.
Run the Triaxis to the loop in of the III, engage "pull deep" WOW! The EQ on the III is also available.
Just got a Mark V. Sounds great but you will never get a Triaxis Lead 2 orange punishment out of it.
Triaxis through a III has many sounds that the V and III alone cannot match.
My plan was to sell one of them to recoup $$ but alas, I can't part with any of them.