Limitations of the Triaxis

[gummx97]

One other thing I didn't see mentioned was that the dynamic voice can be modded by Mesa, I.E. you can ask them to program your own custom EQ curves into the PROM (programmable ROM). If you deem it deficient, that is truly another option.


I love mine, but am selling it to nab the Mark V.
The sheer weight of the Tri + 2:90 installed in my 8 space rack is around 90Lbs give or take, tired of feeling like my arms were 4" longer after a gig.

I definitely agree with the weight issue of the Triaxis and 290 that is installed on one rack. I had that dillemma so my workaround was to install the 290 on a separate 2-space rack. Sure, i have to carry one more piece of gear, but the tradeoff between weight and one extra trip to my vehicle i deemed well worth it.

Didn't know about the reprogram of the dynamic voice, if shipping wasn't so expensive, i would've sent my triaxis to boogie for reprogram.

 

[fab]

Hi
I'm new in the forum. I found this discussion interesting since I've been (and I'm still) in doubt between a Mark combo and a triaxis setup.
Premises: I'm not a pro, I re-take playing after a loooooong break, I do not play metal in whatever form but I use mostly clean for comping (funk, jazz) and soloing (metheny like) and/or smooth saturated (holdsowrth like).... so somebody could wonder "why mesa?" well ... I love the tone anyway.

I recognize the needs of ando

Therein lies the key. If you play professionally, regardless of how many people are in attendance, you can't stop playing and flip switches. If you play professionally, you have to keep playing and stay in performance mode. Leaning over and tweaking knobs and switches is unprofessional and poor stagecraft. Pros need to stay involved in their music and their audience. If you fail to do this, you will lose them. It's too introverted and self-obsessed.

So, if you need a variety of tones as a playing professional, the Triaxis is vastly superior. If you want to record, or you only use a few sounds at a time in gigs, the Mark V would suit and have a few more variations available.

Even without being a pro I need to use more than 3 sounds (or different "colors") during my playing (in the song or between songs) So triaxis seemed the right choice... as a matter of fact I bump into a nice MarkIV for a very reasonable price, I could try it ...and then was mine. (where I live there are not many shop where to try without problem many high end gears).

So how I'm compromising? I use a generic setup for the Mark (which reflects my preferences in terms of tones and colors for the clean, crunch and lead), then I differentiate the colors through the digtal fx in the loop (eq, echos, choruses etc) and store how many patches I want. So I have at my footswitch from the sparkling funky cleans, wha's, until the darkest jazz tone, up to light saturated or high saturated ones... (of course I could go up to infinite possibilities)

Cons:
- I'm coloring the tone with the fx and take less advantage of the 1'000'0000 possible permutation&combination of knobs in the pre stage.
- I must remember the knob setups for which I created the patches.

Pros:
- I have still all the 1'000'0000 possible permutation&combination of knobs in the pre stage.
- I can modify on the fly whatever parameter in the pre-stage (with knobs or GEQ) if I feel I need (even a pro during a gig needs to tweak the sound sometime, because the environmental conditions are not the same of the reharsal room)... sliding a GEQ is much easier than reprogramming a midi patch...

So all in all (as everybody says) I don't think there is a definitive objective answer on which solution is better.
But I'm curious to hear how my Steinberger would sound through a triaxis and compare with my MarkIV.

Bye
Fab

 

[igfraso]

There are lots of good comments in this very nice thread about the Triaxis and the Mark series.
I never owned a Triaxis but, to me, the Mark V looks like a full-amp version of the Triaxis preamp with 9 preamp modes instead of 8 modes:

- a Tweed rhythm mode was added in Channel 1 (coming from the Mark II-A, maybe?)
- an Edge mode was added in channel 2 (coming from the Stiletto, maybe?) by freeing up the Triaxis Lead 1 Yellow "Modified Mark I" slot (replaced in the Mark V by the "Mark I Thick" mini switch?)

Mark V & Triaxis comparison

- Channel 1/Rhythm = Clean/Yellow (Mark IV), Fat/Green (Mark I input 2), Tweed (Mark II-A?)
- Channel 2/Lead 1 = Edge (Stiletto?), Crunch/Red (Rectifier Vintage), Mark I/Green (Mark I input 1)
- Channel 3/Lead 2 = Mark IIC+/Yellow, Mark IV/Green, Extreme/Red (modified Mark IV)

The power amp looks like a Simul-Class 2:Ninety (mono; not stereo) and the controls lay-out looks like a Nomad. Nothing seems to get discarded in Mesa!

Any suggestions to where the Tweed Rythym and Edge modes come from?

Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays to everyone that collaborates and keeps alive this wonderful Mesa Boogie forum!!

 

[THTH]

the Mark V looks like a full-amp version of the Triaxis preamp with 9 preamp modes instead of 8 modes:

Exactly why I didn't buy a Mark V after playing one twice and decided to keep my Triaxis and Mark IV.

 

[iceman]

I would agree that if the Mark V were to be midi-fied it is logical that it would be the next Triaxis (lets see them get it into a 1U rack mountable form factor). However I haven't been able to get the cleans of the Mark V out of the Triaxis, nor the lead yellow 2 of the Triaxis out of the Mark V. So the analogy is close, but I think the voicing of the channels are different enough that the we can continue the debate :wink: . Now to be fair, I've haven't run my Triaxis through a 2:90 not to mention the other 1000's of variables between comparing amps. However as with most Boogies, each is its own beast to be admired. (However it is still fun to endlessly discuss the differences).

 

[Jackie]

I think it's a bit pointless.

You like the sound of a TriAxis+2:90 (or other poweramp) combo? Can handle the 30kgs of rack weight hauling it around? Get one.

You like the sound of a Mark V? Bedroom fiddler/occasional gig and like the portability? Get one of those.

No amp can do everything. Even the Axe FX can't do everything, there will ALWAYS be a one trick pony that does that one trick better than the Axe FX emulates it.
I also find that with every piece of gear that advertises itself to be super-versatile, you'll be running in circles sooner or later because you are limited by YOUR TASTE. Who CARES if Amp X is capable of jazzy cleans, cleaner-than-clean cleans, warm cleans, mild breakup, soft crunch, serious rock n' roll crunch-a-roni, old school tone, modern tone, metal to the max tone, if your taste doesn't encompass all of the tones these styles use. I'm not making an assumption that there is no guitarist that plays all of these, but I think that most of us tend to play one thing about 75-80% time, and want those tones to shine. When you're playing that additional "whatever" 25%, you probably don't put in days of effort nailing that tone, but rather come up with something approximate (since it's not something you play every single day) and it works - at least that's how most of the guitarists I met up to now think.

We all like good tone and we need our rig to be as practical as possible. Sometimes, you just have to compromise one thing for the other, but it's pointless to complain in the sense of:
"darn, I have to haul around a big ol' rack and MIDI floorboard... but I dig the tone"
or
"I don't dig the Mark Vs X-tone (<- clean/crunch/high-gain), but I love how you can just pick it up and go and use a small simple footswitch"

 

[masque]

as an owner of a triaxis and 20/20 setup for almost 12 years I have found that like all amps there are times I turn it on and think "this is the best thing ever" and other times I turn it on and think "man this thing sucks....i need a new amp".

but aside from those strange occasional moments the triaxis has been one of the best and most versatile pieces of gear I have owned.

i have spent hundreds of hours programming and experimenting over the years. I honestly have sounds programmed with every mode that are very usable to me. I love the cleans I am able to get on this thing...it doesnt sound like a fender but that doesnt mean it's better or worse...it just doesnt sound like a fender.

i've heard people bitch about lead 1 red being unusable and yet I have found ways to program in that mode and use it on a regular basis and folks are usually pretty surprised when they hear those tones and find out it's a boogie. to them it doesnt sound like a boogie....to me it's just some great crunch and just another tonal option on my triaxis.

to each their own I suppose....i cant get into the what the "triaxis cant do that the real mark amps can do"....never owned any of them so i guess I cant miss what I never had but I would walk out on a stage in front of 20,000 people with my triaxis and be proud of how it sounds and I would never feel like I'm missing anything.

 

[iceman]

I think my previous post came off wrong. I couldn't agree more with masque/jackie (*well maybe a little see below), if amp X doesn't sound like a Fender or any other amp who cares. The first time I plugged in and played LD2 yellow on the Triaxis it was (and still is bliss). I really couldn't care if it was intended to sound like anything else, I like what it is. If somebody wants a different sound/feature/whatever they should just get it and stop complaining where it isn't.

*However I think we can still reserve the right to discuss differences between gear and wish lists for a next version (because there always is), many of the threads on the forum are about just that. Is it pointless? Perhaps, but hey to each his own (one can just ignore those threads). I think it is the nature of Mesa Boogie and the players of their amps, i.e. the endless tweaking and searching. If it wasn't the nature of the tweaking and searching we would all be playing fenders.

 

[Snoopy551]

HI guys

Who is really care about the sound of the amp is the best.
Do not try to compare the sound, if you are not the same pickups and guitar on your hand.
That is no sens.

If the amp is perfect for you that is great.

Do not forget, the sound is coming from your heart and finger.
Does anyone is able to say that john petrucci sound better since i got a mark V instead of triaxis.

Steph

 

[MesaGod666]

The Triaxis is the best amp in the world. The Axe-Fx is a piece of sh*t.

There.

Now that's been settled and it's beer time.

 

[ando]

Does anyone is able to say that john petrucci sound better since i got a mark V instead of triaxis.

Steph

Actually, I'd say the opposite - he has sounded much worse since he got obsessed with the recitifier sounds on his Mark V. He sounded much better back in the Triaxis days.

 

[Danimal]

The Triaxis is the best amp in the world. The Axe-Fx is a piece of sh*t.

There.

Now that's been settled and it's beer time.

Best post ever.

 

[ryjan]

The Triaxis is the best amp in the world. The Axe-Fx is a piece of sh*t.

There.

Now that's been settled and it's beer time.

I've owned both and loved my Tri/2:90 rig but the Axe-FX can do everything the Triaxis can do in both sound and feel and that's just the tip of the iceburg. The Tri can do a lot but it doesn't compare to the versatility of the Fractal unit.

 

[Danimal]

I agree. I have found that Matchbox cars can go much faster and come in a much greater variety than actual automobiles, so therefore they are superior.

 

[ryjan]

I agree. I have found that Matchbox cars can go much faster and come in a much greater variety than actual automobiles, so therefore they are superior.

Quiet, adults are talking.

 

[Danimal]

I know, and I wouldn't want to disturb them. That's why I came here to talk to you!

 

[masque]

man there are amps out there that can do 100 things more and better than an old fender super reverb and a ts 808 overdrive pedal....but ya know what......it sure sounded good as **** with SRV.

i have a fender twin and a blues deluxe and my buddy has a super reverb.....they all sound great but none of them is the amp I want to play on all the time...it suits my needs when i need it to.

the point is that if the fractal is THE PIECE for you then GREAT....if the triaxis is the best thing for somebody else then GREAT....if a marshall plexi is YOUR THING....then GREAT.

it's pointless to debate which is better or more versatile because hearing is so subjective...find an amp or rack unit that helps you achieve the sound you are hearing in your head the best and make it work for you.....no need in trying to get others to believe that the money we have all spent is justified on the gear we own. i like my gear and that's OK with me....if somebody else like their Fractal better that's fine with me.

 

[ryjan]

Good point Masque. Everyone gets so defensive of their amps. Funny part is that the only rig I can see myself owning twice would be a Tri/2:90 setup. The Fractal kicks ass because in a blind test you'd have a VERY hard time telling the difference if you were A/Bing it with the real thing and you have a virtual studio full of goodies as well. I'm sure I'll see some greener grass in a year or so and horse trade it for another Triaxis or a Splawn or Recto or whatever my GAS demands at the time. :lol: My whole point is that the Fractal can in fact dance with the big boys.

 

[markwayne]

I used to be very guilty of GAS-fueled denial about my own tone and time and touch. The best way I know to make my point is to talk about a couple of sax players I once worked with. The first guy was just outstanding. One of those born musicians who could just flat out play rings around anyone while never giving the impression he was really trying that hard. He also was as nonchalant about his instrument and its care as anyone I've ever known. He was forever scavenging for parts for his old, beat-up tenor sax. Using any reed he could find, paper clips and rubber bands to keep his sax playable. He still smoked every night. Unfortunately, he had all the cliche musician vices which led to his being fired and replaced by this other guy. Now the new guy had a couple of mid-range Selmers and was meticulous in his care of his horns. He would pitch a fit when he couldn't his brand and weight of reed in stock in the local music store. The irony was that he just wasn't very good. He spent most of his time poring over literature on this or that sax rather than practice on what he had. When we had discussions about how he might be able to bring a little more fire to his solos, he would usually blame it on his horn and tell us we should just wait until he got that mark VI he was saving for. That probably would have worked on me had we not just had a player who played a student series Yamaha horn held together with rubber bands and paper clips. That was, for me, the point when I let go a fair amount of GAS.

Wayne

 

[masque]

Good point Masque. Everyone gets so defensive of their amps. Funny part is that the only rig I can see myself owning twice would be a Tri/2:90 setup. The Fractal kicks ass because in a blind test you'd have a VERY hard time telling the difference if you were A/Bing it with the real thing and you have a virtual studio full of goodies as well. I'm sure I'll see some greener grass in a year or so and horse trade it for another Triaxis or a Splawn or Recto or whatever my GAS demands at the time. :lol: My whole point is that the Fractal can in fact dance with the big boys.

i hear you dude......i have owned and for many many years my digitech gsp-2101 was my go to amp/processor for recording guitar sounds.......i cant tell you how many people have heard my stuff recorded from those days and just could not believe it was done with the digitech.....over and over people were surprised.

i love my triaxis and i think it's the bomb but i can still coax sounds out of the digitech that i bought in 1995 and get sounds every bit as good if not better in comparison to my triaxis or my marshall or fender amps......so i am positive that incredible results could be obtained by the fractal and that is my point.....it's all good stuff....there is no right or wrong.....a good guitar sound is just that.....good.