Mark IV or Triaxis

[progrockmike]

Looking for some opinions here. I currently have a Triaxis 2.0 running into a Fifty/Fifty and I've been pretty happy with my tone. However, I'm downsizing my rig a bit and have been thinking of trading the Triaxis and Fifty/Fifty in for a Mark IV head. I like a wide variety of tones (I'm not looking to emulate Petrucci or Metallica), and while the Triaxis has a lot of variety, I tend to settle on two or three base tones that I like and build off those. With that in mind, the Triaxis almost seems like overkill. To top it off, I recently picked up a Stiletto Ace and that reminded me how much I like fiddling with the knobs and dialing in my favorite tones. I just don't get that same visceral feeling with the Triaxis - it almost feels a little sterile to me. So, the question is: Mark IV or Triaxis? Which do you prefer and why? Is the grass truly greener on the other side of the fence?

 

[6L6C]

For what it's worth have owned a Mark IV since 93 around 97 got the TriAxes/2:90 setup loved both. Time goes on had to sell one setup was a little torn till my friend pointed out to me that when we recorded I always went for the Mark IV even with the Tri/2:90 sitting right next to it. I think it boiled down to I like the attack of the head better.

Years later I sometimes miss the Tri/2:90, when i sold it my plan was to get another when I had the money, well I have the money now but no desire to reacquire the setup. Very happy with current setup as you can see below. And most important I dont feel limited, that was the biggest fear when I sold the Tri/2:290

 

[t0aj15]

I have both a Mark IV short head and a TriAxis-50/50 rig and hands down the the Mark IV is my favorite. I just don't use that many of the TriAxis channels and the three sounds I do want come from the Mark IV's channels. I also prefer the speed and directness of knobs over buttons, not to mention the fact that IMO the Mark IV just sounds better and is much less noisy.

 

[phrygiandom]

I've always followed the advice I ran across in an old issue of Guitar Player regarding choosing amps/preamps. One or two KILLER tones is always better than numerous "good" ones.

In my opinion my Mark-IV offers three absolutely stellar, and KILLER, tones. I've played the Triaxis/2:90, and while it was definitely a great piece of gear, it just didn't have the "balls" and overall authority of the Mark.

Just my $.02

 

[sagelakos]

I used a Triaxis/2:90 as an introduction to Mesa, I was a Marshall and 5150 guy before that. I found myself using the sounds that were more along the lines of the Mark IV so I sold it and picked up a Mark IV and have loved it since. I may pick up a Triaxis again sometime in the future but only as an alternative to the Mark not to replace it.
You may want to wait until after the Namm show, maybe there is some truth to the Mark V.

 

[cliffdove]

I tend to settle on two or three base tones that I like and build off those. With that in mind, the Triaxis almost seems like overkill. To top it off, I recently picked up a Stiletto Ace and that reminded me how much I like fiddling with the knobs and dialing in my favorite tones. I just don't get that same visceral feeling with the Triaxis - it almost feels a little sterile to me. So, the question is: Mark IV or Triaxis? Which do you prefer and why? Is the grass truly greener on the other side of the fence?

If you want piece of mind, I think you should pick up a Mark and play both these guys side by side. It is close but you will realise tat the Mark feels more like a Head amp and the triaxis,.. well, an amp with digital chips in it.

Like you, I'm going for two or three tones and just want to plug and play. I don't need all the other triaxis modes that remain idle. The Mark is minimalist in that aspect. I still have the triaxis and 50/50 around to remind me that the Mark is better. :wink:

 

[progrockmike]

Thanks for the insight. Sounds like my gut was telling me the right thing. I think I will wait until NAMM to see if anything if forthcoming.