Mark IV vs Triaxis

[Nick_cor]

I'm wondering what people think about the Triaxis vs Mark IV. I personally cannot believe you can nail a mark IV tone with the triaxis and the 2:90. I've heard the triaxis before and i'm not a believer. Can someone please post a clip of the a triaxis or either their mark IV so I can compare them

If the triaxis can nail the mark IV tone, then i'll will consider selling my mark IV for the TA and 2:90 and if this is really the case, then why don't people use them in the studio over their mesa heads??

Anyways can people post clips of their triaxis and their mark IVs if they have both, and let people know your settings so that someone can try to replicate the tone.

8)

Thanks

 

[ytse_jam]

i think triaxis cannot sound really close to mkIV...
there are many different opinions about triaxis, some people like it some don't.. i think that if you buy a triaxis with the aim of emulating mark series amps you would not be very satisfied. If you think instead of triaxis as a preamp with its own character, it is a great product.

 

[t0aj15]

I own a Mark IV short head and a TriAxis-50/50 rack, and yes I can nail the Mark IV tone exactly with the TriAxis. I still have no intention of selling the Mark IV though.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

"i think that if you buy a triaxis with the aim of emulating mark series amps you would not be very satisfied"

WRONG!!! I've owned both units for many years...and the only reason why I kept the MK IV was because of it's small form factor on a cramped stage.

But without a doubt I pulled those wonderful Mark IV tones out of the Triaxis.

Don't trust anyone that says otherwise, especially if they haven't owned both at the same time. It's not the same to have owned one or the other at some point in time. You have to have had them both to A/B them especially in a "Live" setting.

 

[eagle]

Anyone who thinks the Triaxis can nail any of the amps on the list it's BASED on is deff ,the triaxis and the markIV are good in there own right .
The list is to give you a ballpark idea of the tonal carecter of each chanel not like Line 6 SH*& ,same goes for the Egnater M4 (Guids only)modules .

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Well..."eagle" there you go then.....I guess we're all deaf, All of the engineers at Mesa Boogie are deaf...except you :shock:

Uh, actually you too cause you keep buying amps from a tone deaf company :roll:

Fact is, as has been said over and over again -- TONE IS SUBJECTIVE

You want to know if the TA can get the tone of any other amp, then you need to own both for a while and test extensively for yourself. I don't need anyone to tell me otherwise because I've had them both for many years, and to MY EARS, there's no need to keep the Mark IV if I already have the Triaxis. As a result the Mark IV was sold.

 

[Nick_cor]

OK so do you guys think it's wise to trade in my MK IV and get the 2:90 and triaxis?, i can't get both!

 

[JAZZGEAR]

YES if you seek additional versatility/tones than are possible with the MK IV alone.

YES, if you will like to have your favorite setting saved to be able to be recalled instantly at any moment.

YES, if you like going in stereo at times (although you can run both L/R outputs in Mono - with your Effects Processor, i.e. G Force).

Not sure if you're buying used or new...but the Triaxis (of late) seems to have a better re-sale value than the MKIV -- if you find you don't like it.

The lead tones in the Triaxis, by far eclipse, those attainable in the MK IV alone......

For me, the 2nd channel in the MKIV is not very good - just OK-- rarely ever used.

So really you you have two exceptional channels in the MK IV; 100 or so are possible with the TA/2:90, add in the 3 modes of the 2:90 and those numbers go up exponentially.

 

[phantomlord2oo]

Ok ok everyone, listen up!

I own both a Triaxis and a Mark IVA Short Head. I've compared both of them and I can get them sounding similar but not the same. This is also with a 31 band graphic EQ on the Triaxis!

They both sound good in their own ways, that why I'm keeping both. I like the cleans better on the Mark IV since it doesn't have the OPAMP problem. The distortion sounds clearer on the Mark IV too.

I like the Triaxis with its versatility and good sound quality. It's a lot easier with a rack. Personally I'd stick with the Mark IV.

Having a Triaxis rack setup will cost more now and in the long run.

+Mike+

 

[JAZZGEAR]

As you can see from the voting....you're never going to get any agreement on this issue.

For me, I was able to get them sounding the same (defined as 99.999%).

Even if I concede (which I don't), the lead tone on the MK IV is better (if all you're after is the Mark IV), in which case keep the Mark IV...but I suspect you opened this pole and thread because you seek more (but just don't want to lose the MK IV tones) than just the MK IV.

As for the cleans, I disagree with the poster above. The cleans are just about dead even -- the OPAMP issue is resolved but replacing the tube (don't remember the position off the top of my head) with a lower gain tube. Issue resolved. And btw this is only an issue on the Rythm Green setting (I believe it's the Mark I).

In addition, on the cleans comparison...when you consider that you can save your preset on the TA, then the nod goes to the TA. You go ahead start moving controls on the fly in a live gig....and you will be dissapointed.

With the TA, again, it's all in a preset...modify your tone settings to suit the location and it doesn't affect your other settings -- can't do that with the MK IV.

 

[Nick_cor]

As you can see from the voting....you're never going to get any agreement on this issue.

For me, I was able to get them sounding the same (defined as 99.999%).

Even if I concede (which I don't), the lead tone on the MK IV is better (if all you're after is the Mark IV), in which case keep the Mark IV...but I suspect you opened this pole and thread because you seek more (but just don't want to lose the MK IV tones) than just the MK IV.

As for the cleans, I disagree with the poster above. The cleans are just about dead even -- the OPAMP issue is resolved but replacing the tube (don't remember the position off the top of my head) with a lower gain tube. Issue resolved.

In addition, on the cleans comparison...when you consider that you can save your preset on the TA, then the nod goes to the TA. You go ahead start moving controls on the fly in a live gig....and you will be dissapointed.

With the TA, again, it's all in a preset...modify your tone settings to suit the location and it doesn't affect your other settings -- can't do that with the MK IV.

||

Yes you are right, I wanna keep my mark IV tones but i'm looking for soemthing more, I'm getting a studio pre soon, and if i could maybe get another preamp then i'll be happy, I mean, the mark IV is a dream come true, and the studio will be icing on the cake, with the studio, i'll go back to rack setup, hopefully I'll get a poweramp for it and get another pre amp and get rid of the head, so why haven't you sold the MKIV, if you can get the same tone with the TA?

 

[JAZZGEAR]

"I'm getting a studio pre soon"

In that case, the Studio Pre (which I previously owned) will get you Mark IV tones with less tweaking than the Triaxis and is a great great pre for both the studio and live.

 

[Nick_cor]

cool man, thanks EVERYONE, everyone puts in so much time and money into these things, that's it's critical to have a good understanding of the equipment

 

[phantomlord2oo]

I've replaced the V3 tube with a lower gain tube and while it helped a LOT it didn't fix it fully. And it doesn't only affect the RHY Green. It affects all modes. Refer to http://www.tubefreak.com/triaxis.htm for more info.

+Mike+

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Well, it's never bothered me...and I've gigged my 2:90/TA in all types of venues....In door/Outdoor, etc. Quite frankly, it's really not a problem even w/o the low gain tube.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

As for the tubefreak link: I think it's fair to say you lose most of your credibility when you open a statement with:

"Nope, I do not own a Mesa/Boogie Triaxis preamp."

Let's be real, if everything on paper worked out the way it's mapped out, then:

1. LA Lakers win 2004 NBA Title
2. George Mason get's eliminated in the 1st round (no Final 4 Appearance)
3. Yankess win World Series every year.
4. Class "A' Amplifiers would not be manufactured due to excessive waste of energy.
5. There'd be no Mark Series Amps produced, only Triaxis/2:90 :wink: :lol:

The TA is the only product (prior to RK II) to actually deliver the goods.....but you do have to play it, hear it, tweak it, etc., before you can go make a judgement about it.

And the list goes on......[/list]

 

[t0aj15]

Refer to http://www.tubefreak.com/triaxis.htm for more info.+Mike+

Why on god's green earth would I want to refer to an article by someone who doesn't even own a TriAxis?
The most important part of that article is the first sentence,"Nope, I do not own a Mesa/Boogie Triaxis preamp". That says it all.

 

[fatboy135]

They both sound good in their own ways, that why I'm keeping both. I like the cleans better on the Mark IV since it doesn't have the OPAMP problem

No man, forget that opamp trouble. As I posted a few months ago replacing the IC by a good other opamp you solve the trouble, I recomend the NE5532 or BB opa2134. I have install the burr brown on my triaxis, with the bb and with empirical test with my oscilloscope I achieve a bit more headroom and not so nasty odd harmonic distortion like the old tl072 ( measured the THD with spectralab )
Also don´t forget that good tubes also improve clean tones, I use a =C= on the last tube and a National 5751 on the third position, I don´t know if it sounds better than a mark IV but I have empirical measurements. I could say you that it sounds wonderful with that IC and tubes to me, but there is only an opinion of a crazy man, empirical data will remains for all the times as a tangible prove.
Even if you install a rail to rail opamp you could achieve at least 3 volts peak to peak more headroom. Now apply the 3 volts to either of the units of measurement usually used, dBm, dBU, dBV and calculate the log you could see some dB of headroom improvement