Mark V or Triaxis with 2:90?
- Thread starter MrEzzyE
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
mrcomputer
Well-known member
Mark V is a guitar amplifier (pre-amp / amp) so unless you're using the 2:90 for satellite purposes, you want a TriAxis. The 2:90 was actually designed to be used with that pre-amp.
jbw
jbw
phyrexia
Well-known member
Um, I think he's asking if he should use a Mark V or a Triaxis/2:90 setup.
mejoshee
Well-known member
phyrexia said:
that's what i read
having not (but almost!) owned a triaxis/2:90 setup, i'd like to approach it this way: how comfortable are you with deal with programmability, midi, etc.? i'm a more analog kind of guy. need to still have the front panel knobs, sliders, buttons, etc. i wanna be able to switch stuff here and there on the fly without having to remember if that particular preset has that setting or off without looking all over the panel each time i turn it on.
the other side of the coin is that the knobs and switches can get knicked and bumped if you travel/load gear a lot. be careful with the precious baby
other than that, i'm all for the v. but the iv is also very versatile. a little trickier to dial something in right out of the box, but just my opinion. if you're looking for a set-it-and-forget-it thing, you can get away with either, but you can always run the risk of losing presets. my $.02
8)
Yeah. This is what I had in mind!
I have owned some rack gear so I am aware of all the programming stuff etc. How about the sound difference
between Triaxis/2:90 and Mark V? I've heard somewhere that Triaxis sounds more processed. Is this true?
phyrexia said:
Yeah. This is what I had in mind!
I have owned some rack gear so I am aware of all the programming stuff etc. How about the sound difference
between Triaxis/2:90 and Mark V? I've heard somewhere that Triaxis sounds more processed. Is this true?
mrcomputer
Well-known member
My bad - the mathematician in me read it as written...
To answer your question as intended:
The TriAxis is probably capable of a wider array of sounds than a standalone amp and has the advantage of being able to consistantly reproduce those sound due to its MIDI programmable nature. The Mark V is capable of producing only three basic sounds at a time (without adjustment - 6 if you include the switchable EQ) - more than enough for gigging - and has the advantage of portabilty and price over the Triaxis / 2:90 combination (2k for a Mark V head new, 2100 for the Mark V combo new, 2200 for a clean, used Tri / 2:90 and a cheap rack). The Tri / 2:90 is stereo, the Mark V is not.
I think to better answer your question you need to determine the what and where of your playing situation. Do you gig? Various styles? What do you drive?
I own a Triaxis which I currently use with a 20/20 (I own a 2:90 but I need larger rack before I can use it regularly). I have it programmed for 2 sets of 4 sounds - clean, crunch, lead1 and lead2 - for single coil and humbucking guitars. My rack includes the standard effects, audio loops and pedals - I built a custom pedalboard for it. It sounds great! It cost me about $5500 and 1 year to assemble (including speakers). It spends most of it's time in the rehearsal studio and comes out about one a month for gigs. For pickup stuff, jams and tiny stages I use a combo amp (often just guitar-cord-amp).
I would love to have a Mark V or (IV) head to use with 1 (or more) of my Thiele cabs with a small rack for effects. Easy to carry and flexible in nature. And, with any luck, by this time next year that will be the case. But then, I already have the Tri / 2:90.
So if you can define your requirements for use, I think the answer becomes obvious.
On the other hand, if this is just GAS, you'll probably buy both eventually. :lol:
jbw
To answer your question as intended:
The TriAxis is probably capable of a wider array of sounds than a standalone amp and has the advantage of being able to consistantly reproduce those sound due to its MIDI programmable nature. The Mark V is capable of producing only three basic sounds at a time (without adjustment - 6 if you include the switchable EQ) - more than enough for gigging - and has the advantage of portabilty and price over the Triaxis / 2:90 combination (2k for a Mark V head new, 2100 for the Mark V combo new, 2200 for a clean, used Tri / 2:90 and a cheap rack). The Tri / 2:90 is stereo, the Mark V is not.
I think to better answer your question you need to determine the what and where of your playing situation. Do you gig? Various styles? What do you drive?
I own a Triaxis which I currently use with a 20/20 (I own a 2:90 but I need larger rack before I can use it regularly). I have it programmed for 2 sets of 4 sounds - clean, crunch, lead1 and lead2 - for single coil and humbucking guitars. My rack includes the standard effects, audio loops and pedals - I built a custom pedalboard for it. It sounds great! It cost me about $5500 and 1 year to assemble (including speakers). It spends most of it's time in the rehearsal studio and comes out about one a month for gigs. For pickup stuff, jams and tiny stages I use a combo amp (often just guitar-cord-amp).
I would love to have a Mark V or (IV) head to use with 1 (or more) of my Thiele cabs with a small rack for effects. Easy to carry and flexible in nature. And, with any luck, by this time next year that will be the case. But then, I already have the Tri / 2:90.
So if you can define your requirements for use, I think the answer becomes obvious.
On the other hand, if this is just GAS, you'll probably buy both eventually. :lol:
jbw
vae
Well-known member
Sold my Triaxis/2:90 (had them for many years) and picked up the V.
No regrets at all -- I like the tones from my V much more.
No regrets at all -- I like the tones from my V much more.
MesaGod666
Well-known member
I own both. I like the Triaxis more due to the nature of it's versatility and midi programmable features. The Mark V is nice because it's a combo amp that I can just pick up and go with for practice or whatnot. When I'm on the road, Triaxis/2:Ninety all the way. If I'm just jamming in my studio...then Mark V all the way. If I'm recording...then BOTH but if I had to choose between the Tri/290 or the MKV then I would go with the Tri.
So I decided to go with Mark V because it is easier to transport it back and forth. Rack systems tend to get too big and too heavy before you even notice. And I think with the head it is also easier to find my couple of sounds needed. We'll see how I like it when it arrives in a couple of weeks... Can't wait! 8)
Similar threads
Wanted
2:90
