triaxis vs mark IV?

[Anonymous]

I really only use the mark 4 setting on my tri.
i am looking to either get a 2:90 to thicken up my sound or get a mark IV.
so i am only using the LD2 green should i just get a mark IV?
which would have the heavier sound?
this is not a money issue as i can get either.
if the mark IV is just as heavy then my carry around weight wopudl be better, but i do not want to sacrifice my sound.

thanks again guys, i know i am being a pain!

 

[SFW]

Well, considering that Lamb of God use Mark IVs, I'd say that you can get heavy with the Mark IV. If you are only using the Mark IV setting on your Triaxis, then I'd say get the Mark IV.

 

[Anonymous]

that was my thought, but i was wondering in comparision. which had the better sound the tri/2:90 or the mark IV.

i can try out the mark IV but i can no find a dealer that carries the 2:90 as of yet.

 

[sombra]

I have both and I can make my triaxis sound exactly like mark 4.
So I prefer triaxis 2.90 cause you save your own tones.
Mark 4 just give you 4 tones .
I use my mark jus to study or composing stuff at my studio.Maybe some fun with my friends but at the stage I need more than 4 tones and midi .
With a midi foot controler triaxis is the king.
Unless you have money ,muscles and patience to carry 2 or 3 amps around !
TRIAXIS + INTELLIFEX + 2.90 are my paradise !

luck

 

[Greenevil]

I don't think the Triaxis Mark IV mode sounds like the actual Mark IV head at all. I have both amps and the 2:90 and the Triaxis doesn't even come close to the actual head sound, but then again that is my opinion.
With the Mark IV you have much more voicing options, (i.e. - push pull knobs, mid-range/harmonic switch, tweed/full power, simul-class/class A) and the 5 band EQ def. a makes a huge diff.
The dynamic voice on Triaxis is supposed to be the equivalence of the graphic EQ, but that doesn't even come close! You can get that modded by Boogie to your tastes but I would think that is not even worth doing. Don't get me wrong the Triaxis is a great preamp to use on the road but it doesn't really sound like the Mark IIc or Mark IV head. The diff. mode and use of midi is great though! So I guess what I am saying is, I would go with the Mark IV, but again it all boils down to your tastes, plus it's easier to lug around a head and cab then a rack and cab!

 

[Anonymous]

i do notice the tri is a little compressed sounding. i really am not really fancy guitar player one crunch tone and one clean tone, maybe a lead tone but the 2 suit me. the more i am hearing i may give up my rack for a head.
i wish someone had a couple clips though.

thanks fellow mesa junkies
j.dizzle

 

[Greenevil]

No problem bro, alway a pleasure helping out a fellow Boogie head! Def. sounds like the Mark IV will suit you more so then the Triaxis. There are a bunch of Mark IV clips on the "Rig and Tones" section of the site. Check out my Myspace page (www.myspace.com/shined) and listen to the track "Burn" the Mark IV is all over that (leads and rhy. guitars)! Not sure if you are into metal but that will give you the basic idea...

 

[sombra]

No problem bro, alway a pleasure helping out a fellow Boogie head! Def. sounds like the Mark IV will suit you more so then the Triaxis. There are a bunch of Mark IV clips on the "Rig and Tones" section of the site. Check out my Myspace page (www.myspace.com/shined) and listen to the track "Burn" the Mark IV is all over that (leads and rhy. guitars)! Not sure if you are into metal but that will give you the basic idea...

Dude its the most awfull tone I heard in my life !
Tone is a matter of taste so if you think triaxis cant duplicate mark 4 sounds thats your ears .
We cant tell other guys how an amp sound cause we dont have same ears and tastes.
I hate your tone,probably you ll hate mine.
And there are a thousand people who hate our tones !
So you got to hear for yourself.
luck

 

[Greenevil]

That's cool and that is your opinion, but that is basically what I said earlier. It just boils down to what the individual person digs... but in the end we are all here to help each other so if he gets something out of this board then cool...

 

[Anonymous]

i think i am going to chance it go with a mark IV "b".
now i justhave to find one on the bay!

 

[straitouttahell]

so i am only using the LD2 green should i just get a mark IV?

I never really played thoroughly a MkIv, but I have owned a Triaxis for a while. It's hard for me to believe that the MkIV would sound anything as compressed as the Triaxis. Maybe the first thing you should do is playing a MkIV, that could tell you a lot.

Apart from that, there are other things apart from tone that may determine your final decision.

For example, the MkIV will never get close to a Triaxis as far as it goes for patch programmability.

Possibly you should think about what kind of guitarist you are. If you just use 3 sounds, maybe the Triaxis is not the best choice for you, if you're a MIDI geek that likes to keep everything under remote control probably you'll stick to the Triaxis at the end of the day, even if the MkIV sounded somehow better to your ears (which is not definitely said).

 

[phantomlord2oo]

I've got both and the distortion can get quite close with both units. However, I find the Mark IV to be better. I like the cleans more, the head has a lot more headroom than the Triaxis. Plus it's easier to carry around than a rack. My vote is for the Mark IV.

+Mike+

 

[JAZZGEAR]

that was my thought, but i was wondering in comparision. which had the better sound the tri/2:90 or the mark IV.

i can try out the mark IV but i can no find a dealer that carries the 2:90 as of yet.

After owning my Mark IV since the early 90s, I finally sold it once I mastered my Triaxis. As another poster mentioned...My 2:90/TA combo can sound exactly like a MK IV and beyond.

So there is no question that the TA/2:90 combo is superior and would get my vote as the one to keep.

And to the poster that stated that the TA sounds compressed..and the other that the TA/2:90 can't sound like a Mark IV, then you have bad ears and not sure if anything can be done about that. The engineers at Mesa designed the TA to sound like the Mark Series (I, IIC, IV)...I agree with them as do my band members and other peers that have heard both my rigs.

When I first owned a Triaxis, I too thought the same that it didn't sound like the MK IV....but that's because, I didn't take the time to properly tweak and learn the relationship between the various controls. I have now positively achieved this goal and have just recently sold my MK IV.

One thing for sure, the TA/20-20 does not get the MK IV sound. It will only happen with either the 2:90 or 50/50.

 

[t0aj15]

With the TriAxis-50/50 combination I can nail the Mark IV tone dead nuts. I know this because I own them both and have played them side by each.

 

[NoHayBanda!]

Hi

I Bought like 10 years ago the triaxis (in second hand, as all my mesa gear ;-)). I had it plugged througth a Marshall 9100 power amp, througth 2 cabs 1x12 EV. It was nice at first but... lacked some bottom end and 'soul' (if you get what I mean). Last year I sold the marshall and bought the 20/20. It sounded a lot better. More dynamic and musical. More 'soul'.

...But there is a thing about triaxis that kept freaking me out: Since there's so many stuff into it, if something goes wrong, it's a headache. Unfortunally, things went wrong... more than a couple of times. I spent a lot of money fixing the triaxis. The guy who sold me the 20/20 also has a triaxis... and it also needed technical assistance... 2 unfortunate musicians or a triaxis issue?

Well, anyway, a couple of months ago I bought a Mark IVa (made in 1992) short head. This IS the sound I was looking for. First I thought that the triaxis+20/20 was ok, but after nailing a couple of weeks with the mark IV and going back to the triaxis...

I wanted a amp that sounded like an amp, not a processor. Triaxis does not really sound like a processor, but its sound, specialy the LD2s, is too compressed... or too much gain (no dynamics). Mark IV sounds more 'alive'.

Triaxis is cool if you need a vast array of sounds at your toes. It has a lot of modes and interesting sounds, but I found each mode individually not very tweakable. LD1 red is the exception, maybe.

Bottom line: If the sounds I use in the triaxis are from the Mark series amps, a Mark series amp will do it better by far... and it will save you from the headache of needing recursive technical assistance (hope not ;-))

 

[Guitarzan]

Hi

I Bought like 10 years ago the triaxis (in second hand, as all my mesa gear ;-)). I had it plugged througth a Marshall 9100 power amp, througth 2 cabs 1x12 EV. It was nice at first but... lacked some bottom end and 'soul' (if you get what I mean). Last year I sold the marshall and bought the 20/20. It sounded a lot better. More dynamic and musical. More 'soul'.

...But there is a thing about triaxis that kept freaking me out: Since there's so many stuff into it, if something goes wrong, it's a headache. Unfortunally, things went wrong... more than a couple of times. I spent a lot of money fixing the triaxis. The guy who sold me the 20/20 also has a triaxis... and it also needed technical assistance... 2 unfortunate musicians or a triaxis issue?

Well, anyway, a couple of months ago I bought a Mark IVa (made in 1992) short head. This IS the sound I was looking for. First I thought that the triaxis+20/20 was ok, but after nailing a couple of weeks with the mark IV and going back to the triaxis...

I wanted a amp that sounded like an amp, not a processor. Triaxis does not really sound like a processor, but its sound, specialy the LD2s, is too compressed... or too much gain (no dynamics). Mark IV sounds more 'alive'.

Triaxis is cool if you need a vast array of sounds at your toes. It has a lot of modes and interesting sounds, but I found each mode individually not very tweakable. LD1 red is the exception, maybe.

Bottom line: If the sounds I use in the triaxis are from the Mark series amps, a Mark series amp will do it better by far... and it will save you from the headache of needing recursive technical assistance (hope not ;-))

Nice... I like Mulholland Drive. Good Movie.