Triaxis vs studio pre ?

[Geiri]

First of all a happy new year to you all here, the boogie family.

Is there a significant difference in tone in the triaxis vs the studio pre ? I've been reading here that the triaxis is somewhat wanting in the IIC+ and the MK IV department where on the other hand the studio pre seems to shine. I'm not asking about versatility just the tone.

For my needs a two channel amp is sufficient but more is always merrier but not if the cost of versatility is loss of tone.

The reason I'm asking this is that I have a mk4 and am having a little rack gas now and want to build a humble little rack. A mesa preamp 20/20 poweramp and g-major 2.

Thanks

Geiri

 

[straitouttahell]

I've never played a Studio Pre, but I had a Quad and it sounded much better than both the Triaxises I've had, to the point that I'm buying it back, even though I already own a Mark IV.

 

[bartchamdoh]

I had a studio pre and the clean channel was to die for!!!however the lead channel was a whole other kettle of fish, i could never dial the same tone twice,i had to tweak it every time i changed venue or amp.It was also very much a one channel amp as it was impossible to get a good clean channel with a good lead setting with sufficient gain levels, also it didn,t have enough gain for my tastes. Being a mark 2/3 player i didn,t think either channel was very markish and i couldn,t get the tones of my regular amps or indeed even in the same ball park!!!....i think the quad would be a better bet,i also really like the v-twin pre amp, thats a whole different ball game than the regular pedal!!!

 

[scottkahn]

If you have a Mark IV and switch to a Triaxis and the 20:20 you'll think the sound sucks compared to your Mark IV, and you might mistakingly blame the Triaxis. A huge part of your Mark's tone is the simul-class amp technology. You'll only get that exact sound if you pair the Triaxis with the 2:Ninety.

A compromise would be getting the 2:Fifty, which is at least still 6L6 tubes, but the EL84 tubes of a 20:20 will not have the same depth and presence of the bigger amps.

Scott

 

[Geiri]

Yeah I hear ya. There has to be some reason for most people using triaxis pair it with it's soulmate the 2:90. I'm just entertaining the idea of having a small portable and light rig on the side. But I guess the mark tone comes at a price. The price of weight :mrgreen:

 

[scottkahn]

DId you read my new review of the Triaxis/2:Ninety? It goes into great depth on this topic:
http://www.musicplayers.com/reviews/guitars/2009/1209_MesaBoogieTriaxis290.php

I've owned multiple Triaxis rigs over the years (stupidly sold and then re-bought on more than one occasion). I avoided the 2:Ninety because of the weight issue. But now I've come to accept the fact that if my rack has a few other items in in, the weight difference is inconsequential -- I need someone to help me move the rack no matter what .

Here's the unboxed weights:
20:20 14 lbs
2:Fifty 23 lbs
2:Ninety 35 lbs

Yeah, the 20:20 seems tempting when you look at the numbers, and I almost bought it once... but my friends at Boogie specifically told me not to. Knowing my particular love of Boogie gear, they felt I would be really unhappy with it.

Scott

 

[Geiri]

Yeah dude

I read your review and that is the reason for this rack gas I'm having, it's all your fault :mrgreen: . But I know there is no escaping the fact that if you want the tone you have to go the whole nine yards. I'm not playing out much these day's but that is not a deciding factor for me gearwise. I simply just love the fact of being able to own the tone I like and not have to compromise. I've been lusting for a triaxis for a long time now and not because I need the portability or the versatility. It's simply a piece of gear that I'd like to own in all it's glory paired with a 2:90.


It's like collecting art and in a way mesa boogie amps are art to some of us. But by collecting mesa gear I'm not buying just anything with a mesa logo on it, it's that mark tone I can't get enough of.

 

[elvis]

I have a studio pre. I was really unhappy with the 20/20. I like the 50/50 much better. I have not had a chance to try a 2:90.

The studio pre can get a lot of tones, but takes some tweeking. I'd really like to give the Triaxis a spin, but don't have the $$. I'd hate to find out that the TA is thinner, though. The SP is nice and thick.

Most people rave about the clean tone of the SP, but I generally optimize the lead channel and get what I get on the clean channel. I'm working with a second graphic EQ now to try to get good tone from both channels. It's a pain for sure, and a big part of the reason people go for the Quad. I have, at one time or another, had both good tone clean and distorted tones, but never both at the same time... In my experience you need to boost the mid and bass tone knobs for clean, but cut them almost completely for lead. If you watch people demo the SP on YouTube, you can see that they use totally different settings on both tone knobs and the graphic EQ between rhythm and lead, and totally different settings for different kinds of tones as well (like jazzy vs. bluesy rhythm). It's really more a recording preamp than a performing piece. I'm doing more and more with my PSA-1 due to its flexibility.

SOrry for the stream of consciousness - hope it helps.

 

[Geiri]

Yup

this helps , all input is valid.

Thanks

 

[Geiri]

Scottkahn

since you know of my love affair with the mk4, which version of triaxis would you recommend for me ??

 

[scottkahn]

Scottkahn

since you know of my love affair with the mk4, which version of triaxis would you recommend for me ??

That's easy -- buy a new one. But if you have to go used, don't bother with the phat mod as it's not at all essential to the Triaxis Mark-series love-fest. You're going to use three preamp voices in the Triaxis: the Green rhythm for clean, Lead II yellow, and Lead II red. And you will be in love.

And if you're not playing out much, get a Boogie 2x12 Rectifier cabinet wired for stereo. The 412 will blow you out of the bedroom .

Scott

 

[Geiri]

He he I hear you bro

I sometimes plug the old mk4 in my recto 4x12 and it makes unearthly thunder. A friend of mine came over after a session at his friends house where a powerball from engl was let loose, I aimed the recto cab at him and busted out some chugga chuggas and he nearly shat himself with fear :mrgreen: . But for my needs a 2x12 stereo recto cab would be more than enough.

Well best start saving :mrgreen:

 

[straitouttahell]

I'd hate to find out that the TA is thinner, though.

That is unlikely, but if the Studio sounds anywhere close to the Quad you'd lack a great lot of dynamics.

 

[elvis]

You may want to consider a couple 1x12 rectos instead of a 2x12 stereo cab. I find it's very helpful in a band setting to put one cab by me and the other on the other side of the drummer. Lets the other guitarist and/or bassist hear me (or lets me hear me if I'm way over there), plus gives a great wide stereo effect. I don't run guitar in the monitors, though.

 

[masque]

the 20/20 is one of the best power amps ever made as is the 290. they are different animals.....i prefer the sound of EL84 amps so the 20/20 is a match made in heaven for my triaxis.....i have extensive experience with a 290 as well and it sounds great but it is not the perfect match for the tone I prefer......as we all know tone is very subjective......do not be swayed away from the 20/20.....it has the capability of providing valuable tone to your arsenal....it may not suit yoru needs but it's tonal magic cannot be discounted.

 

[elvis]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the 20/20, it's just not for me. I found it to be too compressed sounding for my taste and it runs out of gas at too low a volume for outdoor parties. It's plenty loud, but loses low end.

I thought it worked really well for (very) small club gigs.

To me the big difference is that the 20/20 sounds very smooth, while the 50/50 is more punchy.

To give you an idea of where I'm coming from, I really like the ragged, punchy sound of an F50. If that's not for you, the 20/20 may work fine.

 

[straitouttahell]

do not be swayed away from the 20/20.....it has the capability of providing valuable tone to your arsenal....it may not suit yoru needs but it's tonal magic cannot be discounted.

+1

I used to have a 20/20 with my first TriAxis, and it was mojo all around. While the 2:90 (unlikely its older siblings, the 295 and the 395) always sounded a tad harsh to my ears, the 20/20 spread smoothness and warmth all around. Despite its small package and dismissed looks, it packed enough power to subdue my drummer with one channel only.

 

[guitarman52]

I have been using a Triaxis since the early 90's...
I have 2 different power amps.... I have a 20/20 and a 50/50

I prefer the 50/50 there is just something about the 6l6's that shine.....

and as far as Clean... I have a Rhythm Green and a Rhythm Yellow set for some really crystal like Cleans....
I also have a Ld1 Green setting that I have set for a clean setting...
then I use a Slightly Pushed GRN 1 for some "Dirty" Rhythm sounds....

Ld 2 Green for some of my solo sounds.....

I stay away from the "Reds"........ to me (and only mo) they are just toooo much....
But Since I put my Triaxis in the rack(and I use a fairly small rack setup...nothing too fancy.)

I haven't looked back... and I play a variety of music styles..

 

[THTH]

I've used a ver2 phat mod tri since '98 with a coliseum 300 power amp. It sounds easily as good as my MKIV WBC, and more versatile sounds. You have to have the right power amp for the style you play. A 20/20 isn't going to cut it for metal, you need at minimum a 50/50.

I use rhythm green, Ld2 green and yellow. Awesome classic rock and metal tones! Ld2 red is a little fizzy for me. :mrgreen:

 

[JT_Marshmallow]

Someone asks this on here every once in a while, and when I asked 2 years ago it ended up being a good discussion. Here it is:

http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?t=27023&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=