Dror520
Well-known member
I'm planing on getting a new amp soon and I'm don't know which one to choose the MK Iv or the Triaxis ??
What should I buy Triaxis or MK IV ??
- Thread starter Dror520
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
It depends on your tastes/needs. You'll have more versatility with the triaxis but a different flavour with the Mark IV (though many people say they can make their triaxis sound so close to the Mark IV). If you really need many different presets then go with the pre, if not you should really try both and then decide. It seems to me the majority here prefers the Mark IV when it comes to achieving a great tone (even if it sometimes compromises the overall versatility - see shared controls), but I've got no experience with the two and you'll find many who prefer the triaxis. It really depends on your tastes, go and try both if you've got the possibility!
Dror520
Well-known member
I can't try these amp because they are no Mesa Boogie In Israel
ToneAddictJon
Well-known member
Personal preference here, but I'd go for the triaxis and pair it with whatever power amp makes the most sense for your uses.
6L6C
Well-known member
Had a Tri Axes & 2:90 still have a Mark IV only sold the Tri Axes & 2:90 cause of money problems at the time. Basically both Tri Axes & Mark IV sound great, I find the Mark IV to have a little better attack but would not really notice unless I was A/B ing both setups at the same time (which I have). On the other hand Tri Axes is way more flexible has 8 voicing’s (or channels) the Mark IV has three. The real time controllers on the Tri make it a force to be dealt with. Being programmable is awesome you can store many setups. If you are doing other peoples material (copy band) the Tri is a must. That’s what I used it for.
Dror520
Well-known member
6L6C said:
thx this information is very useful ... Ya I'm in some sort in a cover band of Dream Theater ... so by the things you were saying I believe I live go with the triaxis ..
visualrocker69
Well-known member
DO NOT GET THE TRIAXIS!
The Triaxis is good, but the Mark IV is AMAZING! My thoughts on the the TA:
1) When you put the Triaxis side by side with a Mark IV, the lead tone on the Triaxis is not just weak, it's... sterile, lifeless, artificial, grainy, fizzy...
2) The inability to dial in EQ on the tone controls accurately is rather frustrating. For example, below 3.0 and above 8.0, the controls go in increments of ONE. So you can't dial in 2.5 for bass, 8.5 for lead gain, 1.5 for presence, etc.
3) Compared to the Graphic EQ's on the Mark series, the Dynamic Voice function is a f@cking JOKE! In case you're not familiar with it, the Dynamic Voice is a circuit with pre-programmed EQ patterns. The higher the setting, the more "scooped" the mids and boosted the treble and bass. Problem is... it's operated by an OPamp circuit... which is solid state technology. Why should one care? Well when you have the DV on higher scooped settings and crank up the output to run the tubes real hot, the OPamp circuit gets overloaded and your tone all goes to ****. Reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaal frustrating, especially after having spent a summer with the Mark IV's outstanding graphic EQ.
4) I really miss the push-pull knobs of the Mark IV as well. They are a wonderful feature.
...Well, I wrote that a few months ago. It was a first impression/reaction, and I was in a hell of a bad mood :lol:
I've since managed to get pretty good tones from the Triaxis, but I haven't... fallen in love with it. What I will do, however, is keep it for the rest of the year so I can get to know it COMPLETELY... and then switch back to a Mark IV.
But trust me... tone for versatility... that's NOT a compromise you want to make. Get a Mark IV 8)
The Triaxis is good, but the Mark IV is AMAZING! My thoughts on the the TA:
1) When you put the Triaxis side by side with a Mark IV, the lead tone on the Triaxis is not just weak, it's... sterile, lifeless, artificial, grainy, fizzy...
2) The inability to dial in EQ on the tone controls accurately is rather frustrating. For example, below 3.0 and above 8.0, the controls go in increments of ONE. So you can't dial in 2.5 for bass, 8.5 for lead gain, 1.5 for presence, etc.
3) Compared to the Graphic EQ's on the Mark series, the Dynamic Voice function is a f@cking JOKE! In case you're not familiar with it, the Dynamic Voice is a circuit with pre-programmed EQ patterns. The higher the setting, the more "scooped" the mids and boosted the treble and bass. Problem is... it's operated by an OPamp circuit... which is solid state technology. Why should one care? Well when you have the DV on higher scooped settings and crank up the output to run the tubes real hot, the OPamp circuit gets overloaded and your tone all goes to ****. Reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaal frustrating, especially after having spent a summer with the Mark IV's outstanding graphic EQ.
4) I really miss the push-pull knobs of the Mark IV as well. They are a wonderful feature.
...Well, I wrote that a few months ago. It was a first impression/reaction, and I was in a hell of a bad mood :lol:
I've since managed to get pretty good tones from the Triaxis, but I haven't... fallen in love with it. What I will do, however, is keep it for the rest of the year so I can get to know it COMPLETELY... and then switch back to a Mark IV.
But trust me... tone for versatility... that's NOT a compromise you want to make. Get a Mark IV 8)
6L6C
Well-known member
If this is any help it has been a while since I sold my Tri Axis & 2:90 and have been able to afford another if I wished, at times I do miss it so versatile. But for me personally prefer the IV. As said before I used the Tri Axis & 2:90 in a cover band all types of music and it worked great but in the studio always showed up with my Mark IV.Dror520 said:
As far as what you seem to be aiming for, JP has not used a Tri Axis for some time, it has been all heads with him. On the current tour he is using (2) Mark IV’s and (1) Lone Star. The Mark IV’s where on R3 all night with the EQ engaged.
With what you’re asking it is very hard to give you a defined answer both pieces of equipment are awesome.
Dror520
Well-known member
6L6C said:
Thx again ... when JP used the Triaxis for me he had the greatest tone ... like in Pull Me Under and Under A Glass Moon
visualrocker69
Well-known member
Dror520 said:
I think I&W came out before the Triaxis. I know he used it on the tour though.
Dror520
Well-known member
visualrocker69 said:
Oh .. you're right so what amp did he use for the recording ???
visualrocker69
Well-known member
Dror520 said:
I've read soooooooo many different things that I don't know what to believe. I've even read that he used a Marshall preamp for one of the parts on one of the songs (Metropolis?) through a 50/50 power amp... anyway... I dunno if that was a joke or something...
I think the studio pre would be a safe guess... But it seems that it's never really been documented.
The Triaxis on the Images and Words tour is for sure though... two of them, in fact. But I HATED his tone on that DVD... :x
ToneAddictJon
Well-known member
I think he used a Quad for leads and rhythms and a Roland JC for cleans on I&W, of course I could be wrong, but I'm sure I read that somewhere.
I currently own a Mark IV short head and TriAxis-50/50 rig and if I had to chose between them I would without the slightest hesitation chose the Mark IV. IMO it's just a better sounding amp then the TriAxis. My problem with most technologically complex units like the TriAxis is that while they may electronic engineering masterpieces loaded with IC's and midi controls and such, none of that contributes favorably to the tone of the amp, whereas with an amp like the Mark IV it's ALL about the tone.
petejt
Well-known member
MarkIV all the way!
t0aj15 said:
Thanks for the reaffirmation. I have both setups like you do and can't help but feel that the Mark IV sounds more real. As for previous posts about Triaxis users that managed to get an exact or close enough Mark IV tone on their setup, I still find it questionable.
The Tri-axis rig has served its purpose well enough and I'm ready anytime to free it up for spare cash.
Bourque
Well-known member
Just to add a little to the amp JP used for I&W, I have the DVD where they perform When Dream and Day Unite and it contains interviews with them from after they recorded that album. In all of JP's spots he's sitting in front of a huge rack with the Quad and Studio Pre in it. So I'm assuming that's what he continued to use for I&W.
The speculation never ends haha.
The speculation never ends haha.
visualrocker69
Well-known member
Bourque said:
Probably. I'm not sure whether the Triaxis was out by the time they started recording I&W, but I doubt it. He DID use it on the tour, though.
Lopp
Well-known member
FWIW, I own both the TriAxis and the Mark IV and prefer the TriAxis.
It's a taste thing. It may be because I like the compressed sound better. It may be that I can quickly compare and/or use two drastically different settings by switching patches. Mainly it comes down to the fact that I have gotten many different tones that I love from the TriAxis and have not had the same success with the Mark IV. It's probably just a taste thing.
It's a taste thing. It may be because I like the compressed sound better. It may be that I can quickly compare and/or use two drastically different settings by switching patches. Mainly it comes down to the fact that I have gotten many different tones that I love from the TriAxis and have not had the same success with the Mark IV. It's probably just a taste thing.
