Axe fx 2 + Mesa Triaxis = bliss

S

searching

Inspired
I know a lot of people will tell me I'm crazy for wanting anything else other than the axe fx, but to me it seems like these two units were made for each other. The triaxis has 8 channels of tube preamp sounds midi switchable with over a hundred memory slots. I use that with the 4 cable method using the axe fx 2 only for effects into a mesa fifty/fifty power amp and a mesa recto 4x12.

What does this accomplish that the axe can't do on its own? Well I will say that I don't really need to use the triaxis, it's mainly just the fact that I can seemlessly integrate it with a couple advantages and a few small drawbacks. I don't want to start a big tone debate, because I will say that I was satisfied for a long time with just the axe fx into a tube power amp for live use. But I found a great deal on a used triaxis, which has always been a dream amp of mine. When I tried it out, the sound of lead 2 yellow for example has a pretty big difference vs. the usa pre lead 2 yellow axe preset I've been using even with the same settings. The lead 2 green (mark IV setting) had an even bigger difference when comparing to a mark IV preset. It's not that the axe sounded bad. Far from it actually. It's hard to explain the tone but to me the biggest difference was in the upper frequency range where the triaxis seemed to have more presence. It sounds more "raw" if that makes sense. The analogy I would use is it's like looking at a mountain range on an 4K HD TV vs actually being there. I'm sure someone could challenge me and dial in a preset to sound even more like the real thing, but why? It's only one rack space, and I'm tired of tone tweaking. I just want to play.

The second advantage is to save cpu usage, which is self explanatory.

The drawbacks are space, weight, and the fact that I must use the mfc-101 with midi cables now instead of an ethernet cable since I need to control both the axe fx and triaxis simultaneously.
 
Hey as long as you like what you hear, no worries! Big names like Vai and (I believe) Lifeson use the Axe just for effects, too.

I originally bought my Axe FX just for effects. My main sound was an ADA MP-1. Ultimately I separated the Axe & MP-1 into separate rigs, but I was happy with the sound either way.

Rock on.
 
That is the great thing about Fractal gear and a good electric guitar. No rules. There are, by any measure, a lot of guitarists here on the forum, each with their own "sound" and tastes. FAS gear has such huge flexibility, each musician can find his or her own voice. So even if your rig is "unconventional" (if there is such a thing) but it inspires you to play your instrument, then who is to say that your approach is "not the right way to do it". As long as you like your rig, and your audiences like you, then personally, I say more power to 'ya. As we say in Texas, "Let 'er rip".
 
I've been using a tube amp again lately, this time with an FX8. I'm using a TC-50 and have an Inoon order.

I have a theory that having a tube amp and cab in the rig brings a visceral, somewhat primal element to the music that resonates deeply and perhaps even subconsciously for some people. I think it doesn't have much to do with sound quality, and has a lot to do with "feel." It's "I can't quite say what I like better, but it's something." I think part of it is simple knowledge that you're using "real" gear as opposed to modeling.

I'm literally at a concert right now and Ghost just finished up opening for Iron Maiden. I kinda dig their music but I was honestly a little bored. Seemed to lack the typical energy of a live show. Part of that is the masks and stuff which don't really do it for me, but there's just something "cool" about seeing a cab or two on stage. I dunno.

Again, that's for some people and I think the sound quality of the Axe FX is about as good as it gets. I'm sure you can get a mic'd amp to sound that good but you'll need some solid production skills.

I agree with Geezerjon that it's totally subjective and some people don't get or need that feeling from having a real amp in front of them. It's really a very cool thing that we are all different. :)
 
I also use a Triaxis with an Axe-Fx sometimes. It's great when you want basically an entire guitar library of sounds from a single Axe-Fx patch.

Also, throw in a programmable EQ just after the Triaxis for effectively infinite sounds. The Axe-Fx Mark II can put 6 or 8 EQ blocks on the grid at once if you want but that tends to get really crowded really fast.
 
Last edited:
Moke said:
Just one note. You can still use the Ethernet cable and use the midi out of the Axe-Fx to send a midi thru to your Mesa.:cool:

Axe-Fx midi thru...'On'
Click to expand...

I tried this, but it's not working for me. I'm really glad to hear you say that though, maybe it's possible and I just have something screwed up.

Simeon.... You're the man! I didn't know that and will try it out.

I agree the flexibility is one of the best things about the axe fx. I've used it for recording and live sound for so long, and now it's just still giving me more and more even just using it as an effects unit. I recently got an mfc-101 which has opened even more possibilities.
 
searching said:
I know a lot of people will tell me I'm crazy for wanting anything else other than the axe fx, but to me it seems like these two units were made for each other. The triaxis has 8 channels of tube preamp sounds midi switchable with over a hundred memory slots. I use that with the 4 cable method using the axe fx 2 only for effects into a mesa fifty/fifty power amp and a mesa recto 4x12.

What does this accomplish that the axe can't do on its own? Well I will say that I don't really need to use the triaxis, it's mainly just the fact that I can seemlessly integrate it with a couple advantages and a few small drawbacks. I don't want to start a big tone debate, because I will say that I was satisfied for a long time with just the axe fx into a tube power amp for live use. But I found a great deal on a used triaxis, which has always been a dream amp of mine. When I tried it out, the sound of lead 2 yellow for example has a pretty big difference vs. the usa pre lead 2 yellow axe preset I've been using even with the same settings. The lead 2 green (mark IV setting) had an even bigger difference when comparing to a mark IV preset. It's not that the axe sounded bad. Far from it actually. It's hard to explain the tone but to me the biggest difference was in the upper frequency range where the triaxis seemed to have more presence. It sounds more "raw" if that makes sense. The analogy I would use is it's like looking at a mountain range on an 4K HD TV vs actually being there. I'm sure someone could challenge me and dial in a preset to sound even more like the real thing, but why? It's only one rack space, and I'm tired of tone tweaking. I just want to play.

The second advantage is to save cpu usage, which is self explanatory.

The drawbacks are space, weight, and the fact that I must use the mfc-101 with midi cables now instead of an ethernet cable since I need to control both the axe fx and triaxis simultaneously.
Click to expand...

I went to using the Axe Fx II in 4CM along with my new Mesa TC50 rack head. Much prefer. I spent countless hours tweaking the amp parameters on the Axe Fx II and now that I only use it for effects, I spend more time playing. The amp modeling is on point with the Axe Fx II, but All I need is 3 amp channels, with boost and do grit light breakup tones with an Axe Fx II drive pedal prior to Mesa amp. Simple and works great! After all these years, I've never been happier!
 
Just make sure the axe fx is set up to send midi thru and you can use the Ethernet cable from MFC to axe and then a midi cable out of axe in triaxis
 
Tremonti said:
I went to using the Axe Fx II in 4CM along with my new Mesa TC50 rack head. Much prefer. I spent countless hours tweaking the amp parameters on the Axe Fx II and now that I only use it for effects, I spend more time playing. The amp modeling is on point with the Axe Fx II, but All I need is 3 amp channels, with boost and do grit light breakup tones with an Axe Fx II drive pedal prior to Mesa amp. Simple and works great! After all these years, I've never been happier!
Click to expand...

Yes! This is it exactly. Any midi switchable tube amp is a match made in heaven with the axe fx.
 
This makes me wonder how many X/Y instances of the Amp block the Axe-Fx could support.

For me, the advantage of having something like a Triaxis is not a tonal benefit, the Axe-Fx sounds amazing, it's a benefit of utility. I can get up to 99 sounds out of a Triaxis while never having to deviate from the 8 scenes in a single Axe-Fx patch + individual effect toggling with fully functional spillover.

If the Axe-Fx would support about 5-10 Amp block W/X/Y/Z type instances I would probably not see the need for any external preamps though. I mean it's easy enough to just create different patches but you know, quality of life ideas for improvements and all that.
 
searching said:
I know a lot of people will tell me I'm crazy for wanting anything else other than the axe fx, but to me it seems like these two units were made for each other. The triaxis has 8 channels of tube preamp sounds midi switchable with over a hundred memory slots. I use that with the 4 cable method using the axe fx 2 only for effects into a mesa fifty/fifty power amp and a mesa recto 4x12.

What does this accomplish that the axe can't do on its own? Well I will say that I don't really need to use the triaxis, it's mainly just the fact that I can seemlessly integrate it with a couple advantages and a few small drawbacks. I don't want to start a big tone debate, because I will say that I was satisfied for a long time with just the axe fx into a tube power amp for live use. But I found a great deal on a used triaxis, which has always been a dream amp of mine. When I tried it out, the sound of lead 2 yellow for example has a pretty big difference vs. the usa pre lead 2 yellow axe preset I've been using even with the same settings. The lead 2 green (mark IV setting) had an even bigger difference when comparing to a mark IV preset. It's not that the axe sounded bad. Far from it actually. It's hard to explain the tone but to me the biggest difference was in the upper frequency range where the triaxis seemed to have more presence. It sounds more "raw" if that makes sense. The analogy I would use is it's like looking at a mountain range on an 4K HD TV vs actually being there. I'm sure someone could challenge me and dial in a preset to sound even more like the real thing, but why? It's only one rack space, and I'm tired of tone tweaking. I just want to play.

The second advantage is to save cpu usage, which is self explanatory.

The drawbacks are space, weight, and the fact that I must use the mfc-101 with midi cables now instead of an ethernet cable since I need to control both the axe fx and triaxis simultaneously.
Click to expand...

What's great is to have more than one Axe Fx II. I prefer using the Axe Fx as an effects generator for my tube amps. However, I found that I missed using the Axe Fx thru a SS amp to a guitar cab more. The wide range of sounds it can generate is very useful when recording. So I bought a second and could make use of more. This in no way diminishes my preference for tube amps. I can appreciate both.
 
The only piece of gear that I would consider to upgrade my rig would be a 2:90, but I'm not sure I really want that much power. I mainly play small bars and my fifty/fifty is already overkill. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom