Triaxis/Axe Shootout

tonaholic said:
Tone match for us :)
Click to expand...

I'd be happy to do a tone match, but I haven't had much luck with it in the past. :( It always ends up coming out "phasey" and thin sounding. If anyone has any tricks on how to nail a tone match, I'd be happy to try it out and post the results. :)
 
symphx said:
the triaxis is def more scooped in both cases. so in the room and recorded the mid boosts on the axe will make it sound more alive, alone recorded the triaxis sounds better, but maybe not in a mix or live (would probably be sucked away). Can you scoop the axe 2 a bit more? and add a hair more gain?

Im curious about the red lead, my friend who owns a triaxis says this is where its at, and axe doesnt do this persay (maybe its the fas modern or something). He wont get rid of his triaxis for this reason, also he prefers to take the triaxis live and leave the axe at home.
Click to expand...

I always leaned towards preferring the Yellow Lead sound. It was a little more "creamy" for lack of a better word. The red lead reminds me more of a vintage Marshall, with much more high-end content.

As I mentioned before, if someone has suggestions on how to nail a good tone match, I'd be happy to TM all eight Traxis modes, and post them on AxeChange.
 
shredi knight said:
What I do instead of use eq on my Mesa patches (the "USA" sims), is I put a Tone-Match block from one of the "Channel 3" patches posted in this thread....


http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-tone-match/52546-mark-v-amp-match-all-channels-modes.html


....and place it directly after the Amp block in the signal chain. The patches are Tone-Matches that were performed on a real Mesa Mark V. The Tone-Match blocks in the patches are amp matches only, meaning they are just the eq curve of just the amp and not a cabinet, so they would work perfectly fine with your setup since you are already using a cab (if you were going direct or using FRFR, you would have to add a Cab block after the Tone-Match block).

These sound great with my patches and have saved me a ton of time messing with the Axe-Fx's eqs, trying to recreate the Mesa "Classic V" curve. It's already ingrained in these Tone-Match blocks. My personal favorite is from patch #14 ("Mark V Ch3 IIC+ Bright"). The Tone-Match blocks from the "Extreme Mode" patches are also really good for a more scooped metal tone. They might work really well with your mid heavy, boxing sounding Triaxis patch.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion Shredi, and also the link. My preference is to try to get as close as possible "organically" without using a tone match. That may not be possible in the end, so I'll keep this option open, or may play around with it anyway to see if there is a tone match in this Mark V collection that gets me close.
 
This is kind of ironic because I have to send my Axe-Fx II to FAS to have the Output 2 Hiss issue fixed, so I'm going to use my old Mesa Boogie TriAxis while it's being repaired but I'm still trying to figure out how to program my MFC-101 to control my old rig before I ship my AF2 to be repaired.

I used to love the tone of my TriAxis but I like the versatility I can get w/ my AF2. I think I'm going to keep my TriAxis, so I can compare my AF2 tones as a reality check because I sometimes forget what a real amp sounds like.

I think the TriAxis magic happens when used with the 2:90. Actually I think anything I put into the 2:90 sounds magical. I know the 2:90 colors the tone but it sounds perfect to my ears. I swear it has the Fletcher–Munson curve built in because as I turn it up, everything stays smooth sounding and doesn't get harsh like other tube and solid state amps do. I can't believe how loud the 2:90 can get either. It has to be the loudest 2 space rack power amp I've ever heard or almost lost my hearing to ;-) I just wish the 2:90 wasn't so heavy and didn't cost me almost $200 a year in tubes. That's the only reason I'm not using it anymore and using a Crown XLS 2000.

How is the Matrix GT1000FX compared to the 2:90? Can the Matrix GT1000FX get as loud as the 2:90? Where do you keep the Presence knobs on the 2:90?

Any chance you can do 4 comparison recording clips playing the same riff?
1. AF2 > Matrix GT1000FX
2. AF2 > 2:90
3. TriAxis > Matrix GT1000FX
4. TriAxis > 2:90


Here's my post if anyone can give me any help setting up the TriAxis w/ my MFC-101:
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/mfc-d...ow-how-setup-mfc-101-mesa-boogie-triaxis.html
 
GotMetalBoy said:
This is kind of ironic because I have to send my Axe-Fx II to FAS to have the Output 2 Hiss issue fixed, so I'm going to use my old Mesa Boogie TriAxis while it's being repaired but I'm still trying to figure out how to program my MFC-101 to control my old rig before I ship my AF2 to be repaired.

I used to love the tone of my TriAxis but I like the versatility I can get w/ my AF2. I think I'm going to keep my TriAxis, so I can compare my AF2 tones as a reality check because I sometimes forget what a real amp sounds like.

I think the TriAxis magic happens when used with the 2:90. Actually I think anything I put into the 2:90 sounds magical. I know the 2:90 colors the tone but it sounds perfect to my ears. I swear it has the Fletcher–Munson curve built in because as I turn it up, everything stays smooth sounding and doesn't get harsh like other tube and solid state amps do. I can't believe how loud the 2:90 can get either. It has to be the loudest 2 space rack power amp I've ever heard or almost lost my hearing to ;-) I just wish the 2:90 wasn't so heavy and didn't cost me almost $200 a year in tubes. That's the only reason I'm not using it anymore and using a Crown XLS 2000.

How is the Matrix GT1000FX compared to the 2:90? Can the Matrix GT1000FX get as loud as the 2:90? Where do you keep the Presence knobs on the 2:90?

Any chance you can do 4 comparison recording clips playing the same riff?
1. AF2 > Matrix GT1000FX
2. AF2 > 2:90
3. TriAxis > Matrix GT1000FX
4. TriAxis > 2:90


Here's my post if anyone can give me any help setting up the TriAxis w/ my MFC-101:
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/mfc-d...ow-how-setup-mfc-101-mesa-boogie-triaxis.html
Click to expand...

The 2:90 is just an amazing piece of gear, if it wasn't so damned heavy. So if I can get close enough with my Matrix, I'm gonna sell that boat anchor. :lol

To answer your questions, I think the GT1000FX can get me pretty darned close to the 2:90. Over the next few days I'm going to start tweaking and see how close I can get. I'll post my findings. I don't think ANYTHING can get as loud as the 2:90! I've played very large venues, and never had it above 4/10, really the loudest amp I've ever played with. So no, the Matrix is not going to be as loud as the 2:90...but it will be plenty loud for me. Over the years, I've been actively trying to reduce my stage volume, to get more control of the on-stage sound. The Axe is all part of that strategy...getting great tones without the volume. :)

Anyway, your wish is my command...I've posted the four comparison recording clips in the original post.
 
out of the 4 comparison clips you've posted , by far I prefer the Axe into the 2:90. IMO it sounds much more 'alive"
I have the MAtrix GT1000FX and I've been struggling to get my Mesa "MarK" patches to sound as good as they did when I ran my Mesa 50/50 with them.

***EDIT*** FAS Modern II has easily gotten me my best sounding "mark" patch thru the matrix, try that model if you haven;t already.
 
Last edited:
mrstrat said:
I've posted the four comparison recording clips in the original post.
Click to expand...

Allright, now comparing apples to apples (Triaxis Preamp w/o V-EQ (flat) to Axe-Fx in neutral Preamp mode (Sag OFF; Hi-Cut at neutral 12 0`clock) sounds to me very, very similiar. So the last link is the Power Amp. The 2:90 sounds lot more bright, or vs.: Matrix very muddy in comparison. But this is now apples to oranges again: The Mesa IS a Tube Power Amp, it does make "sound". The Matrix should do sound neutral, because in the Axe-Fx should simulate the power-amp voicing.

So please: Give us the missing link: Comparison:

Axe-Fx Sim with SAG ON (starting from default setting) + GT1000 vs. Triaxis + 2:90.

As we now learned: Preamp simulation seems to be pretty spot on. Now we`ve to setup the power amp simulation from the Axe-Sim to emulate the 2:90. would be interesting how close you can get by just using for example SAG, PRESENCE, DAMPING (or whatever Power-Amp Parameter should bring the sim into the ballpark of the 2:90 ...

I think, this would be interesting, what you`ll find out?!
 
mrstrat said:
I'd be happy to do a tone match, but I haven't had much luck with it in the past. :( It always ends up coming out "phasey" and thin sounding. If anyone has any tricks on how to nail a tone match, I'd be happy to try it out and post the results. :)
Click to expand...

Well I know a thing or two about matching. If you watch Cliff's tutorial video then not much can go wrong.
 
Oh boy. Based on the new 4 clips I won't be buying a Matrix. I'd rather break my back carrying a 2:90 than sound so muffled.

This is actually funny since I’ve got one of those Magnum 44 pedals and I could really make it sound just like a Mesa 2:50 with a slight global EQ scoop. It's pretty loud also... not like a 100W amp but you get the point.

Here's a clip:

[soundcloud]https://www.soundcloud.com/clark-kent-job/mesa-2x50-vs-ehx-magnum-44[/soundcloud]
 
Clark Kent said:
Oh boy. Based on the new 4 clips I won't be buying a Matrix. I'd rather break my back carrying a 2:90 than sound so muffled.

This is actually funny since I’ve got one of those Magnum 44 pedals and I could really make it sound just like a Mesa 2:50 with a slight global EQ scoop. It's pretty loud also... not like a 100W amp but you get the point.

Here's a clip:

[soundcloud]https://www.soundcloud.com/clark-kent-job/mesa-2x50-vs-ehx-magnum-44[/soundcloud]
Click to expand...

is this the Axe triaxis yellow as in the OP? sounds great maybe a bit scooped otherwise cool.
 
"Triaxis/G-Force/2:90 rig. This rig has been the backbone of my sound for many years" I say keep it.If you love it as much as you say you do,later on down the road you may regret selling that rig.While the AxeFx is great at what it does,it'll never replace the real thing.Especially if you already own it.Keep it,retire your rig and use the AxeFx.You'll always have it to go back to if you so choose....
 
A couple of questions
is the 2:90 closer to what they use as a power amp for the Rectos or the marks?
is the 2:90 more "neutral" than the 50/50?
I'm thinking of maybe grabbing one of these and a/b-ing it myself against my Matrix GT1000fx
 
Last edited:
Clark Kent said:
Oh boy. Based on the new 4 clips I won't be buying a Matrix. I'd rather break my back carrying a 2:90 than sound so muffled.

This is actually funny since I’ve got one of those Magnum 44 pedals and I could really make it sound just like a Mesa 2:50 with a slight global EQ scoop. It's pretty loud also... not like a 100W amp but you get the point.

Here's a clip:

[soundcloud]https://www.soundcloud.com/clark-kent-job/mesa-2x50-vs-ehx-magnum-44[/soundcloud]
Click to expand...

Sounds great man!

I feel kind of guilty having made the GT1000FX sound so bad, lol. I may go back and tweak the EQ, see how close the Matrix can get to the 2:90 and post the results. :)
 
lead 1 red has to have the recto board without the fat mod for it to be useable.. and it's the best part of the triaxis. All the other lead 1 reds are crappy, and the fat mod is an abomination.
 
kmanick said:
is the 2:90 more "neutral" than the 50/50?
Click to expand...

I've owned both, though I've only used a 2:90 with the Axe.

I wouldn't say either one sounded "neutral", just slightly different. To me, the 2:90 was a little darker and a little smoother than the 50/50. Maybe a bit more midrange. I preferred it. I also think the 2:90 has a better "feel". More dynamics. The 50/50 felt more "stiff" by comparison.

The problem was that IMO it colors the sound too much. With the Axe, most amp models sounded very, very similar. It was a good tone but I bought the Axe for versatility, which didn't happen for me with the 2:90.
 
I'm a bit worried about that, I've got a line on both of these and a VHt 2-50-2, the VHT is ideally what I think I want to try against the Matrix that I have.
I had a 50/50 a while back but it was with a very early FW version and , although my mark patches all sounded great with it , my Marshall type patches did sound very "colored".
I was wondering if the simul class would maybe help out there a little, mixing in El-34's with the 6L6's might help? yes ? no?

so what are you using now?


Der JD said:
I've owned both, though I've only used a 2:90 with the Axe.

I wouldn't say either one sounded "neutral", just slightly different. To me, the 2:90 was a little darker and a little smoother than the 50/50. Maybe a bit more midrange. I preferred it. I also think the 2:90 has a better "feel". More dynamics. The 50/50 felt more "stiff" by comparison.

The problem was that IMO it colors the sound too much. With the Axe, most amp models sounded very, very similar. It was a good tone but I bought the Axe for versatility, which didn't happen for me with the 2:90.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom