Triaxis EQ Algorithm??

[CactusTone]

Does anyone know the factory-determined 5-Band EQ algorithm used in the Triaxis? I'm trying to translate the settings I used in my Triaxis, but it's impossible to know the exact parameter settings beyond 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, etc. For example, what are the individual bands set to at 1.0, or 5.5, etc?

 

[admgloval]

I know the manual shows some of the EQ curves at different settings like 2.0, 4.5 and 7.0. Maybe you can deduce what the curve is based on those? Page 11 of the manual:
http://mesaboogie.com/media/User Manuals/TriAxis_160801.pdf

 

[FractalAudio]

It's impossible to know. They are really just presets. As you increase the "Dynamic Voice" the gain of each band changes but in no real pattern.

It doesn't matter though. You have the equivalent EQ available with far more adjustability. Stop trying to copy and, instead, create.

 

[Rich G.]

A long time ago I went through the exercise of calculating the transfer function of the Dynamic Voice circuit shown below:

My results showed it to be a notch filter at 4.5 kHz. The notch kind of looked like if you were to draw a simple seagull or a McDonald's logo. The 'wings' would go higher and the notch would go deeper with increasing Dynamic Voice. The basic shape is shown below. X Axis runs 20 - 20 kHz. I don't know what the actual values of the variable resistor (LDR24) are. I ran arbitrary cases with LDR24 = 0, 10k, 1M. This way you can see the trend as it increases.I've never tested my results- would be easy enough to do with a sweep on RoomEQ Wizard and a clean setting on the Triaxis.

 

[FractalAudio]

A long time ago I went through the exercise of calculating the transfer function of the Dynamic Voice circuit shown below:

My results showed it to be a notch filter at 4.5 kHz. The notch kind of looked like if you were to draw a simple seagull or a McDonald's logo. The 'wings' would go higher and the notch would go deeper with increasing Dynamic Voice. The basic shape is shown below. X Axis runs 20 - 20 kHz. I don't know what the actual values of the variable resistor (LDR24) are. I ran arbitrary cases with LDR24 = 0, 10k, 1M. This way you can see the trend as it increases.View attachment 37945I've never tested my results- would be easy enough to do with a sweep on RoomEQ Wizard and a clean setting on the Triaxis.

4.5 KHz doesn't make sense. That's beyond the normal EQ area for guitar tones. I have a simulation around here somewhere. I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

[FractalAudio]

Found it. The "notch" (it's actually a peaking EQ) is at about 725 Hz.

 

[GreatGreen]

I own a Triaxis with the TX4 L1 Red board and have never been a fan of the Dynamic Voice control. The Q of the mid cut seems too narrow to me and only hollows the sound without really increasing how open the sound is. Setting it to 1.0 or 2.0 is about as far as I ever go, and that's only because it doesn't really do much other than extend the audible bass a bit, along with a tiny amount of treble.

Outbound EQ with full control is where it's at with these things. As far as I can tell, a single parametric eq adjustment of slightly cutting the mids with a super wide Q in Lead 1 Red mode puts the Triaxis into grail tone territory for high gain stuff.

 

[Rich G.]

Found it. The "notch" (it's actually a peaking EQ) is at about 725 Hz.

That makes more sense. 4.5k Seemed awfully high to me.

 

[admgloval]

I own a Triaxis with the TX4 L1 Red board and have never been a fan of the Dynamic Voice control. The Q of the mid cut seems too narrow to me and only hollows the sound without really increasing how open the sound is. Setting it to 1.0 or 2.0 is about as far as I ever go, and that's only because it doesn't really do much other than extend the audible bass a bit, along with a tiny amount of treble.

Outbound EQ with full control is where it's at with these things. As far as I can tell, a single parametric eq adjustment of slightly cutting the mids with a super wide Q in Lead 1 Red mode puts the Triaxis into grail tone territory for high gain stuff.

I have the same version and always found Lead1 Red to be a flubby mess. I never used it until I was jamming with a friend of mine who had a Marshall TSL2000. He used a tube screamer to tighten up his rhythm tone and I decided to try it(I had never used a boost before since I had never owned an amp that needed one). I found that using the TS, it got rid of the flubby frequencies that caused me to dislike Lead1 Red, it actually made it sound like what the manual described! I immediately ordered a Maxon OD808 and used it just for that channel! Of course now that I have the AFXII, the Triaxis/290 and OD808 sit in my closet, gathering dust. Kinda sad

 

[GreatGreen]

I have the same version and always found Lead1 Red to be a flubby mess. I never used it until I was jamming with a friend of mine who had a Marshall TSL2000. He used a tube screamer to tighten up his rhythm tone and I decided to try it(I had never used a boost before since I had never owned an amp that needed one). I found that using the TS, it got rid of the flubby frequencies that caused me to dislike Lead1 Red, it actually made it sound like what the manual described! I immediately ordered a Maxon OD808 and used it just for that channel! Of course now that I have the AFXII, the Triaxis/290 and OD808 sit in my closet, gathering dust. Kinda sad

Yeah, that makes sense. I have the non-phat mod version. From what I hear, the phat mod added a ton of bass before the gain stages, which is basically the worst thing you can do with a Mesa high gain preamp circuit and I have no idea why they released that version. Maybe they were catering to metal players who used strats? Anyway, the non-phat mod TX4 lead channel sounds very, very great to me. It's like what a Recto would have sounded like if its circuitry actually matched the diamond plate look.

The non-phat mod TX4 channel basically sits right between Mark and Recto lead channels with the best elements of each. I kinda love it.

I think my Triaxis is a bit different than most though. Mine actually started life as a phat mod, but was modded back to non-phat by a guy who knew what he was doing. Built and rebuilt amps all the time, Knew Randall Smith on a first name basis, etc. He told me that some incorrect components in the Triaxis on actual non-phat mod LD1 Red channels were mistakenly built into the Triaxis, as in they left the factory with different parts than what was written in to the official schematic. So, he de-phat-modded mine with the "correct" components that were originally planned into the design. All I know is that mine sounds amazing and I play it all the time.

Also, Cliff, I have pics of the mod the guy sent me if you'd like to look at them out of curiosity. I'll see if I can email him and ask him specifically what he changed.

Just as a post comment: the whole bit about Mesa using different components than what was on the schematic could have been completely made up. I don't know that info first hand and have no way of verifying whether or not it's true.

 

[GotMetalBoy]

Of course now that I have the AFXII, the Triaxis/290 and OD808 sit in my closet, gathering dust. Kinda sad

My Triaxis and 290 are just collection dust too. I had just installed all new tubes in them right before I bought my Axe-Fx II Mark I in early 2012. I really need to sell my old stuff.

 

[Brock]

My Triaxis and 290 are just collection dust too. I had just installed all new tubes in them right before I bought my Axe-Fx II Mark I in early 2012. I really need to sell my old stuff.

I also used to have this combo. Going back and listening to my old tracks using it and also listening to Petrucci's (old) Triaxis tones, I really miss them. I've tried over and over again to get the same sound with the Axe-Fx, but just can't. For example, listen here:



To me, the Axe-Fx is missing a chunkiness. I've begged @ML SOUND LAB several times to create a preset copping this Petrucci tone and he's said it's not possible because that tone is a result of mic phasing (or something to this effect). I trust Mikko's much smarter than me in this area, but still, I had a Triaxis and I know what it sounded like - and it's different than the Axe-Fx models of it. Then again, it's been a long time, so maybe I've forgotten?

I presently have an Ibanez RG750 with a Steve's Special and Air Norton (the PU combo Petrucci used in his Ibanez guitars). I'm happy to provide dry (DI) tracks if anyone with a Triaxis is willing to try to duplicate this tone on the Axe-Fx.

Or, can anyone on here who has the Triaxis/2:90 and the Axe-Fx - have you ever compared the two? Do they sound identical?

(And, @GotMetalBoy and @admgloval - if you guys are interested in selling your Triaxis/2:90 combos, please PM me. Thanks! )

 

[mr_fender]

The power amp used in the Axe's TriAxis models is also not the SimulClass 2:90. It's based on something else (VHT I think?) so it's not going to sound exactly the same.

 

[admgloval]

I also used to have this combo. Going back and listening to my old tracks using it and also listening to Petrucci's (old) Triaxis tones, I really miss them. I've tried over and over again to get the same sound with the Axe-Fx, but just can't. For example, listen here:



To me, the Axe-Fx is missing a chunkiness. I've begged @ML SOUND LAB several times to create a preset copping this Petrucci tone and he's said it's not possible because that tone is a result of mic phasing (or something to this effect). I trust Mikko's much smarter than me in this area, but still, I had a Triaxis and I know what it sounded like - and it's different than the Axe-Fx models of it. Then again, it's been a long time, so maybe I've forgotten?

I presently have an Ibanez RG750 with a Steve's Special and Air Norton (the PU combo Petrucci used in his Ibanez guitars). I'm happy to provide dry (DI) tracks if anyone with a Triaxis is willing to try to duplicate this tone on the Axe-Fx.

Or, can anyone on here who has the Triaxis/2:90 and the Axe-Fx - have you ever compared the two? Do they sound identical?

(And, @GotMetalBoy and @admgloval - if you guys are interested in selling your Triaxis/2:90 combos, please PM me. Thanks! )

I don't know man, in addition to my Presonus Eris E8's, I also have a Carvin DCM1504L and an old Crate 4x12 with Celestion G12S-50's in it and if anything, it chunks too much IMO! I have to lower bass to almost nothing in all my patches, cut bass and bass on 0 and even lower it in the GEQ section of the amp as well. No idea why I have so much bass, I see people post patches all the time where they have no bass cut and bass at 4 or 5 on patches, if I did that, it would be one big flubby mess. I can say with the tones I get from the Axe, I don't miss the Triaxis at all.

 

[Brock]

I don't know man, in addition to my Presonus Eris E8's, I also have a Carvin DCM1504L and an old Crate 4x12 with Celestion G12S-50's in it and if anything, it chunks too much IMO! I have to lower bass to almost nothing in all my patches, cut bass and bass on 0 and even lower it in the GEQ section of the amp as well. No idea why I have so much bass, I see people post patches all the time where they have no bass cut and bass at 4 or 5 on patches, if I did that, it would be one big flubby mess. I can say with the tones I get from the Axe, I don't miss the Triaxis at all.

Well, we're not talking about the same thing. Other than the Triaxis, your gear is different that what John (and I) used. I had the Triaxis, 2:90, Recto cab (1x12 and 4x12), Lexicon, dbx, and effectively the same guitar John used then. To me, it sounded fantastic.

 

[reclavea]

Also, the Dynamic Voice normally acts differently from Mark Series 5 band EQs. The "dry" signal is still mixed in proportionally as you increase the Dynamic Voice and with 10 being at the minimal mix. Mesa offered an the option to mod the Dynamic Voice to behave similar to the Mark Series EQs however.

Cliff is right. The setting are preset curves, with 10 similar to the classic "V" ...

 

[Desmo808]

My Triaxis and 290 are just collection dust too. I had just installed all new tubes in them right before I bought my Axe-Fx II Mark I in early 2012. I really need to sell my old stuff.

New tubes, haha, same here. In 2015, I bought a bunch of new tubes and put some in my MP-1. Just a couple of months later, I bought a Fractal. Now I don't play the MP-1. I still have an unused Mullard and an unused Ruby (JJ). I don't think I'll sell them, they make pretty display pieces on my desk.

 

[CactusTone]

Great, and I was going to list my Triaxis and VHT 2/50/2 on eBay this weekend. Looks like there might be some competition now!

 

[ML SOUND LAB]

To me, the Axe-Fx is missing a chunkiness. I've begged @ML SOUND LAB several times to create a preset copping this Petrucci tone and he's said it's not possible because that tone is a result of mic phasing (or something to this effect). I trust Mikko's much smarter than me in this area, but still, I had a Triaxis and I know what it sounded like - and it's different than the Axe-Fx models of it. Then again, it's been a long time, so maybe I've forgotten?

Just to clear this one out. The parts where you hear the guitar out of a mix context in that video has another mic (room mic or crowd mic or something) blended in with the signal so you get this phase effect which actually makes the guitar sound really cool. I've had this happen before when I tried to recreate some of my favorite live guitar tones but it's almost impossible to get that raw amp sound matched when you can't hear it clearly.

It's sometimes easy to sort of overappreciate real amps and the fond memories you had while sucking in that tube burn smell. We did get a Mesa Mark IV and Mesa Roadster to our studio so we could create the comparisons between the amp sims and sure we needed to have a few settings fine tuned (mostly low resonance frequencies and master volume) but after that it's actually really easy to get the tones pretty much identical. I would actually say that the Mark series amps are so close that I don't touch the advanced settings at all at this point. Just set the master to 4 and you're good to go. (including the Triaxis) We've had at least 5 different Rectifiers at our studio and I have to say that they have all been very different. Changing that V1 tube turned some of them into completely different amps but even then I don't think you have to struggle to get a "Recto tone" either.

Chasing "the Petrucci tone" is another chapter for sure. So much in the fingers and guitar but also so much on the amp side of things. I would say these earlier tones had less gain and super clean playing. When he plays those big chords they're closer to something like Bon Jovi rather than Metallica. These days he uses more gain obviously.

 

[GotMetalBoy]

New tubes, haha, same here. In 2015, I bought a bunch of new tubes and put some in my MP-1. Just a couple of months later, I bought a Fractal. Now I don't play the MP-1. I still have an unused Mullard and an unused Ruby (JJ). I don't think I'll sell them, they make pretty display pieces on my desk.

I actually kept the original tubes from my Triaxis and 290. I know I can't use the 290 power tubes but I could use the Triaxis preamp tubes, if I ever wanted to change the tone.

I replaced my Triaxis tubes with the Eurotubes.com Triaxis High Gain Low Output Option.

I've never been able to replicate the sound with those tubes but the Axe-Fx II comes pretty close to the original tubes. There's probably an advanced setting that could be tweaked to sound like the high gain tubes.

The low output tubes really helped with the 4CM.

I personally like the way my Axe-Fx II sounds better than my Triaxis and 290 but I think it's because I like being able to use different cab IR's through FRFR cabs.

I have to admit there's still nothing that compares to standing in front of a Triaxis and 290 through a real 4x12 cab with the 290 volume knobs almost all the way up.

I have to take out my old rig and decide if I'm ready to part ways with it. It was the first real tube amp I ever had and all my favorite guitarists used it, so it has some sentimental value. haha I'm such a dork.