Mesa Boogie talking about the possibility of a new TriAxis

[EOengineer]

Id be absolutely pumped for an updated Triaxis.

 

[Nathan Explosion]

Would rather see the Studio or Quad preamp reissued TBH.

 

[0XI0]

the Studio

there's nothing in it!

 

[GTR37]

And for the days your feeling extra energy from the gym
Maybe a compact coliseum 500 / Triaxis in a 112 open back combo but with a Neo cream back to keep the weight down

 

[EOengineer]

Would rather see the Studio or Quad preamp reissued TBH.

Given the recent IIC+ reissue I’ve wondered if a Studio Pre is on the horizon given their similarities.

A Quad reissue would also be interesting because the 2nd half of the preamp is a Mark III, which as far as we know isn’t being reissued.

 

[Whizzinby]

If there’s anything I’m NOT interested in from Mesa as a total Mesa fan boy, it’s a digital backend that my otherwise awesome tube preamp is now married to in a climate where that part of the tech is evolving.

Mesa should stick to what they know. Cab clone sounds like shit on a stick.

Yeah I wish all these companies would sell versions without the digital backend for those that don’t want it, but I understand why they include it.

 

[Desertdweller]

It was a poor example on my part in the first place because triaxis wouldn’t need to handle a speaker load. I just feel like anything Mesa stuffs in there will be completely obsolete in 5 years.

It’s technically on brand for them. My 35 year old studio preamp and 25 year old V-Twin rack have useless speaker simulated outs I no longer use. I’d love to see them break the cycle and just leave it to outboard hardware.

Absolutely a fair point, though I can appreciate going as far back as the Studio Pre (as you said) and the Mark IV they were trying to get a speaker emulated out in-line with the times they were in. It was never a great option, but the speaker sims before IRs were all very hit or miss. I recorded a whole album using the speaker sim on a Rocktron preamp 20 years ago and I had to do a lot of post-EQ to get it to sound anything like a real cab. I still don't think I got very close. IRs really changed everything, then the reactive loads out today are just so good too. I don't know that loadbox or IR tech is really going to advance much in the next 5-10 years, so this would probably be a good time to put out something with current tech in the box.

Of course I say that and tomorrow "Super IRs" or something will come out and crush everything we're doing today.

 

[EOengineer]

Absolutely a fair point, though I can appreciate going as far back as the Studio Pre (as you said) and the Mark IV they were trying to get a speaker emulated out in-line with the times they were in. It was never a great option, but the speaker sims before IRs were all very hit or miss. I recorded a whole album using the speaker sim on a Rocktron preamp 20 years ago and I had to do a lot of post-EQ to get it to sound anything like a real cab. I still don't think I got very close.

I’m old enough to have lived through the days of crude EQ based cab sims…that feeling when there just aren’t enough EQ bands on earth to make it sound natural. Ugh. I feel that pain.

IRs really changed everything, then the reactive loads out today are just so good too. I don't know that loadbox or IR tech is really going to advance much in the next 5-10 years, so this would probably be a good time to put out something with current tech in the box.

Of course I say that and tomorrow "Super IRs" or something will come out and crush everything we're doing today.

IR’s are definitely a big step forward, and will sound SIGNIFICANTLY better in 20 years than the Studio Pre recording outs sound now. We can agree there.

My own maybe controversial take is that we’re going to see capture/profiling tech overtake IRs in the not too distant future as costs drop. I SWEAR there’s something in cab captures that I am not getting in IRs. However, that difference is far less noticeable than the difference between my Studio pres recording outs and the cab clone IR in a Mark VII.

Nonetheless, the presence of an IR circuit wouldn’t put me off so long as the unit wasn’t rendered useless without it and it’s not contributing substantially to the cost.

 

[CorrosiveMatter]

It was a poor example on my part in the first place because triaxis wouldn’t need to handle a speaker load. I just feel like anything Mesa stuffs in there will be completely obsolete in 5 years.

It’s technically on brand for them. My 35 year old studio preamp and 25 year old V-Twin rack have useless speaker simulated outs I no longer use. I’d love to see them break the cycle and just leave it to outboard hardware.

If they put that tech in the new stuff do you "have" to use it or could you still use your outboard eqipment? I have ignored the Cab Clone on mine and use a Two Notes if anything. Or are you more worried about putting in tech that makes it more expensive? Or prone to break?

I never understand why some folks see options as terrible. As long as they are optional and they don't fit my needs I just think that is a feature I don't care about.

 

[EOengineer]

If they put that tech in the new stuff do you "have" to use it or could you still use your outboard eqipment? I have ignored the Cab Clone on mine and use a Two Notes if anything. Or are you more worried about putting in tech that makes it more expensive? Or prone to break?

I never understand why some folks see options as terrible. As long as they are optional and they don't fit my needs I just think that is a feature I don't care about.

I wouldn’t have to use it, I just wouldn’t want to pay for it, if that makes sense. I’d rather my money goes towards better analog components than a technology that history tells us will likely be obsolete far before the preamp.

 

[laxu]

If they put that tech in the new stuff do you "have" to use it or could you still use your outboard eqipment? I have ignored the Cab Clone on mine and use a Two Notes if anything. Or are you more worried about putting in tech that makes it more expensive? Or prone to break?

I never understand why some folks see options as terrible. As long as they are optional and they don't fit my needs I just think that is a feature I don't care about.

You could argue that it's pointless to have anything but a good speaker out derived line-out because you have so many cab sim boxes, plugins etc out there.

Having it all built into the amp is a convenience so you don't have to buy a cab sim or connect extra gear. But it adds extra failure points and cost, doesn't keep up with cab sim development etc.

IMO the slave out on Mesas combined with a built-in loadbox would be ideal for most cases.

With the Triaxis being just a preamp, if they want to add direct out options you would want poweramp simulation + IRs. What's the usecase?

• If you are direct recording, you could throw a Tonex plugin with a poweramp sim at it.
• If you want to play through headphones...you'd still want to hook it up to something else as Triaxis does not have built-in room reverb.
• If you want to run direct to PA, sure, having that stuff is convenient. But how many want to bring a Triaxis to run it direct live?

 

[CorrosiveMatter]

With the Triaxis being just a preamp

I am a unimformed on these things so these are real quesitons, not gotchas.

Isn't the Friedman-IRX just a preamp with IR loading? Does it have Power Amp modeling?

I get the I don't want to pay for features I won't use and could cause the device to break but to assume your use case fits all users is what I meant in my post, Mesa has to try to sell to everyone so you add features more people will like while not forcing everyone to use those features sells more amps w/o doubling the cost of the device or you would have a better argument. IMO. Like I think headphone jacks on tube amps are silly but I also understand they didn't custom build the amp for me.

If you look at all of the competition I feel like more devices have IR loading and or digital features than not so they might want to bring things like that to their line and attract more customers.

 

[laxu]

I am a unimformed on these things so these are real quesitons, not gotchas.

Isn't the Friedman-IRX just a preamp with IR loading? Does it have Power Amp modeling?

IR-X has digital poweramp modeling.

If you look at all of the competition I feel like more devices have IR loading and or digital features than not so they might want to bring things like that to their line and attract more customers.

Maybe, but products like the IIC+ and Triaxis are playing into nostalgia and prestige of those products more than anything, so they are a different thing from e.g an ENGL with an IR loader.

I honestly wish Mesa keeps innovating rather than becomes a legacy brand. They were the one amp company that kept doing something different so even though I don't like everything they do, they still did a thing nobody else did.

Randall Smith had his way of doing things and based on how much a pain in the ass many Mesa designs are to work with, it wasn't necessarily the best way so having someone else design for them could be potentially good. But it's Gibson so...

 

[Whizzinby]

I do wonder what the actual cost is to include the digital backend stuff. My guess is it’s marginal at best from a hardware cost perspective, and really it’s a matter of the initial dev work. (Which you may end up being able to spread across multiple products, like what BAD is doing with their brands)

It’s interesting because on one hand everyone talks about the convenience of modelers, but when analog dudes try to leverage digital to make their products more functional in an evolving market, we piss and moan at its inclusion.

I mean I bypass the x88 backend 95% of the time I’m using it, even when I’m going to end up going direct, but I don’t mind having the stuff there if I needed to use it. I’d rather have it there and not use it, then have saved $100 at purchase. It doesn’t really change my ability to use the send to go to a PA as the Rack Gods intended.

 

[JiveTurkey]

For me; I had nothing but problems with the Badlander Cab Clone and slightly less so with the VII's Cab Clone. There were still some issues with it iirc and it soured me on ANYTHING digitally related in a Boogie product. The amps are complex enough as it is without adding more stuff for a tech to complain about

That mild rant aside; digital back end is nice to have on these types of products so adding them, generally speaking; is a win for the consumer I'd say.

 

[FuzzyAce]

I'd be interested in a Triaxis.

Interested in considering the possibility of maybe, possibly, getting one before talking myself out of it.

.

 

[GreatGreen]

I'd love an updated Triaxis. My ideal Triaxis 2.0:

Features:
- replace buttons with knobs
- dedicated fully controllable 5-band EQ you can change settings per patch

Channels:
1 Cali Tweed Clean
2 Fillmore Clean
3 IIB
4 Crunch
5 IIC+
6 IV
7 Recto Org
8 Recto Red