Why Are Mark Vs So Expensive?

FWIW some years back I was fishing around for a 2nd Mesa amp to use live. Didn't want to be taking my beloved IIC+ to every gig and looking for a bit more tonal versatility. At that time IV's were very reasonable and was focused on getting one. Thaymz suggested I consider the V and then a V:90 "no brainer" deal fell into my lap. Have since added a LSS & an Ace. Each amp definitely has it's own special thing. Surely would have been happy with a IV... but find the V amazing, so versatile and easy to manipulate (now).

When I got it home.. couldn't wait, screw reading the manual, I have a Mark already... plugged in and started twisting knobs. It didn't sound very good at all. LOL But a few sample settings from the manual got it going. It definitely has a learning curve but years later there are still cool things that I discover with it.

woodbutcher65 said:

I'm a new Mark V 90 owner. It is the single most impressive amp I've ever touched.

I have previously said that in general I don't care for amps that have more than 12 knobs or 2 channels. But Mesa has changed my mind about that with their logical way of laying out three sets of controls, one for each channel. Gone are the shared control functions that always made setting up the tones of any earlier Mark series amp a balancing act between the R1, R2, and lead tones.

I've previously owned two triple rectos and a 3 channel dual recto. They got me used to this setup. But the rectos were really not quite my type. I got them cheaply enough that they were well worth the experiment. (Sold them for modest profits, eventually, too.)
But to me, the Marks sound better than the Rectos. Tonally speaking, my Mark IV was better than the Rectos, so was my Mark III Blue Stripe. Now that I've got the Mark V, I have the best of all worlds. It'll keep up with and destroy all competitors, whether you play in standard tuning or drop tune down into the subsonic realm. Yes it chugs if you are into that.

I can barely imagine what a hypothetical Mark VI will be like. There's so little I can think of to improve on the Mark V.
It could be that the Mark V is the amp that gives me a reason to sell off all the rest of my amps...except a few pieces I want in my collection forever.

Is the JP2C even really better than the Mark V? The second EQ doesn't seem like a feature I'd really NEED. I use the one EQ, and the EQ presets serve well enough any time I may want to apply a different EQ setting to another channel.

Click to expand...

Having two EQ is better than only one. The Mark V is so equipped as you stated you use the presets. You just can't adjust the preset cut/gain frequencies. With the JP2C, sometimes I want a different character for the CH2 vs CH3 or may use one for CH2 and CH3 and the other for the clean.

I use an assortment of 5 GEQ settings with my RA stereo rig. Boss EQ-200 has 4 recallable memories and one manual. I can also turn it off as the RA sounds great without it. Actually I found it essential for use with the Strymon BigSky reverb as some features bring in some sort of shimmer effect that tends to amplify the upper frequencies, it can also create an octave above the fundamental. Without filtering that, it would be an ice pick generator (mostly with the MW Dual Rec but the RA can be bright too). I did not need the aid of the GEQ in the FX loop for the JP2C since the GEQ follows the FX loop. Mark V on the other hand, GEQ is before the FX loop.

The Mark V does have a lot of cool features to choose from. It just did not fulfill my expectations. I can wait for the Mark VI but that will not happen (or would that be the JP2C and have to wait for the VII to come out). My V was made in 2012, I had way too many issues with it to be happy, tone was one of them.

One thing to note is that when I want to use an EQ, I REALLY use an EQ. I have an Alesis DEQ-230 in the effects loop and that has 30 stereo user programmable presets. (Plus 30 non-adjustable ones that as far as I'm concerned just waste memory.) If my needs expand I'll upgrade to the MIDI equipped DEQ-830 and be able to switch my EQ curves on the fly. And I can tell you, having a 31 band EQ to adjust really beats the pants off a mere 5 bander. It's such a precision tone shaping tool.

This post has made me curious about the Mk V. I have a I reissue, a IIb and a III green stripe.
I’m seeing prices from $2000ish to $3900 and slightly higher for 90w.
Some say 3 channel and I see three obvious sections on some amps and on another I see two rows of knobs and it’s listed as a 3 channel. Is that accurate?
I’ll read up about these but am confused that they are V’s but see very different front panel configurations. ???

I would think I would prefer that one made before Gibson took over … is there a difference?
Thanks.

Nothing has changed. Mesa makes them exactly the same now as they did last year. Gibson has made NO operational changes to Mesa that affect any aspect of amplifier production. Same parts, same assembly line, same people assembling them. NO DIFFERENT.

Why do people think that Gibson buying Mesa HAS to be bad for Mesa? The truth is, if there IS a company in the music business that totally supports American workers and wants top quality product, it's Gibson! The company that has consistently refused to send its production to any foreign country, and at MOST has licensed some guitars to be made in Japan, under the Orville and Burny names.

The Mark V is a series of amps, at 25, 35, and 90 watt ratings. Each is also a different size. The 25 is TINY. The 35 is "regular size" for a Mesa combo or head, with a 17" wide chassis. The 90 is the big boy, about the size of a long head or coliseum head Mark II or III.

Markooo99 said:

This post has made me curious about the Mk V. I have a I reissue, a IIb and a III green stripe.
I’m seeing prices from $2000ish to $3900 and slightly higher for 90w.
Some say 3 channel and I see three obvious sections on some amps and on another I see two rows of knobs and it’s listed as a 3 channel. Is that accurate?
I’ll read up about these but am confused that they are V’s but see very different front panel configurations. ???

I would think I would prefer that one made before Gibson took over … is there a difference?
Thanks.

Click to expand...

Only the original 90W Mark V is three channel, the 25W and 35W versions are two channel. Anyone advertising otherwise has got it wrong. Each channel on the smaller versions is found on the 90W, they just removed three modes to pare it down. Channel one on the smaller amps essentially combines 1 & 2 from the bigger amp. Channel 2 on the smaller amps is channel 3 on the 90W.

It still remains to be seen what sort of impact Gibson will have on the manufacturing, if any. I'd be more concerned by the impact of the pandemic and their supply chain issues and sourcing parts. They just recently had to redesign their transformers because of changes in EU import laws. Mesa are still struggling to catch up, so there's that. Basically not enough "post-Gibson" amps exist yet to say. And they could be problematic because of the pandemic, not Gibson. And I'm the last person to ever defend that company.

A lot of sellers are hawking their wares as "pre-Gibson" but at this point it doesn't really mean a lot, they're just trying to inflate their appeal. Hating Gibson is the coolest thing to do right now. Too soon to say whether those amps will be better, and for what reason.

woodbutcher65 said:

Why do people think that Gibson buying Mesa HAS to be bad for Mesa?

Click to expand...

Oh I dunno, maybe because they bought Epiphone and shipped them overseas for 5 or 6 decades? But don't get me wrong I agree with you, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I'd sooner Gibson own them than some random holding companies where they're bought and sold over and over as the brand dies a slow death, like what happened with Hiwatt. Or Samsung buying Digitech? Seriously wtf was that all about. Anyways there have been a lot of companies setting seriously stupid precedents over the years, so who knows?

The mark amps were always under valued. Not sure they should be $3,000 now, but mid teens would be fair. A Mark IV is a great amplifier. Those people on TGP who can't seem to figure it out need a different hobby.

New to the forum here, just picked up a Mark V 25 locally for a great price. I like that the amp is small, its a combo but can easily be plugged into a 2x12 or 4x12 and not even look that weird sitting on top of it. Plus the volume is enough for me right now as I have an infant. So far I'm really digging the amp. I think it was made in 2020, I have to check the card. The crunch setting really gained up with a small mid push from the EQ has been really working for me. Wondering if there are any threads with pics of presets for the 25? Admittedly, not sure I would have ended up with this amp if I had to pay full price but the seller was very close to me and was fair with it. He also let me try it out at home with different guitars which really helped. Anyway, glad to be joining the Mesa community and may you all find the tones you seek!

Mark v owner here I do love it but I must admit that day 1-180 were very underwhelming. Once I learned how to dial in a mark series amp life is so much better. But if I was saving up money for one I would probably just go with the VII. It’s not that much more money and it’s refined or updated from the v. But a v is great.

I recently paid ~$2070 for a used Mark V 90W head and all new tubes. It definitely seems like a fair price compared to the other amps I've had and how much I paid for them.
Revv G20: $1350 new
Peavey Invective MH: $600 used
Marshall DSL20CR: ~$1050 new after a speaker & tube swap.
These amps are horrid compared to the Mark V. Tubby, boxy, muddy, fizzy, and/or honky. The V is definitely worth that much more.
Though the V doesn't quite sound like a $2000 amp until I put extra parametric EQ in the loop. But with the EQ, it sounds great, and it's the best amp I've ever had, and may be the last amp I ever buy. I'd like a VII, but no master volume is a big disappointment (I live in an apartment), and it's just too expensive for me now.

Have they said why they did not include a master volume on the Mark VII? It's not like this series has ever relied on power tube distortion. Probably a good reason, I just can't think of one.

Sinner's Swing! said:

Have they said why they did not include a master volume on the Mark VII? It's not like this series has ever relied on power tube distortion. Probably a good reason, I just can't think of one.

Click to expand...

It seems like they were really focused on making it smaller. Two less preamp tubes, no rectifier tube, no front panel space for the master volume and solo boost (and one less footswitch without the solo boost).

Sinner's Swing! said:

Have they said why they did not include a master volume on the Mark VII? It's not like this series has ever relied on power tube distortion. Probably a good reason, I just can't think of one.

Click to expand...

I should remain silent but wanted to add my 2 cents to this.

The only Mesa amps I am aware of that do not rely on power tube distortion fall into the Rectifier category. Roadster is the prime example. Power tubes with more headroom like the coded red or yellows sound the best with that amp in particular. Tried tubes with early distortion characteristics like green and grey and it sounded terrible. Did not care for the STR448 or STR445 with that amp. Too much mush with power tube distortion. Many have complained that the 6L6GC tubes are basically coasting in the Dual Rectifier lineup. That is all preamp distortion. Mark amps on the other hand rely on power tube distortion more so than one would think. JP2C for instance, sounds best with tubes having early onset of distortion like coded green or grey. It will go lame with reds or yellows. Lacks that drive characteristic with tubes having more headroom, that is without changing any preamp tubes too. That would cover the 60W and 100W amps of yesterday SRG, HRG versions of the Mark IIC, Mark III. I do not believe the Mark IV had a 60W or 100W model, but it was a Simul-Class amp. What is referenced as the Class A power tubes is just a Class AB mode with extended Class A mode so it does not get into a Class B characteristic that creates cross-over distortion. That being said, the Class A tubes have a hotter bias than the other supporting pair that are just Class AB. It is the power distortion or tube saturation effect you get with the Simul-Class versions. There will be power tube distortion even with tubes having a higher headroom like reds and yellows than with tubes in the green or grey codes.

Mark IIC, Mark III and even the Mark IV only had 5 preamp tubes. That is all that is required to get that sound. Mark V90 was an exception as they attempted to toss in the kitchen sink. Mark I mode required a different arrangement of gain stages, so V2 comes in for CH2 only. It is not used on CH1 or CH3. Since they decided to use the GEQ circuitry to generate the send level for the FX loop or even when bypassed, only the recovery stage needed to be tube buffered, also where the global master volume and solo boost reside. That goes away in hard bypass. So what is following the lead drive circuit is V3A, this gets attenuated with several voltage divider circuits before the last gain stage V6A which is used for voicing the IIC, IV and Extreme modes. Had Mesa decided to leave out the Mark I mode, the extra tubes would not be present as they are not adding much to the amps character. Anyways, the Mark V90 is what it is. Rectifier tube is only needed for the 10W power mode as that is a pure single ended class A power mode that uses the extra power tube as a ballast to prevent damage to the output transformer. The added benefit of that Rectifier tube allows one to use it with CH1 and CH2 but cannot be used with CH3 when using the 45W power mode. The Mark V is an engineering wonder just like many other amps Mesa has come out with. I can appreciate what was designed into it. The Rectifier tube is disabled when running the 90W power mode so it does not contribute much. At least there is a variac power mode so that drops the plate voltages to bring out some more harmonics. It is a cool amp in many respects. Actually the Mark V90 has one advantage, ability to run the extended class A tubes in triode or pentode modes (this was also a feature of the Mark IVB). Historically Simul-class was a combination of Class AB running in pentode and extended class A push-pull running in triode. That cuts power down on the extended class A or what most call Class A positions. Excluding the variac power mode, the Mark V90 has 5 power modes for the lead channel. 90W full pentode, 70W pentode/triode, 45W pentode, 25W triode, and 10W single ended class A (triode). Mesa did not indicate actual power drops when using the pentode/triode switch on CH3. the 45W pentode mode sound much like the Mark VII. I assume it drops to 25W in triode mode as that is what the Mark VII does (changes petode/triode based on the power mode switch and you cannot alter the 90W power mode as a pentode/triode blend). the Mark IIC+/Mark III simul-class amps ran the class A power section at 15W triode and required an EL34 tube as the bias voltage was too low to support a 6L6 tube. I ran a quad of 6L6 tubes in the Mark III without issue but it later came out not to do so from Mesa when they updated the manual on-line.

The Mark VII is true to its roots as is the JP2C. Back to 5 preamp tubes. To be honest, the JP2C was my salvation from the Mark V90 as it has a much better tone and gain structure. Sometimes it may seem to have less gain. I assume that is the IIC+ character for a Class AB amp. The Mark VII was based off of the JP2C platform but with some new operating modes. Crunch and VII modes are a hybrid circuit that places the lead drive circuit in front of the tone stack, sort of like the Mark I mode on the V90. Actually this must have worked out as Mesa released a hybrid version of the Rectifier called the Badlander. That amp also has the same lead drive circuit as a Mark amp but places that in front of the tone stack driver borrowed from the Rectifier line. There are some similarities to the crunch and crush modes of the BAD to the crunch and VII modes of the Mark VII. They are still different due to the tone stack driver circuits. So lets focus more on the IIC and IV modes. Mark VII IIC mode sounds identical to the JP2C CH2 or CH3. There is a shift in brightness due to the presence of the simul-class power vs the Class AB. I did slave the Mark VII into the JP2C and found the IIC mode to have the same sound as the JP2C preamp. Sure the GEQ circuits are different as well as both amps have that following the FX loop. The IV mode of the Mark VII is a masterpiece. The Mark V90 cannot touch it. It will get close. I feel the Mark VII IV mode to be more impressive than the Mark IVB I used to have. No extreme mode though. That would have been cool. Global master volume would also have been a nice feature. What is missing that is present on the Mark IVB and the Mark V90 is the tweed/variac power functions.

They all have their merits and specific tonal characteristics. The IIC and III were very close in design and characteristics. The big move was with the Mark IV and then the Mark V having independent channel controls and a slew of different features. Perhaps the Mark VII was a step back but by no means is it sub-par because it lacks a Rectifier tube and two preamp tubes. It does quite a lot for its size. They are all worthy of ownership. Some models may be easier to bond with than others. The Mark V may be more home use friendly as it is easier to dial in a decent sound at bedroom level than the other models. Mark III and IV were very loud. JP2C is more manageable, Mark VII is a bit closer to the III and IV on loudness but it does have the 3 power modes to aid in dropping output levels. Figuring it all out is the fun part. At least one does not need a decoder ring to dial in clean, crunch and lead used on the same amp. That was not fun with the Mark III, Mark IV was a bit better and the V answered that problem. Moving forward and a step back to the JP2c and Mark VII still has the full channel separation. They are just different. Sometime down the road, may not be too long, before the Mark V90 gets retired from production. You cannot find many new ones, seems to be the V:25, V:35, Mark VII or JP2C.

Well that is way beyond the scope of my understanding, but what I should have said is I think people don't really rely on the power tube distortion from the later Marks, especially the Mark V, because of all the features. Maybe that is the answer. If you can go pentode/triode, go into variac mode, etc. you probably don't really need a Master volume on the VII. I don't know all of the features, but my point was the Marks are not like a simple Plexi style amp where people know they need to crank the volume to get a smooth distorted tone.

Sinner's Swing! said:

Have they said why they did not include a master volume on the Mark VII? It's not like this series has ever relied on power tube distortion. Probably a good reason, I just can't think of one.

Click to expand...

It seems Mesa has gotten away from the master volume in their new Mark designs since the V:90. The V:25/35, JP2C and now the VII don't have it. Cost, less complexity I'd guess. Also there was complaint about tone suck on the V:90 related to the way the MV and the loop was implemented. BTW, I compensate with the no master-vol Badlander by running a volume pedal in the loop.

Sinner's Swing! said:

Well that is way beyond the scope of my understanding, but what I should have said is I think people don't really rely on the power tube distortion from the later Marks, especially the Mark V, because of all the features. Maybe that is the answer. If you can go pentode/triode, go into variac mode, etc. you probably don't really need a Master volume on the VII. I don't know all of the features, but my point was the Marks are not like a simple Plexi style amp where people know they need to crank the volume to get a smooth distorted tone.

Click to expand...

IMHO having a few Mesas... yea the preamp supplies most of the tone, especially the overdriven ones. The Mesa power sections definitely add character and they can be driven to supply even more saturation. However compared to an old style Marshall, for sure.

Sorry, I downed a pot of coffee before responding.

It would be difficult to remove the power tube distortion characteristic from a Simul-Class amp as that is in its design. It is still all class AB power. What many call the Class A sockets are what is known as extended class A push-pull. It is a means to prevent that power section from operating in the Class B mode where cross-over distortion becomes an issue. That will result in a harsh sounding ice pick effect due to odd-order harmonics becoming more abundant. Some of this is corrected by the negative feedback circuit. Just for S&Gs. comparing the JP2C to the Mark V. One amp is Class AB and the other is Simul-class. I can run the same tubes in both amps, say the STR440 6L6GC tubes. You will get the characteristic grind from the JP2C with those tubes in the grey codes (early distortion) but change to red codes it will go lame, all of that nice grind is gone and mostly sound like a weak clean amp. Some distortion is there but will lack that characteristic Mesa sound. Same tubes in the Mark V90 but just sticking with the reds, plenty of grind to be had. Green code you get more saturation effect. Grey it is over the top and probably too much. The Simul-Class power has an advantage over the standard Class AB power due to the way it operates.

Going back to the Mark III or DRH vs the HRG. The simul-class version may have only been at 75W but that extended class A push-pull in triode operation added in that juicy tube saturation by the 15W provided by that "class A" section. Perhaps the Mark III is a bad example as there was no such thing as bedroom level with that amp. OK, you could just run the 15W power mode by itself, but that took so much out of its characteristic sound.

Perhaps it is best to copy the manual and paste it here. On-line manual starting at page 30 This is all about power tube saturation and clipping. That is the key to the Simul-Class output section. If the amp did not have power tube distortion it would be all clean no grind if that unless you cranked it up like a Plexi.



This is the description from the Mark IV manual: Sheds a bit of more light onto the power tube distortion, just worded differently than in the V90 but the power section is about the same.

Sinner's Swing! said:

Have they said why they did not include a master volume on the Mark VII? It's not like this series has ever relied on power tube distortion. Probably a good reason, I just can't think of one.

Click to expand...

Yes, Doug West said in a Mark VII video that the master volume on the VII sucked the tone just a bit. They wanted to have as simple a signal path as possible and therefore didn’t include the master OUTPUT and SOLO on the VII.

Taking a step back to the OP...

Mesa is not quite priced in the boutique market but close enough. You get a lot of amp for a reasonable price. Sure, over the years the prices will increase. All companies do this as the market changes, cost of materials go up, wages go up, etc. Considering what I paid for the JP2C in 2016, it was expensive but much more affordable than they are now. Ouch. So, consider that the PCB assembly is mostly hand inserted components. Relays, capacitors, transistors and the like. The resistors could be machine inserted or done by hand as well. That would be the wave solder assembly line. Number of workers to build the PCB for soldering the components. I doubt the preamp tube sockets are run through the wave solder line, that may be soldered by hand as they do sick out on the bottom side some distance from the board surface. Hand soldering of all of the lead wires, then comes the assembly of the PCB assembly, chassis and control features, jacks, etc. I could only imagine the time it takes to start from raw parts to build one complete assembly. It is quite an involved process and that requires labor hours to do it. I am surprised that the Mark V90 does not cost more than the Mark VII or JP2C considering the overall size of the preamp and power amp boards and other board assemblies for the GEQ and back panel. The Mark V90 has more of the boards exposed so you can see most of it. The power tube board is on a different level than the main preamp board. The Rectifier tube board is also separate. Also, due to the nature of the beast, it would not be possible to do this on a peg board with like they used to make them in the 1960-1980. More features and circuits, the more complex the assembly to achieve it. The chassis is a formed aluminum sheet and then welded to ensure a good rigid structure. It also goes through a painting process. I would not doubt that the chassis is a purchased component from a good resource. That bezel on the front panel is also a machined aluminum plate that gets anodized black after it is processed. The Mark V90 is truly a work of art and sounds good too. The sum of the parts and labor of assembly will drive the cost up.



The cost of the head is now $3145 as listed on Mesa's web site. I am sort of tempted to buy one as the one I have now has had some issues. Plus, I am so familiar with it, I know what preamp tubes makes it sound really good. I would be curious to see if they made any changes since 2012 (I hope so).

Just for S&G, lets take a look at an amp that retails now for $2600. The EVH 5150 IIIs EL34. This is made in Mexico by Fender. It only has six preamp tubes. External power capacitors so it appears they can be replaced when needed. I would say this is comparable to the Mark V90 in some ways. The front grill is made of 3 layers of cut sheet metal. It becomes rather delicate once you remove the screws, it has to be removed to get the chassis out. (same with the rear panel).






Here is the innards image, There is so much wasted space on the PCB. the components few compared to the Mark V90. So I would ask, why is the EVH product so expensive based on what little you get shoved inside it. Just about every component is attached to the PCB, not much in hand soldering except for the factory mod of bypassing a gain stage to use CH3 circuits with CH2.



If I had to rate the quality of each, the Mark V90 wins hands down. Not because it is a Mesa product, more so, how it is made and how it sounds.

Now we can see the smaller boxed amps like the JP2C and the Mark VII. There is a gut shot of the JP2C It makes use of all of the triodes of each preamp tube. What you can't see is buried under the main preamp board. Well, this was made specifically to be as close to the original IIC+ HRG in its characteristics. It is not an exact replica as most of the components used back then are obsolete. A few added features like the midi controller and cab clone. Not as many relays as that used on the Mark V90. Getting the JP2C all sfuffed into the smaller enclosure looks to be more time consuming. Taking the assembly apart looks to be more of a nightmare than the Mark V90.



And now for the Mark VII, Mesa wanted a similar role of the next mark amp to have as many features or voices as possible, somewhat like the Mark V90 that has 9 unique voices. The Mark VII only has 7 voices (two are repeated). Let's use the same chassis as the JP2C and stuff more into it. This took some planning and the JP2C was the starting point. Again, we are seeing several layers of stacked boards so not all is in view like it is with the Mark V90.



For a brand comparison but different model, Here is the MWDR. Not as expensive as any of the large bottle Mark amps. Still it is busy with many components. Currently sells for $2700. Much simpler in design, not as packed as the Mark V90 or the other amps.



You get what you pay for when it comes to Mesa. Sure, I wish the prices were a bit more affordable. I have no regrets paying what I did for each amp. I feel that the EVH was over priced for what you get. I can see why the Mesa products are more expensive but what is inside is what counts the most. Not only are the guts made of quality parts, the other materials on the outside are of better quality then I have seen with other brands. I want something that will last the test of time. The longest period I owned a single Mesa product was 24 years and sold it to a friend about 13 years ago, it is still going strong as it did for me over the 24 years of ownership. Not sure how the EVH will fair on the long haul, I barely ever use it.