5:50 burn channel - voiced like a mk series?

[seerenity]

Is the burn channel on the Express amps voiced similarly to a mk2 or 4?
Or is it a different type of sound?

Thanks

 

[UKBoogieboy]

Channel 2 is VERY mid heavy, massive difference to channel 1 which is sweeter.

 

[TimeSignature]

Yes, the Burn channel sounds similar to a Mark ...but with less gain. If you overdrive and crank the Express is will sound similar. I own a Mark IV and used to own an Express 5:50. I do not know how it sounds in relation to a Mark II.

 

[edward]

Depends ...what does a "Mark" sound like?

Not trying to be a smart-aleck, but there is a huge palatte of "Mark tones" when considering a series I to a IV (never tried a V personally). And then there are the various iterations within each Mark. Not to mention with the GEQ, any Mark can sound decidely less "Mark-ish."

I do not believe the Express can get as uber-saturated as, say, a III or IV ...it gets saturated, but not as "dense" or thick in my limited experience with a 5:50. And the Contour knobs of the Express line pale in comparison to the Marks GEQ's ability to shape tone, IMHO.

Not to say one is better ...that's in the ears of the beholder, to be sure. But if you are looking for a 5:50 to sound like a Mark (again, which one???), you can get close with some tweaking, but you will not truly be there. And FWIW, try the Crunch channel saturated ...I personally think it is a better OD tone than the Burn which sounds very exaggerated to me. Again, all IMHO.

Edward

 

[TimeSignature]

The Mark sound is easily distinguishable from .... say.... a Recto, most if not all Peavey's, Fenders, Engls, Vox's, Marshalls, etc. The schematics, tubes, speakers (C90's in the Mark combo and Express 5:50), etc all play into it. I do not have a major in physics nor can I read schematics so I can not tell you exactly why.... but I can guarantee you will not find a more "Mark" like sound from any other amp besides the DC's than an Express. The Express imho is like the Mark's little buddy.... a Markster if you will. lol

The Mark and Express have the same type of dark / midrange heavy tone. The contour knob really scoops the mids on the 5:50 similar to the EQ on the Mark.

I believe you can make a Mark sound like an express.

I agree that it's not the same tone... Its more of a general ball park area.

I view the Express like a no frills stripped down less gain version of the Mark.

Keep in mind that I am only referring to the high gain "burn" mode on the Express and the later Mark series (III, IV) in the comparison above.

 

[mdortona]

I had a MKIV and a 5:50 at one point and to my blown out ears, the 5:50 burn channel did not have the saturation or bottom of the MKIV. Playing with the contour and using a BB Preamp, got me a bit closer to the MKIV, but no cigar. Actually, I often used the crunch and blues channels more often than the burn channel. In my experiences, other than a MKIV itself, the closest things to it have been the DC series and the Love channel on the Heartbreaker (MKI out the ying yang). I still have my Heartbreaker. 8)

Matt

 

[HaggertysMusic]

I would agree the 5:50 has a "mark" voice. It's very mid heavy. If you turn the graphic EQ of the Mark IV off, it's very much in the 5:50 territory. Running a graphic EQ in the loop of the 5:50 pushes it a lot closer to the sound of a Mark IV... Not 100% there... but closer.

 

[EtherealWidow]

See I could never get the Mark V to do what I wanted. The crunch channel to me on the Express just absolutely kicks the crap out of a V. I still really want a V though, and I don't really know why. I think it's just the graphic EQ. Anyway, I could never get the V's voice to sing exactly like the crunch channel on the Express. Once again, I got close, but the V also has really wimpy reverb IMO. Especially on the second channel. With the dougs tube kit I hear it also tightens up the reverb on the Express a lot, because that verb is kind of muddy.

 

[giorikas81]

I don't really know about the express. I suppose it can be "markish". Most of the owners of f-series amps claimed that as well. I suppose the schematics can point to a mark like behaviour (you know, pre gain eq, plus graphic eq contour mode etc) but subtle changes can add/substract gain, character (bright, fat, thick...) and differentiate the preamps plus the difference in the power section.

All in all I never found a clip that showcased a heavy mark style sound from an express, more like classic rock is where I'd put it but then I stumbled in on this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0Krpp-bUzI

which is definately in the -smooth-high gain-fusion style sound that I'd come to expect from a mark, so there you go!!! If it was even more aggresive I'd buy it!!! But I think this voicing is more characteristic in the f-series which ultimately won me!!! Of course you can always mod the hell out of it preampwise.

You can never be sure enough with mr Smith. Mesa claimed the dc series beeing recto lead and mark I clean. I found the schematics and even though many players claim to achieve very similar sounds to the mark series and considered it to be a non-frills aggresive mark version rather than a recto, the lead channel is definately recto "organised" like a marshall built with fender components...

In the contrary, the f-series schematic which has supposed to have evolved from the studio and the dc preamp and has the same patent number and claims recto menacing gain by mr smith's statement is actually more close to the mark in terms of pre gain eq and actually it kinda resembles the lonestar drive channel schematic!!! Go figure.

I would have to say that none of this is crucial enough to categorize an amp. If a mark is the main soundscape then go after one. Even if it is a small studio or quad preamp. If not and judging by your ears and prefference then express it is!!!

 

[TimeSignature]

I never understood how the DC lead channel could possibly be related at all to the recto's.

Ive been fortunate enough to have owned / own a Roadster head, f 50 1x12, DC 10 2x12, Express 5 50 2x12, Mark III and Mark IV.

As far as Tone.

The Roadster was in a class all by itself.

As far as the rest

The F50 was similar to the DC which was similar to the Mark's. The Express was like a Mark light.

 

[giorikas81]

well i m with you on this one. the way you described it pretty much summarizes every clip of every amp in question here. i was ver surprised to see the schematic that confirmed the tonestack being at the end of the preamp like a recto. in my opinion mr smith likes to toy with voicings and component placement. i could imagine the dc as a recto transexual mark voiced channel with the graphic eq whereas the f as a recto voiced lonestar/mark mid bass heavy channel!

but with the tonestack in the end of the preamp the dc cannot be a mark!