Anyone Stopped fighting an amp with the Mark V?

[NR2112]

I am playin a JSX right now, and I would love to own a Mark V. I am really "fighting" the amp right now (I feel like the amp isnt responding to my touch as well as I would like it too) I seem to have to really work hard to get it to FEEL right.

I played a mark five, and the touch seemed to be there immediatly....

So,
Has anyone upgraded to a mark V and seem a big difference in FEELING? Or has it just been more of a sonic difference?
What kind of amp did you "upgrade" from???

 

[Shang Chi 66]

Hey guy!

I arrived at the Mark 5 from a VHT Sig X. That amp was extremely touch sensitive & dynamic, more so then the Mark 5.

The VHT seemed to want to put up more of a fight, but in reality, that was the amp wanting me to ,"take some responsibility", and play it...know what I mean?

The Mesa, (for me at least) seems to be alot easier to play, but still process's enough dynamic content for your fret hand touch, pick attack, & guitar volume changes, to come through.

Having said that, there are times where I do miss the "feel" of the VHT, it was nice...really nice. Sonically and overall though, I'm more pleased with the Mark 5.

Unfortunately, I'm not one of those cats that can afford ta own 2 amps at once...

...but man, let me tell ya...the perfect amp for me would be the 2nd channel of that Sig X, along with the 1st, and 3rd channels of the Mark 5! That would be an awesome & **** near perfect amplifier!

Think of how cool & mind-blowing that would be if a collaboration of that sort were to actually happen? Man, think of the possibilities!? The designs, the sounds, the AMPS that would come out of that, from those 2 master amp builders!?

And while they're at it, have Mr Egnater, and Mr. Soldano stop by as well! Wow!

Sorry...I'm awake now! :lol:

Mr Smith & Mr Fryette, are you listening?

 

[jam3v]

I came from an ENGL Savage 120, which is the most versatile amp I've ever seen. The only problem with it is that even with 3 dirty channels, you can't escape the "ENGL sound."

There was also something missing, in terms of feel, with the ENGL. It was surprising how much more "connected" i felt to my guitar and amp when I started playing out of the Mark V. I imagine that has something to do with attack dynamics and compression. Not sure.

So yes, not only was it sonically more interesting than the ENGL, but it also felt much better to play through.

 

[theroan]

There is definitely a "somethings missing" feel to ENGL's. For me, they're too sterile. They lack rawness and for high gain they aren't brutal enough.

 

[Deaj]

When I first demo'd the Mark V in October I had been using the same amp exclusively for more than four years - a Fuchs ODS-50 combo. The ODS is a dynamics payer's dream! Though the resulting output is quite different from the Fuchs I found I was right at home with the Mark V at first demo at least in part because it seemed to be very responsive to my technique. I have since purchased a Mark V. It's a nice companion amp to the Fuchs as they cover very different sonic territory and they're both responsive in a way that fits perfectly with my approach.

I didn't have to stop fighting with another amp but rather found in the MkV another amp with which I'm very comfortable.

 

[jHemy]

I had been fighting different amps for years before the Mark V. My first tube amp was a Single Rectifier. When I had it, I loved it, but I thought the sound was too muddy. Then I switched over to a Peavey 6505+, mainly because I was going through a HUGE EVH stage and wanted his tone. But when I recorded with it, I always thought the tone was too harsh and really didn't respond to different guitars well. I followed the 6505 up with a JSX head. I thought the tone was a big improvement over the 6505, but again, too harsh when recording. Back in March I found an '81 Mark IIB head. I began to feel like I was heading in the right direction, but the B didn't quite create enough gain for me. I had a F100 2x12 combo as well at the same time, and that had some of the best clean tones out of an amp I've ever heard, but I HATED channel 2 on that amp. The normal setting didn't create enough gain, and when I switched to contour mode, all dynamics were gone and it sounded very dark. Then I picked up a Mark IV combo as well as a Dual Rectifier 2 channel head w/ a 4x12 cab at around the same time. The Mark IV was incredibly close to what I was looking for, and the Dual Rectifier was in my house literally for 3 days before getting rid of it. By now you can tell that I think the Rectifier line is too muddy for my taste. Then in June I was at GC and the guy I normally work with there showed me the Mark V. I knew instantly that I had found my perfect amp. Ordered it on the spot, and I haven't looked back since.

 

[steve_k]

I still fight it every day. The V just doesn't have the balls of the Mark III or IV. When I think I am comfortable with the V and lay out all the settings, it comes time to gig and I end up saying aw **** and throwing the III and IV back in the rack just because I am more comfortable with them and know how they will react. Seems at gig volumes though, the bottom end just isn't there. Versatile yes, vintage Mark tone and thump - no. I am not a big fan of boost and pedal help either.

Just my opinion and observations. I will keep trying though with some tube combos to try and coax something familiar out of it. Meanwhile, the IIC+ arrives in a day or two. Will probably have to rethink it all then.

Steve

 

[Shang Chi 66]

I still fight it every day. The V just doesn't have the balls of the Mark III or IV. When I think I am comfortable with the V and lay out all the settings, it comes time to gig and I end up saying aw sh!t and throwing the III and IV back in the rack just because I am more comfortable with them and know how they will react. Seems at gig volumes though, the bottom end just isn't there. Versatile yes, vintage Mark tone and thump - no. I am not a big fan of boost and pedal help either.

Just my opinion and observations. I will keep trying though with some tube combos to try and coax something familiar out of it. Meanwhile, the IIC+ arrives in a day or two. Will probably have to rethink it all then.

Steve

Sorry to hear that Steve. I say give it abit more time, and I hope you can get the Mark 5 to work out for ya! And let us know how sweet that IIC+ is!

It seems over these many months now, that a large number of those that do have previous experience with the earlier Marks, are never truly pleased with or convinced of it's tones, while those with no previous Mark exp. are usually pretty happy with the Mark 5.

Is it that they (previous Marks) were/are that much, "fuller, sweeter, better feeling", than the Mark 5, or is it that the Mark 5 just lives under the long history, heavy weight & reputation of it's older brothers?

I've said before that the fellas with no prior experience came into owning a Mark 5 with, "clean, virgin ears" so to speak, therefore attaching no outstanding prejudice's to it.

In other words, taking and judging the Mark 5 on it's own merits (and tones), and not those of the IIC+, III, or IV?

I think that we may be at an advantage (of not having owned/played any previous of the series), because we're comparing the Mark 5 to the Mark 5.

Or is this a case of, I think I know what killin is, but in actuality, I don't know what I'm missing? :lol:

Please don't misunderstand me, I don't doubt for a minute that the previous Marks are outstanding, (and definately time tested) amps as well, but man, if they're that much more killer then the 5, then they've got to be just hellacious!

Question; is there anyone out there who has owned a previous Mark, that feels the 5, by it's own merits, not comparatively, is as worthy an amp as it's predecessors?

Anyone?

 

[niilz]

Well, I sold my MK IV B when the MK V arrived and never looked back.
For me the MK IV/Extreme modes in the 3rd channel of the MK V is even better than the original!!!

I did not fight with my IV, but the V seems to do everything the IV does - just a little better ;-)

my 02 cents...

 

[steve_k]

Its all cool....not trying to compare V with its predecessors. Its nice having both (or all 4) so the option is there. Just haven't spent enough time with it. The V just sounds a little thin to me in the IIC+ and IV mode on Ch. 3. I do like the hell out of the crunch on Ch. 2 though and the bit of hair you can dial up on Ch. 1. But I haven't got warmed up to Ch. 3 yet enough to leave the others at home. The V is getting accolades with the press though. Lots of kudo's. I see they have already made LOG, Chevelle, Petrucci and others ditch the IV's and use their V's. Compared to other amps on the market, it is a hell of a value though. I got a couple Diezels and an Elmwood I would like to move.

Good luck and post to the MkV settings page.

Steve

 

[glguitarman]

Hey there,

I'vé been using a Mark V that my work purchased for a short while. I current own a Mark IV, and have had a IIC+, 3 III's (2 reds and 1 green). I really think the Mark V is quite awsome. I will say that I'm still learning to use it though.

I think that the biggest "strangeness" in the Mark V vs. all other Marks is that the "input gain" is gone. That's the way you set a Mark amp, historically, with your input volume, treble, and drive all working together. Now it's just a switch and a gain...so I can see why some might fight it a little.

 

[Shang Chi 66]

Cool stuff guys!

Steve, what kind of cab/speakers do you run through?

I play thru a rather flimsy Carvin Legacy 2x12, loaded with an Eminence Swamp Thang & Wizard (or a V30, depending on my mood and taste on any given day :lol: ) It's decent, however nothing like a nice Boogie or Orange cab.

Anyway, I never have any lack of low-end...quite the contrary, perhaps a bit too much at times.

The low end frequency sliders, I keep pulled back most of the time, right around the middle indent point, or slightly below it.

This kind of makes me wonder about how much variance that there may be from one amp to the next.

No 2 amps are going to sound exactly the same, but given todays technology, there should'nt be much though, should there?

 

[4406cuda]

I use to fight my Triaxis/2:90 set up. I was never satisfied with it and it was a pain to move. I am currently using Fat/Crunch/Extreme all in 90W with the variac on in to a pair of Bogner 1 X 12 cubes and I am very satisfied.

 

[steve_k]

Hey there,

I'vé been using a Mark V that my work purchased for a short while. I current own a Mark IV, and have had a IIC+, 3 III's (2 reds and 1 green). I really think the Mark V is quite awsome. I will say that I'm still learning to use it though.

I think that the biggest "strangeness" in the Mark V vs. all other Marks is that the "input gain" is gone. That's the way you set a Mark amp, historically, with your input volume, treble, and drive all working together. Now it's just a switch and a gain...so I can see why some might fight it a little.

You hit the nail on the head there. Its the set up and process of getting there which may be the biggest stumbling block. no more stacked gains and dialing in like the original marks. Glad you all got it going on. Had my Mark III (red head) out last night and forgot how good it sounds! Will get the V out and have another go at it.

Steve

 

[DaveDaveDave]

Generally yes. I've got a bunch of amps, including a Mark IV, a Maverick, a Traynor plexi-clone and couple others. I bought the Mark V as a swiss-army type of amp - something I could play anything with. I play everything from lounge to metal, but mostly kidzy/indy/pop stuff.

IMO, the Mark V BLOWS away the IV. I had been fighting that amp for ages - and in the end I pretty much gave up on the clean channel. Everything just feels really tight no matter what you do with that amp - almost compressed. The only times I ever had that amp sounding really good to me was with a 1970 greenback loaded Marshall 4x12, which somehow made it sound a lot more responsive and yet softer attack - and warmer all around.

Of course, Every different component in a rig contributes to a sound - picks, pickups, strings, bridge, fret size, guitar cable, each tube - there's a lot to it as you no doubt know. I'm sure you've narrowed it down to the JSX - and I'm not familiar with that amp at all, but when you mention "touch", I can't help but think of how your pickups are interacting with the amp - what kind of axe/pickups are you using?

That said, The Mark V really does seem to bring out the nuances of the guitar that you're playing - much more so than the Mark IV. As an example, I've got two 70's Yamaha SG guitars loaded with different pups - the SG2000 with Bill Lawrence L500s and the SG1500 with Lace Alumitones. The basic frequency response is almost the same with either set, but the Lawrences just sound sooo much faster and tighter. The difference is always there, but it's more pronounced with the Mark V than with just about any amp I've played.

Of note though - I find that the natural tones, sounds and timbres coming out of a given guitar or amp tend to make me play in that general direction - and I can't help but follow through with the genre associated with the tone. For instance, when I plug my '62 RI Tele into a Twin Reverb, I can't help but start playing country licks.

Man, you really got me babbling... I'm gonna go plug in!
Cheers,
Dave

I am playin a JSX right now, and I would love to own a Mark V. I am really "fighting" the amp right now (I feel like the amp isnt responding to my touch as well as I would like it too) I seem to have to really work hard to get it to FEEL right.

I played a mark five, and the touch seemed to be there immediatly....

So,
Has anyone upgraded to a mark V and seem a big difference in FEELING? Or has it just been more of a sonic difference?
What kind of amp did you "upgrade" from???

 

[SteveO]

I went through all kinds of frustration trying to coax the sound I heard in my head out of a Roadster, found it within five minutes with the Mark V.