Back to the big daddy Mark V

[nitefly]

lol wow! :lol:

Was it just a bit too 'bloated' for your tastes?

 

[Bullen]

Thanks I'll try that in the morning! Why you no play jp-2c?

I sold it this afternoon.

What was it about the JP that you didn't like or not like as much as the V?

I understand that you had some kind of a breakthrough with the V the last few days, that's awesome. I wish that I had that experience with my V. But apart from the honeymoon phase, I always prefered my III or IV to the V. I had the same basic problems with it that you had with your last one. And I always ran my cab on the floor and had the fx loop bypassed most of the time when I had it, and yes it does sound better that way. And as I have stated a few times, I find the JP to be better in most ways to the V. I still miss fat and crunch sometimes, but to me the JP is quite a bit more to my liking in the lead channels as I feel it's sounds more like what I like a Mark series amp to sound like.

 

[Dreamtheaterrules]

Thanks I'll try that in the morning! Why you no play jp-2c?

I sold it this afternoon.

:shock: :shock:

 

[cradlefish]

Great post here! Glad that there are more supporters of this great amp and glad that you're back with the Mark V. I've had the IV and love the amp but when I traded my Bogner Shiva for the V. It was time to sell the IV. It took a bit of time to tailor the sound of the V and still finding new sounds I didn't realized. Great tip on the killing the Loop. It does make a difference. It doesn't sound how should i say it. Softer? What i realized is that the tubes on the V and other current production Mesa amps needs better tubes. The ones they use sound a bit too round or boingy. Making the the V a bit lack luster. I always swap out with NOS tubes with any new amp I get. That has been from my experienced to get the true sound of the amp. The reason why alot of people say the IV may sound better is partly because of the tubes it uses, along with past mesa amps and maybe no rectifier tube in past mark series. This is just my opinion. After I swapped the Mark V with NOS preamp, power and recitifier tubes. The amp sounded amazing! What i didn't know was killing the loop. Deactivating the loop made the V sound like it took out the Rectifier tube. Which I like better. Overall, if more tube amp users swap out for better tubes instead of using the crappy ones they put in there. Their amps would sound even better and let the true sound shine in their amps.

 

[IronSean]

THEN added a parametric EQ and notched at about 1kHz as well. That's where it went from "good, but missing something" to "oh, crap, that's it"

That is the key most people seem to miss when dialing in Metallica tones, the cut at 1.2 KHz they did with Parametric EQs on top of the amp EQ.

 

[Gizzorge]

Glad your back! Mark V is the Ruler, even Randall Smith will tell you that.....

I did get some time in last week on a Stiletto Deuce Stage II....... my god, that amp rocks!!!!

 

[dlpasco]

Another one bites the dust: sold my Multiwatt Recto.

 

[barryswanson]

Another one bites the dust: sold my Multiwatt Recto.

:shock: what Randall Smith say to you the other day?

 

[dlpasco]

Another one bites the dust: sold my Multiwatt Recto.

:shock: what Randall Smith say to you the other day?

"One Amp to rule them all, One Amp to find them,
One Amp to bring them all and in the darkness bind them"

 

[dlpasco]

Another one bites the dust: sold my Multiwatt Recto.

:shock: what Randall Smith say to you the other day?

What ACTUALLY happened:

Me: "I've been a fan since I was a teenager. Thank you for everything you have done for this industry."

Randall: "Thank you for trusting me with your tone"

(Yeah, he may say that to a lot of people but I still went "wibblewibblewibble" and ran in circles with my head under one wing anyway)

 

[barryswanson]

Lol!!

I was thinking something like this,

dlpasco: i have the Jp-2c and it's great amp.

Randall: thanks for trusting me with your tone.

dlpasco: do you think you'll ever make a simulclass version?

Randall: I already have, it's called a Mark V

dlpasco: yeah but a proper one with the exact circuit and correct coupling cap for the EQ

Randall: it's called Mark IV mode, that cap is the only difference.

dlpasco: well **** me in the *** and call me Susan!!

 

[dlpasco]

Lol!!

I was thinking something like this,

dlpasco: i have the Jp-2c and it's great amp.

Randall: thanks for trusting me with your tone.

dlpasco: do you think you'll ever make a simulclass version?

Randall: I already have, it's called a Mark V

dlpasco: yeah but a proper one with the exact circuit and correct coupling cap for the EQ

Randall: it's called Mark IV mode, that cap is the only difference.

dlpasco: well f%&# me in the *** and call me Susan!!

Lol

 

[OryCheyne]

Oh Barry!

 

[MrSmitty]

Lol!!

I was thinking something like this,

dlpasco: i have the Jp-2c and it's great amp.

Randall: thanks for trusting me with your tone.

dlpasco: do you think you'll ever make a simulclass version?

Randall: I already have, it's called a Mark V

dlpasco: yeah but a proper one with the exact circuit and correct coupling cap for the EQ

Randall: it's called Mark IV mode, that cap is the only difference.

dlpasco: well f%&# me in the *** and call me Susan!!

HA HA HA !!!

 

[IronSean]

Lol!!

I was thinking something like this,

dlpasco: i have the Jp-2c and it's great amp.

Randall: thanks for trusting me with your tone.

dlpasco: do you think you'll ever make a simulclass version?

Randall: I already have, it's called a Mark V

dlpasco: yeah but a proper one with the exact circuit and correct coupling cap for the EQ

Randall: it's called Mark IV mode, that cap is the only difference.

dlpasco: well f%&# me in the *** and call me Susan!!

Hahaha, perfectly summed up from my digging through the schematics. The pull deep is engaged on the Mark IV mode as well just for completion sake.

But all those souls complaining about their Mark IIC+ mode not being the Mark IIC+ mode they wanted...

 

[Nicklotsaguitars]

Man I wanted that to be wrong. I just got in, fired up and proved it right.
I switched the EQ off, thinking that both channels wouldn't sound the same. So ruling out the cap being the only difference.
Well aside from a smidge more bass and gain, maybe a shade of presence. There's no **** difference between 2 and 4 modes.


Thank you. You just opened my amp up a bit more to me

 

[barryswanson]

Hahaha, perfectly summed up from my digging through the schematics. The pull deep is engaged on the Mark IV mode as well just for completion sake.

But all those souls complaining about their Mark IIC+ mode not being the Mark IIC+ mode they wanted...

Isn't pull deep the difference between Mark IV mode and Extreme mode? It's pulled in Extreme mode I think form memory, well what i think I read in the manual.

 

[Bullen]

No, the difference in Extreme mode has to do with the negative feedback loop. Same as the presence shift in the Mark IV and pretty much the same as what you get in the modern mode on the recto.

So are we saying that the deep function is in the V? I though that was ruled out years ago on this forum. Must be a tamer version if that is the case. The V has nowhere near the sub lows that pull deep adds to my Mark III. Even the IV has more and deeper lows than the V.

 

[Dreamtheaterrules]

Did the loop test last night. I have a question for all of you who are trying it. Where are you setting the master when you try it?

Here is why I ask. I have read for several years, that with the loop engaged, you need the channel volumes up round noon to sound their best. That means, my master is running around 10:30 or so (that's as loud as I can get away with when the wife is home). Just turning off the loop is a big volume boost. I said this before... yeah, sounds "better" because it's way louder. But I know there are actually additional gain stages involved here, vs. the testing last week of the solo control. So when disengaging the loop, you then only control volumes with each channel volume control, so they have to be turned down or it's way loud. So I turn all three down and relatively matched, to about the volume I had before. I also have the loop volume on the back set at noon.

Just flipping the loop on and off with wherever you had the knobs set is, again (IMHO) not a fair comparison because of volume differences. So, rather than the channels around noon, master at 10:30 or so approach, I figured that to be fair I have to equal out the volumes with the loop on and off. To do this, I left the channel volumes where they were without the loop on so now roughly C1 = 11:00, C2 =10:00, C3 = 9:30 or so). Then I flipped the loop on and off a few times and adjusted the master volume when on, to match the volume levels very closely to when off.

All that for reference. Now to the results. At first I was using the JP12. Almost no difference at all in tone. Again, nothing plugged into loop or in front, guitar straight in. "Where is this tone suck from the loop I keep hearing about?" Ok, I'll get a more transparent set of pickups and try it. PRS NF3 plugged in. ON/OFF/ON/OFF repeat, repeat, repeat...

Not to be controversial or whatever. Not to be "non-critical." When the levels are carefully matched, there is almost no difference in actual tones. Certainly no "tone suck" where I sense a loss of transparency. In fact, the differences were so slight, that I basically decided I'll test it one more night ONLY because I've heard "tone suck" so many times. If I feel after the next test like I did after last night, the loop will go back on and stay on. I'll then retain the function of the master, the solo and have a usable loop. If sitting right in front of the speakers with critical ears detects almost no difference at all, then it's not worth giving up 3 functions on the amp for a difference nobody would ever notice from 20 feet away or with ANY other source of sound present. It was that slight.

So again, have any of you who felt it sounded considerably better, and have sworn off your loops ever balanced the volumes to see how much difference there really is? If so, maybe I just have a better tube driving my loop... But I'm telling you there is less difference in tone when engaging the loop, than there is moving ANY knob on any channel by even a slight amount.

Thoughts?

 

[Nicklotsaguitars]

...maybe I just have a better tube driving my loop...
Thoughts?

That is one variable I hadn't considered and probably the most likely.
Found a couple of Mazda's I want to try out. They could be great they could be junk. If they're junk it'll just prove the valve quality issue acting on the loop