Channel 2

[screamingdaisy]

I got bored today and tried to figure out what channel 2 was nearest to on channel 3. I know a lot of people like to call 'crunch' mode somewhat Marshally, but I always thought it sounded like a Mark IV with the mids notched out to give it a stronger rhythm sound.

Anyway, turned the G-EQ off and left channel 2 set to the way I normally set it and started messing with channel 3 trying to make them sound identical. I wasn't able to do it, but I did get pretty close using channel 3 extreme. The two things I couldn't quite nail are the mids and bass. Channel 2 has a fatter/rounder bottom end that I couldn't replicate on channel 3 and even with the mids on zero channel 3 had more midrange than channel 2 did set up normally.

Anyway, here was the closest I could manage. Someone else may be able to get closer... my ears are pretty burnt out now.

 

[Scary]

It's funny, but more often than not, I find myself trying to get Channel 3 to sound more like 2! I agree that Crunch does cross over into Mark IV's lead territory, at least in the sense that you can get one sound that covers lead and rhythm well.

 

[screamingdaisy]

Same here. It used to piss me off that crunch sounded more like what I wanted channel 3 to sound like than channel 3 did. The result was that I kept dialling in very redundant sounds, so there was really no point in having two separate channels.

Anyway, I decided to go for a different approach. Instead of trying to dial in an identical sound without the EQ, I dialled in both channels identically and tried using the graphic EQ to make Mark IV mode sound more like Crunch mode.

The picture below isn't the closest I got, but I couldn't quite find that setting again although this is fairly close. I think that if I were to go back and forth between channel 3s knobs and the EQ sliders a couple of times I could get it nearly spot on, but my ears are really fried now. I also kind of suspect there's a mid notch in channel 2 that channel 3 or the EQ sliders can't quite replicate and that I'm dancing around it trying to dial in the mids when it's not totally possible.... but my opinion is now that Crunch mode is essentially a tweaked version of Mark IV dialled in for rhythm.

 

[rmcfee]

I must admit that Crunch is one of my least fave modes on this amp (the other being Extreme).
There is a mid sound in Crunch that i cannot get past. But maybe it needs to be louder. I have not used Crunch at stage volume.

 

[screamingdaisy]

I thought crunch really came to life with EL34s. Volume helps a lot too. Through this experimentation today I actually found I like crunch with the G-EQ bypassed. I had the G-EQ set up to a moderate V shape that was shared between channel 2 and 3, but without the G-EQ it's harder hitting and more aggressive. It kind of makes sense in light of todays experiment since I was basically stacking the G-EQ's V contour on top of the built in V contour. It made for a thicker sound at low volumes, but it did get a tad mushy when I turned things up.

I'm also starting to think crunch might have more in common with IIC+ mode than IV mode. The mids seemed to line up better, but my ears were so blasted by the time I noticed this that I didn't really care to experiment any more.

It would be nice to know if crunch was wired up in triode or pentode. I have my suspicions (triode), but I'd like to know for sure.

I'll update this later... but I would like if others would join in so I can get different ears and different points of view involved.

 

[eudaimonia02912]

I can get crunch to sound like a lower gain, less fat version of Mark IV mode. I'm surprised you think it has more bass--it seems to have less to my ears.

 

[screamingdaisy]

I can get crunch to sound like a lower gain, less fat version of Mark IV mode. I'm surprised you think it has more bass--it seems to have less to my ears.

Really? I agree with the lower gain but on mine it's always had a lot more bass. It really made dialling in channel 3 a pain in the *** when I first got it because channel 3 sounded thin next to channel 2 unless I went extreme on the G-EQ.

I wonder if Mesa's tweaked the channel over time?



What's your serial number out of curiosity? Mine's 300.

 

[Hendog]

I thought crunch really came to life with EL34s. Volume helps a lot too. Through this experimentation today I actually found I like crunch with the G-EQ bypassed. I had the G-EQ set up to a moderate V shape that was shared between channel 2 and 3, but without the G-EQ it's harder hitting and more aggressive. It kind of makes sense in light of todays experiment since I was basically stacking the G-EQ's V contour on top of the built in V contour. It made for a thicker sound at low volumes, but it did get a tad mushy when I turned things up.

I'm also starting to think crunch might have more in common with IIC+ mode than IV mode. The mids seemed to line up better, but my ears were so blasted by the time I noticed this that I didn't really care to experiment any more.

It would be nice to know if crunch was wired up in triode or pentode. I have my suspicions (triode), but I'd like to know for sure.

I'll update this later... but I would like if others would join in so I can get different ears and different points of view involved.

I was under the impresion that the whole amp was Pentode with the exception of the option for Triode on CH3 (unless in 10 watt of course).

 

[Metallicaseeker]

I got bored today and tried to figure out what channel 2 was nearest to on channel 3. I know a lot of people like to call 'crunch' mode somewhat Marshally, but I always thought it sounded like a Mark IV with the mids notched out to give it a stronger rhythm sound.

Anyway, turned the G-EQ off and left channel 2 set to the way I normally set it and started messing with channel 3 trying to make them sound identical. I wasn't able to do it, but I did get pretty close using channel 3 extreme. The two things I couldn't quite nail are the mids and bass. Channel 2 has a fatter/rounder bottom end that I couldn't replicate on channel 3 and even with the mids on zero channel 3 had more midrange than channel 2 did set up normally.

Anyway, here was the closest I could manage. Someone else may be able to get closer... my ears are pretty burnt out now.

Hey dude, can you see and answer this topic : http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=49471&p=355265#p355265

Thank you very much!

 

[eudaimonia02912]

I can get crunch to sound like a lower gain, less fat version of Mark IV mode. I'm surprised you think it has more bass--it seems to have less to my ears.

Really? I agree with the lower gain but on mine it's always had a lot more bass. It really made dialling in channel 3 a pain in the *** when I first got it because channel 3 sounded thin next to channel 2 unless I went extreme on the G-EQ.

I wonder if Mesa's tweaked the channel over time?



What's your serial number out of curiosity? Mine's 300.

Mine's 2544, IIRC.

 

[screamingdaisy]

I was under the impresion that the whole amp was Pentode with the exception of the option for Triode on CH3 (unless in 10 watt of course).

It could be... I'm totally guessing at this point. I've been away for a couple of days and intend on repeating the test tomorrow... it'll let me approach it with a fresh set of ears. Plus I'm learning a lot and dialling in some killer tones just by messing with things in non-standard ways trying to figure this whole thing out.

 

[phyrexia]

the mark v is pentode except for triode mode, 90w, third channel. all other 90w modes are pentode.

in the past i have not used crunch, but yesterday i tried it out and was pretty happy with the results. I have generally stuck with Edge or Mark 1 in ch2.

 

[mystidream]

the mark v is pentode except for triode mode, 90w, third channel. all other 90w modes are pentode.

in the past i have not used crunch, but yesterday i tried it out and was pretty happy with the results. I have generally stuck with Edge or Mark 1 in ch2.

Out of curiosity, would you mind sharing your settings for the edge mode?

 

[Anonymous]

Same here. It used to piss me off that crunch sounded more like what I wanted channel 3 to sound like than channel 3 did. The result was that I kept dialling in very redundant sounds, so there was really no point in having two separate channels.

Anyway, I decided to go for a different approach. Instead of trying to dial in an identical sound without the EQ, I dialled in both channels identically and tried using the graphic EQ to make Mark IV mode sound more like Crunch mode.

The picture below isn't the closest I got, but I couldn't quite find that setting again although this is fairly close. I think that if I were to go back and forth between channel 3s knobs and the EQ sliders a couple of times I could get it nearly spot on, but my ears are really fried now. I also kind of suspect there's a mid notch in channel 2 that channel 3 or the EQ sliders can't quite replicate and that I'm dancing around it trying to dial in the mids when it's not totally possible.... but my opinion is now that Crunch mode is essentially a tweaked version of Mark IV dialled in for rhythm.

those setting are great, i have been using crunch channel 2 eq off and mark iv channel 3 eq off ( mids on ch 3 around 12:00 or 1:00) with variac power and switch to normal in channel 3 with excellent results.

good luck