What's wrong with having differing opinions? Not everyone is going to love it. I haven't played one yet so I have no opinion. But it seems, as with all new gear, some guys fall in love with the "notion" of the gear before they even play it. No matter what, it's going to be the greatest. Alot of people don't work that way. Someone doesn't agree with your opinion of an amp? So what? Don't take it personally. It's just gear.
Kind of surprised at the negatives....
- Thread starter binnerscot
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
danyeo1 said:JAZZGEAR said:
Not to be a jerk, but if you think the Mark IV lead channel sounds better than anything on the Mark V lead channel, then how can the V be the quintessential Mark series tone?
IMHO, to hear THE Mark series tone you need to experience a IIC+ or a Coliseum. In a band setting, that midrange just cuts through, so clear and tight. All the Mark V has done is make me miss my IIC+'s even more.
Uh? Duh? My point is the amp as a whole, not a single channel. As a whole, the Mark V is the better amp. But IMHO, the best lead tone of the two amps belongs to the IV (ch 3).
danyeo1
Well-known member
JAZZGEAR said:danyeo1 said:JAZZGEAR said:
Not to be a jerk, but if you think the Mark IV lead channel sounds better than anything on the Mark V lead channel, then how can the V be the quintessential Mark series tone?
IMHO, to hear THE Mark series tone you need to experience a IIC+ or a Coliseum. In a band setting, that midrange just cuts through, so clear and tight. All the Mark V has done is make me miss my IIC+'s even more.
Uh? Duh? My point is the amp as a whole, not a single channel. As a whole, the Mark V is the better amp. But IMHO, the best lead tone of the two amps belongs to the IV (ch 3).
Ok, but you said before that the mark V is quintessential Mark series tone, then you said it's has it's own tone, then it's a better overall amp. Those are 3 different points.
But i agree with you about the IV's lead channel.
Yes, but to be clear in what I mean Mark Tone...is that if you are familiar with the Mark Sound, it is clearly recognizable when you hear it (without seeing the amp, close your eyes and listen...it sounds like a great Mark whatever. My only observation of issue is that since I do have both the IV and V, when playing them both side by side, is that the IV has a better lead tone. Clearly, this observation can't be made in isolation of either amp (or in a vaccum). In a band context (or recording), anyone would be hard pressed to say Oh that's a Mark V, or Oh that's a Mark IV.
In the end, what's important is that the Mark V is a huge improvement over the whole Mark IV. In trying to serve all audiences, Mesa crammed alot into each channel....and for my ears, they excelled in differentiating a clear improvement in channels 1 & 2.
In the end, what's important is that the Mark V is a huge improvement over the whole Mark IV. In trying to serve all audiences, Mesa crammed alot into each channel....and for my ears, they excelled in differentiating a clear improvement in channels 1 & 2.
Nermel
Well-known member
Man, I just posted the link to tell people that Mesa posted a MK V manual...not it's turned in to an all-out sh!t fest.
No it doesn't sound exactly to a T like a MK II C+ in that mode...and yes the MK IV lead mode kicks *** over the MK V's...
AND YES...M/B has marketed their amp based on a subjective subject like tone, saying it represents the prev MK amps...and yes I feel it delivers...and danyeo1 doesn't...well that's great...but to argue back and forth vehemently like a bunch of Fourth graders over who's the best baseball player is FREAKING ridiculous.
Expecting perfection and this MK V amp to be the Messiah of all amps and to match your expectation of what it should sound like (subjective) is unreasonable.
MK V is great...if you don't like it stop bitching and sell it and stop whining about how Mesa betrayed your virgin ears with their false sounds and marketing trickery
EDIT: Sorry I got this mixed up with my thread where the same FREAKING discussion is going on
No it doesn't sound exactly to a T like a MK II C+ in that mode...and yes the MK IV lead mode kicks *** over the MK V's...
AND YES...M/B has marketed their amp based on a subjective subject like tone, saying it represents the prev MK amps...and yes I feel it delivers...and danyeo1 doesn't...well that's great...but to argue back and forth vehemently like a bunch of Fourth graders over who's the best baseball player is FREAKING ridiculous.
Expecting perfection and this MK V amp to be the Messiah of all amps and to match your expectation of what it should sound like (subjective) is unreasonable.
MK V is great...if you don't like it stop bitching and sell it and stop whining about how Mesa betrayed your virgin ears with their false sounds and marketing trickery
EDIT: Sorry I got this mixed up with my thread where the same FREAKING discussion is going on
danyeo1
Well-known member
Nermel said:
On paper the Mark V is a better amp. But most people buy these amps for their lead tone, and that's what made them what they are. If the Mark V is a better amp, but have a lead channel that's not as good as the previous model, then i simply can't say it's a better amp.
Everyone keeps saying that this amp has it's own sound and don't expect IV and IIC+ tones from it? I find that ridiculous since Mesa Boogie is saying something different. It's marketed as the mother of all Mark amps and it didn't deliver IMHO? And after playing these amps for 12 years I'm not angry and trashing it for the sake of it, I'm bummed out. I WANTED it to be everything Mesa claimed. I'm just not having an easy time since i waited so long for the damm thing, and yes i sold it already.
Fixxer6671
Well-known member
binnerscot said:
I just laughed outloud. Classic man! :lol:
Fixxer6671
Well-known member
danyeo1 said:Nermel said:
On paper the Mark V is a better amp. But most people buy these amps for their lead tone, and that's what made them what they are. If the Mark V is a better amp, but have a lead channel that's not as good as the previous model, then i simply can't say it's a better amp.
Everyone keeps saying that this amp has it's own sound and don't expect IV and IIC+ tones from it? I find that ridiculous since Mesa Boogie is saying something different. It's marketed as the mother of all Mark amps and it didn't deliver IMHO? And after playing these amps for 12 years I'm not angry and trashing it for the sake of it, I'm bummed out. I WANTED it to be everything Mesa claimed. I'm just not having an easy time since i waited so long for the damm thing, and yes i sold it already.
the manual states it was modeled after the best IIC+ they had access too (former employee who owned several). I'm not bagging on you, but if your in love with your IIC+ for thenumber of past years with it, i doubt anything would impress you. You had years to dial it in and made a sell decision after a few days / weeks with it.
I played it, and it sounds pretty IIC to me.
DudewithFr0
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Messages
- 116
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh well the mark V is a **** impressive amp for all thats in it. Every time i turn it on it inspires the hell outta me.
:mrgreen:
:mrgreen:
phyrexia
Well-known member
Jesus,
PRESET AND THE GEQ USE THE SAME COMPONENTS, DO THE SAME THING, AND CAN GET THE EXACT SAME SOUND. Preset is easier to dial.
there. i quit the internet till i'm back from vacation.
PRESET AND THE GEQ USE THE SAME COMPONENTS, DO THE SAME THING, AND CAN GET THE EXACT SAME SOUND. Preset is easier to dial.
there. i quit the internet till i'm back from vacation.
danyeo1
Well-known member
Fixxer6671 said:danyeo1 said:Nermel said:
On paper the Mark V is a better amp. But most people buy these amps for their lead tone, and that's what made them what they are. If the Mark V is a better amp, but have a lead channel that's not as good as the previous model, then i simply can't say it's a better amp.
Everyone keeps saying that this amp has it's own sound and don't expect IV and IIC+ tones from it? I find that ridiculous since Mesa Boogie is saying something different. It's marketed as the mother of all Mark amps and it didn't deliver IMHO? And after playing these amps for 12 years I'm not angry and trashing it for the sake of it, I'm bummed out. I WANTED it to be everything Mesa claimed. I'm just not having an easy time since i waited so long for the damm thing, and yes i sold it already.
the manual states it was modeled after the best IIC+ they had access too (former employee who owned several). I'm not bagging on you, but if your in love with your IIC+ for thenumber of past years with it, i doubt anything would impress you. You had years to dial it in and made a sell decision after a few days / weeks with it.
I played it, and it sounds pretty IIC to me.
THIS impresses me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG5iODYp2fU
...NO, MY DICK IS THE BIGGEST!!!
in all seriousness though, everyone expected/wanted different things from this amp. the c+ mode in the V is supposed to be the exact same preamp circuit, but instead of having several extra potentiometers and push/pull thingies (very technical, i know) like the C+, mesa put fixed resistances in the circuit based on what they thought most people would like. so if you can't dial the V in exactly as you wanted, keep in mind the different modes are just "slices" of the particular amps. While it's technically correct to say "it's the exact same preamp as the IIC+", that statement doesn't fully hold water. in addition, how many people have replaced the stock tubes in it with whatever you used with your old mark amps (to make it more of a fair comparison)?
also, tone is subjective. why are guys hating on each other for subjective differences?
in summary, my dick is still the biggest.
in all seriousness though, everyone expected/wanted different things from this amp. the c+ mode in the V is supposed to be the exact same preamp circuit, but instead of having several extra potentiometers and push/pull thingies (very technical, i know) like the C+, mesa put fixed resistances in the circuit based on what they thought most people would like. so if you can't dial the V in exactly as you wanted, keep in mind the different modes are just "slices" of the particular amps. While it's technically correct to say "it's the exact same preamp as the IIC+", that statement doesn't fully hold water. in addition, how many people have replaced the stock tubes in it with whatever you used with your old mark amps (to make it more of a fair comparison)?
also, tone is subjective. why are guys hating on each other for subjective differences?
in summary, my dick is still the biggest.
Hey guy's. I am new to Mesa amps and to this forum. Any and all help is greatly apprecieated. I just got a Mark V combo. I really like how incredibly versitile it is. I have had none of the channel popping I have read about on this forum, at least not if all are set to the same output. This amp sings and shout's, purr's and screams. I LIKE IT. But... ... it's now in the shop. It quit on me. After switching from CH3 to CH2 it stopped. No sound. All three channel select lamps are on and it wouldn't switch at all, no sound , and that awefull electronic's burning smell. Unpluging the foot switch makes no difference and for the hell of it I tried a known good set of str447's. I really like this amp and hope it's just something stupid, but is this something I should worry about with mesa amps. I thought they were built better than most assembly line amps. I am a little scared of another failure. Hopefully it's a one off, strange malfunction. Also what speaker suggestions do you guys have for replacing the combo speaker. I like it heavy and smooth. Not bright not dark. TIGHT. I was thinking of a EV 12L or BlackLabel12L. (I don't play big enough shows for an extension cab) Thanks guys, please tell me I can trust the Boogie.
... it's now in the shop. It quit on me. After switching from CH3 to CH2 it stopped. No sound. All three channel select lamps are on and it wouldn't switch at all, no sound , and that awefull electronic's burning smell. Unpluging the foot switch makes no difference and for the hell of it I tried a known good set of str447's. I really like this amp and hope it's just something stupid, but is this something I should worry about with mesa amps. I thought they were built better than most assembly line amps. I am a little scared of another failure. Hopefully it's a one off, strange malfunction. Also what speaker suggestions do you guys have for replacing the combo speaker. I like it heavy and smooth. Not bright not dark. TIGHT. I was thinking of a EV 12L or BlackLabel12L. (I don't play big enough shows for an extension cab) Thanks guys, please tell me I can trust the Boogie.
Silverwulf
Well-known member
gplex said:
I've had 65+ Mesa amps spanning about 12 years (I think, it's been a while), and never had a single problem with any of them, despite the best efforts of my bandmates (tossing them around in cars, spilling Jager on top of them, etc).
I've had 65+ Mesa amps spanning about 12 years (I think, it's been a while), and never had a single problem with any of them, despite the best efforts of my bandmates (tossing them around in cars, spilling Jager on top of them, etc).
Yea thats pretty much what thought I would get as a reply. Hopfully they will fix it fast and it won't crap out again. THANK YOU FOR THE MORAL SUPPORT. Nobody really can like an amp they don't trust.
Yea thats pretty much what thought I would get as a reply. Hopfully they will fix it fast and it won't crap out again. THANK YOU FOR THE MORAL SUPPORT. Nobody really can like an amp they don't trust.
lesterpaul
Well-known member
:lol: :lol: enjoy vacation, brother..hope you get to light up the sky mK V stylephyrexia said:
6L6C
Well-known member
Would like to get a V in the future (maybe order one in November or so) currently have an IV as my main amp. The V is certainly a versatile beast!
The two things I get the biggest kick out of is the “no midi” complaint. Hello, the chassis is only so big, also start adding that type of stuff you are probably going to start adding noise to the amp. The other thing I get a kick out of is “it does not sound exactly like a C +” With some tolerances on components being as much as 20% + or - , don’t think you are going to find 2 C+’s that sound identical let alone the inconsistency of tubes.
However if you are talking the “feel” of a C+ that’s a different subject.
I do know 2 people who tried the V and slammed it, but for whatever reason went back to it weeks later played with it some more and now both have ordered one.
The two things I get the biggest kick out of is the “no midi” complaint. Hello, the chassis is only so big, also start adding that type of stuff you are probably going to start adding noise to the amp. The other thing I get a kick out of is “it does not sound exactly like a C +” With some tolerances on components being as much as 20% + or - , don’t think you are going to find 2 C+’s that sound identical let alone the inconsistency of tubes.
However if you are talking the “feel” of a C+ that’s a different subject.
I do know 2 people who tried the V and slammed it, but for whatever reason went back to it weeks later played with it some more and now both have ordered one.
Masterof1angel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2009
- Messages
- 137
- Reaction score
- 0
I can add two to the original post that I found when playing it (mine just came yesterday and I deposited on it so I have to buy it but hopefully I'll end up liking it.)
1. It's too tight/clinical
(bass cap on original iic+ was made smaller and the transformer is "higher quality" making it stiffer. although it sounds great, for me it wasn't inspiring. I ended up fighting it to play what was I wanted. I had a mark IV next to it and when I plugged that in, virtuoso time then when you go back it's like playing with 12 gauge strings IMHO, sometimes having more audiophile parts sometimes makes less vibe)
2. Mid scoop doesn't scoop as much.
(the mark IV really got the wind sucking away from your ear sound, while the V had the mids that ripped through the mix, a la iic+ no matter how low you set it.)
3. Naming the 2nd mode "mark iv"
(IMHO it sounded much more like the iic+ in every setting than a mark IV. Actually, the different settings to me sounded like tweaks on the iic+ mode.)
I didn't write a review yet because I was waiting to get a real iic+ and do them side by side as well but basically, it sounded great - everything was fantastic, but soo stiff. I found it hard to play and thus find inspiration. I think this is mostly due to the transformer. I'll wait to get it tomorrow but From what I can tell, it doesn't sound exactly like a iic+ and definitely not like a mark iv. It'd be nice if someone who has a real iic+ could let us know if there is a difference in feel.
1. It's too tight/clinical
(bass cap on original iic+ was made smaller and the transformer is "higher quality" making it stiffer. although it sounds great, for me it wasn't inspiring. I ended up fighting it to play what was I wanted. I had a mark IV next to it and when I plugged that in, virtuoso time then when you go back it's like playing with 12 gauge strings IMHO, sometimes having more audiophile parts sometimes makes less vibe)
2. Mid scoop doesn't scoop as much.
(the mark IV really got the wind sucking away from your ear sound, while the V had the mids that ripped through the mix, a la iic+ no matter how low you set it.)
3. Naming the 2nd mode "mark iv"
(IMHO it sounded much more like the iic+ in every setting than a mark IV. Actually, the different settings to me sounded like tweaks on the iic+ mode.)
I didn't write a review yet because I was waiting to get a real iic+ and do them side by side as well but basically, it sounded great - everything was fantastic, but soo stiff. I found it hard to play and thus find inspiration. I think this is mostly due to the transformer. I'll wait to get it tomorrow but From what I can tell, it doesn't sound exactly like a iic+ and definitely not like a mark iv. It'd be nice if someone who has a real iic+ could let us know if there is a difference in feel.
Fixxer6671
Well-known member
Taken from another post:
NOTE FROM THE AUTHOR: Douglas West A.K.A Tone Boy
Randy wanted me to give this bit of info to you personally, even though it felt a bit funny to write “I” as opposed to “we”, so that my personal experience could validate the source.
From 1982-1991 I was the person who tested every finished amplifier here at MESA - along with my other duties in R&D, Customer Service and writing Owner’s Manuals. I worked side by side with Randy (playing guitar and asking for more Tone and features) on the revision of the MARK II B that would eventually become the MARK II C+… as well as every amp since. During that time is when I was affectionately given the nickname Tone Boy for my relentless pursuit of a certain attack/morphing-harmonic characteristic I was hearing in my head. I was driving Randy crazy then - and I must take the time here and now to give him my deepest thanks and utmost respect for listening to my ranting and raving. He didn’t even play guitar - but he heard me - and had the belief in this quality I described just as deeply as I did. And even better - he found a way to deliver it! From myself, and all of us guitarists who have made this sound our own…Thank You!
Anyway, as to how this affects you as a MARK V owner, there is some inside info you need to know to get the most out of Channel 3. This especially applies to you MARK II C+ and MARK IV owners who will be looking for your old amps sound in this Channel and probably even be comparing the MARK V side by side to your II C+ or IV.
Back when I was testing II C+’s every day in the burn-in room, I always thought the non-graphic amps had a certain attack and purity to the sound that the amps that had Graphic EQ on them just didn’t have. There was an urgency and bold punch to the sound…they seemed tighter and more cohesive. Now granted, we made far more amps with the on-board EQ than without…probably 70% had the EQ, but not many people had the opportunity to compare day-in and day-out as I did. The EQ model had the shaping advantage…no doubt about it, and certainly all the sounds that II C+ are famous for were created with the EQ being an integral part of that sound, but when it came to the straight sound – no EQ – the non-graph model always got to me with it’s speed and authority.
So it was that I came to be the obsessive/compulsive owner of no less than 8 of the II C+ Simul-Class, Reverb (non-graphic) heads. I hand picked these as being the best sounding amps - for me - out of the thousands of II C+ we made. Out of these eight amps I immediately found my favorite - which I dubbed “His Highness the C-ness” and which I used as a reference model to have our Chief Tech and Archival Guru Michael Bendinelli, copy exactly on the other 7 amps. Everything was measured and scrutinized (pot values, resistors, caps, transformers swapped, etc.) and duplicated, and in the end… all 8 sounded alike. Regardless, His Highness was my golden reference for MARK II C+ Tone and our R&D reference amp for many MARK Series amps to follow, including the MARK IV.
Over the next two decades I found the need to part with some of these magic amps for studio gear and such and always I gave my close friends first crack at these – but His Highness remains to this day a mysterious, sweet-singing, fire-breathing beast of an amp.
So naturally when it came time to do the Channel 3 sounds of the MARK V, we went to the Oracle – His Highness The C-ness - and asked permission to pay our respects to His Golden Tone…He granted, and the work began.
In our endless comparisons of many original II C+’s - both EQ and non-EQ samples - alongside this golden reference, we discovered that I wasn’t just Tone-dreaming. There was actually a difference between the EQ model and those non-EQ models. It all came down to a coupling capacitor at the end of the EQ circuit that feeds the driver. In the EQ model, it was a great big cap that let a lot of sub-low pass, slowing down the sound and making it fatter. In my amp - a non-EQ version - this cap was smaller and didn’t let as much sub-low through - which speeds up the sound and makes everything tighter and more urgent. There it was, a simple part…but it made all the difference in the time domain.
Yet there were so many more of these slower, fatter sounding EQ versions out in the world… that many more people were used to
THE CHANNELS: (Continued)
hearing as their reference. It would not do well to set the MARK V permanently to this faster, tighter way. Too many players would have a tough time adjusting and when they compared the two amps side by side, the V would sound faster and tighter yes, but also stripped of sub-low and therefore maybe not as fat in comparison to their trusty II C+ Graphic model or MARK IV - which also had the bigger coupling cap. What to do at the crossroads? What we do is take more time… and go down both roads.
So in the MARK V we gave you both fast and fat.
The II C+ Mode in Channel 3 uses this smaller coupling cap to deliver the tightest attack and fastest response in the time domain. In addition you get the bonus of having this Mode work incredibly well with the EQ, because the lack of sub-low at the end of the preamp means you can add more low frequencies with the EQ before the sound gets flubby. So all you II-C and MARK IV guys might like this characteristic even better. You can get high gain sounds with the EQ even tighter than ever before!
The MK IV and EXTREME Modes utilize the bigger coupling cap to add sub-low and slow down the attack for a bigger, fuller slow-hand feel that is absolutely huge. You will find that you have to be a little more careful with the 80 and 240Hz Sliders when dialing in low end with the EQ because more low end happens earlier, but the sound is definitely bigger.
So if you want it tight, urgent feeling with the fastest attack and maximum focus, use the MK IIC+ Mode. If you want the fattest, warmest,
biggest sound and don’t need the super fast response, use the MK IV and EXTREME Modes.
Oh, and by the way…Mission Accomplished! The Oracle, His Highness The C-ness, now shares the Throne Of II-C Tone with the MARK V. Of course the MARK V rules in so many other sonic Kingdoms that it has it all over the II-C for all around diversity of sounds and incredible gig-ability.
NOTE: II-C+ and MARK IV OWNERS
If you do end up doing a side by side with a II-C+ for the LEAD Mode, you must use the II-C+ and MARK V set like this for a fair comparison:
SET II-C+ As Follows:
VOLUME (Far Left) control Pulled (Bright On) and set to Approx. 7 ¾. (This stage in the MARK V is set to a sweet spot we found from measuring many amps and control deleted).
LEAD DRIVE Control Pulled and set to desired setting
All Tone Controls set by ear as close as possible (we measure each pot and set both exactly with an ohm meter).
PRESENCE set to desired setting. (0 or 10 is the most fair for comparisons sake and removes any pot variance).
GRAPHIC EQ Off (Bypassed)
SET MARK V As Follows:
GAIN control set by ear and relative “clock face” setting to II-C LEAD DRIVE.
Tone Controls set by ear and relative “clock face” setting as II-C Tone Controls. (Remember that II-C BASS control is in the 2nd position
- MID is 3rd on II-C whereas MARK V is TREBLE, MID, BASS).
Channel 3 BRIGHT switch in the BRIGHT (switch down) position.
Rear Panel Channel 3 TRIODE / PENTODE switch set to TRIODE (switch down).
Rear Panel EFX LOOP switch set to ACTIVE (switch up).
CAUTION: The EXTREME Mode is LOUD in both these amplifiers…Use Care and Zero out the OUTPUT Level Controls before beginning this comparison
SET MARK IV As Follows:
Channel 3 (LEAD)
LEAD GAIN (FAR LEFT) Pulled and set to 7 ¾
LEAD DRIVE Pulled and set as desired
Channel 3 (LEAD) Tone Controls set as desired.
Pull All Controls (unless comparing EXTREME - then leave LEAD PRESENCE Pushed In = EXTREME)
PRESENCE set as desired (0 or 10 is most fair and removes pot variance)
Rear Panel TRIODE / PENTODE switch set to PENTODE
Set MARK V As Follows:
Channel 3 set to MK IV or EXTREME Mode (Make sure set the same as MARK IV)
GAIN set to match relative “clock face” setting of numeric LEAD DRIVE setting on MARK IV.
Channel 3 Tone Controls set to match relative “clock face” settings on Mark IV.
Channel 3 BRIGHT / NORMAL switch set to BRIGHT (switch down).
Channel 3 PRESENCE set to relative setting on MARK IV.
Rear Panel TRIODE / PENTODE switch set to PENTODE (switch up).
Rear Panel EFX LOOP switch set to ACTIVE (switch up).
You cannot hear the MK II C+ Mode in the MARK V’s response in an older MARK Series model because the coupling cap at the end of the EQ in those amps is simply too big and is adding too much slow-lows to be a fair comparison.
NOTE: These comparisons are as close as possible regarding the setting and configuration of the circuits. When doing these types of tests it is important to take into account that the power tubes, preamp tubes, transformers and even the caps and resistors may be different depending on availability at the time of construction
NOTE FROM THE AUTHOR: Douglas West A.K.A Tone Boy
Randy wanted me to give this bit of info to you personally, even though it felt a bit funny to write “I” as opposed to “we”, so that my personal experience could validate the source.
From 1982-1991 I was the person who tested every finished amplifier here at MESA - along with my other duties in R&D, Customer Service and writing Owner’s Manuals. I worked side by side with Randy (playing guitar and asking for more Tone and features) on the revision of the MARK II B that would eventually become the MARK II C+… as well as every amp since. During that time is when I was affectionately given the nickname Tone Boy for my relentless pursuit of a certain attack/morphing-harmonic characteristic I was hearing in my head. I was driving Randy crazy then - and I must take the time here and now to give him my deepest thanks and utmost respect for listening to my ranting and raving. He didn’t even play guitar - but he heard me - and had the belief in this quality I described just as deeply as I did. And even better - he found a way to deliver it! From myself, and all of us guitarists who have made this sound our own…Thank You!
Anyway, as to how this affects you as a MARK V owner, there is some inside info you need to know to get the most out of Channel 3. This especially applies to you MARK II C+ and MARK IV owners who will be looking for your old amps sound in this Channel and probably even be comparing the MARK V side by side to your II C+ or IV.
Back when I was testing II C+’s every day in the burn-in room, I always thought the non-graphic amps had a certain attack and purity to the sound that the amps that had Graphic EQ on them just didn’t have. There was an urgency and bold punch to the sound…they seemed tighter and more cohesive. Now granted, we made far more amps with the on-board EQ than without…probably 70% had the EQ, but not many people had the opportunity to compare day-in and day-out as I did. The EQ model had the shaping advantage…no doubt about it, and certainly all the sounds that II C+ are famous for were created with the EQ being an integral part of that sound, but when it came to the straight sound – no EQ – the non-graph model always got to me with it’s speed and authority.
So it was that I came to be the obsessive/compulsive owner of no less than 8 of the II C+ Simul-Class, Reverb (non-graphic) heads. I hand picked these as being the best sounding amps - for me - out of the thousands of II C+ we made. Out of these eight amps I immediately found my favorite - which I dubbed “His Highness the C-ness” and which I used as a reference model to have our Chief Tech and Archival Guru Michael Bendinelli, copy exactly on the other 7 amps. Everything was measured and scrutinized (pot values, resistors, caps, transformers swapped, etc.) and duplicated, and in the end… all 8 sounded alike. Regardless, His Highness was my golden reference for MARK II C+ Tone and our R&D reference amp for many MARK Series amps to follow, including the MARK IV.
Over the next two decades I found the need to part with some of these magic amps for studio gear and such and always I gave my close friends first crack at these – but His Highness remains to this day a mysterious, sweet-singing, fire-breathing beast of an amp.
So naturally when it came time to do the Channel 3 sounds of the MARK V, we went to the Oracle – His Highness The C-ness - and asked permission to pay our respects to His Golden Tone…He granted, and the work began.
In our endless comparisons of many original II C+’s - both EQ and non-EQ samples - alongside this golden reference, we discovered that I wasn’t just Tone-dreaming. There was actually a difference between the EQ model and those non-EQ models. It all came down to a coupling capacitor at the end of the EQ circuit that feeds the driver. In the EQ model, it was a great big cap that let a lot of sub-low pass, slowing down the sound and making it fatter. In my amp - a non-EQ version - this cap was smaller and didn’t let as much sub-low through - which speeds up the sound and makes everything tighter and more urgent. There it was, a simple part…but it made all the difference in the time domain.
Yet there were so many more of these slower, fatter sounding EQ versions out in the world… that many more people were used to
THE CHANNELS: (Continued)
hearing as their reference. It would not do well to set the MARK V permanently to this faster, tighter way. Too many players would have a tough time adjusting and when they compared the two amps side by side, the V would sound faster and tighter yes, but also stripped of sub-low and therefore maybe not as fat in comparison to their trusty II C+ Graphic model or MARK IV - which also had the bigger coupling cap. What to do at the crossroads? What we do is take more time… and go down both roads.
So in the MARK V we gave you both fast and fat.
The II C+ Mode in Channel 3 uses this smaller coupling cap to deliver the tightest attack and fastest response in the time domain. In addition you get the bonus of having this Mode work incredibly well with the EQ, because the lack of sub-low at the end of the preamp means you can add more low frequencies with the EQ before the sound gets flubby. So all you II-C and MARK IV guys might like this characteristic even better. You can get high gain sounds with the EQ even tighter than ever before!
The MK IV and EXTREME Modes utilize the bigger coupling cap to add sub-low and slow down the attack for a bigger, fuller slow-hand feel that is absolutely huge. You will find that you have to be a little more careful with the 80 and 240Hz Sliders when dialing in low end with the EQ because more low end happens earlier, but the sound is definitely bigger.
So if you want it tight, urgent feeling with the fastest attack and maximum focus, use the MK IIC+ Mode. If you want the fattest, warmest,
biggest sound and don’t need the super fast response, use the MK IV and EXTREME Modes.
Oh, and by the way…Mission Accomplished! The Oracle, His Highness The C-ness, now shares the Throne Of II-C Tone with the MARK V. Of course the MARK V rules in so many other sonic Kingdoms that it has it all over the II-C for all around diversity of sounds and incredible gig-ability.
NOTE: II-C+ and MARK IV OWNERS
If you do end up doing a side by side with a II-C+ for the LEAD Mode, you must use the II-C+ and MARK V set like this for a fair comparison:
SET II-C+ As Follows:
VOLUME (Far Left) control Pulled (Bright On) and set to Approx. 7 ¾. (This stage in the MARK V is set to a sweet spot we found from measuring many amps and control deleted).
LEAD DRIVE Control Pulled and set to desired setting
All Tone Controls set by ear as close as possible (we measure each pot and set both exactly with an ohm meter).
PRESENCE set to desired setting. (0 or 10 is the most fair for comparisons sake and removes any pot variance).
GRAPHIC EQ Off (Bypassed)
SET MARK V As Follows:
GAIN control set by ear and relative “clock face” setting to II-C LEAD DRIVE.
Tone Controls set by ear and relative “clock face” setting as II-C Tone Controls. (Remember that II-C BASS control is in the 2nd position
- MID is 3rd on II-C whereas MARK V is TREBLE, MID, BASS).
Channel 3 BRIGHT switch in the BRIGHT (switch down) position.
Rear Panel Channel 3 TRIODE / PENTODE switch set to TRIODE (switch down).
Rear Panel EFX LOOP switch set to ACTIVE (switch up).
CAUTION: The EXTREME Mode is LOUD in both these amplifiers…Use Care and Zero out the OUTPUT Level Controls before beginning this comparison
SET MARK IV As Follows:
Channel 3 (LEAD)
LEAD GAIN (FAR LEFT) Pulled and set to 7 ¾
LEAD DRIVE Pulled and set as desired
Channel 3 (LEAD) Tone Controls set as desired.
Pull All Controls (unless comparing EXTREME - then leave LEAD PRESENCE Pushed In = EXTREME)
PRESENCE set as desired (0 or 10 is most fair and removes pot variance)
Rear Panel TRIODE / PENTODE switch set to PENTODE
Set MARK V As Follows:
Channel 3 set to MK IV or EXTREME Mode (Make sure set the same as MARK IV)
GAIN set to match relative “clock face” setting of numeric LEAD DRIVE setting on MARK IV.
Channel 3 Tone Controls set to match relative “clock face” settings on Mark IV.
Channel 3 BRIGHT / NORMAL switch set to BRIGHT (switch down).
Channel 3 PRESENCE set to relative setting on MARK IV.
Rear Panel TRIODE / PENTODE switch set to PENTODE (switch up).
Rear Panel EFX LOOP switch set to ACTIVE (switch up).
You cannot hear the MK II C+ Mode in the MARK V’s response in an older MARK Series model because the coupling cap at the end of the EQ in those amps is simply too big and is adding too much slow-lows to be a fair comparison.
NOTE: These comparisons are as close as possible regarding the setting and configuration of the circuits. When doing these types of tests it is important to take into account that the power tubes, preamp tubes, transformers and even the caps and resistors may be different depending on availability at the time of construction
