Mark V 90w vs. Mark V 35

[John_not_Pet]

I'm sure this subject is beat to death but I'm new here.

I'm currently playing a 40 watt amp, which is plenty loud in my context with master volume at noon and High and Low volumes at 9 & 10:00 respectively. But I'm selling that amp to get a Mark V series amp.

Considering 40 watts is more than enough for me right now, I'd assume that 35 would be enough but of course part of me wants to consider 90 watts, for the clean headroom and such. Plus the 90 watt has the option to lower the wattage. Is the lower watt settings detrimental to the overall tone? So tell me the Pros and Cons of both the 90 and the 35!

 

[jaslan]

I have the n90 W head. I play mostly in 45 W mode on all channels and, personally, can't tell a difference. The 90 W has the extra "Modes" but I rarely leave the "Clean" in Ch. 1, "Crunch" in Ch. 2 and "Mk IV" in Ch. 3. When I do switch to the other modes, it is just for something different and I always end up back in my favorite mode within 10 minutes or so. The foot switch on the 90 W is nice but the 35 W has built in Cab Clone. Playing live a lot might favor the 90 W for the foot switch and extra channel whereas recording in your home a lot might favor the 35 W for the Cab Clone. Hope that helps.

 

[John_not_Pet]

I have the n90 W head. I play mostly in 45 W mode on all channels and, personally, can't tell a difference. The 90 W has the extra "Modes" but I rarely leave the "Clean" in Ch. 1, "Crunch" in Ch. 2 and "Mk IV" in Ch. 3. When I do switch to the other modes, it is just for something different and I always end up back in my favorite mode within 10 minutes or so. The foot switch on the 90 W is nice but the 35 W has built in Cab Clone. Playing live a lot might favor the 90 W for the foot switch whereas recording in your home a lot might favor the 35 W for the Cab Clone. Hope that helps.

The 35 watt has a footswitch as well so I might as well just go with the 35! Thanks for the help!

 

[Thaymz]

I'm sure this subject is beat to death but I'm new here.

I'm currently playing a 40 watt amp, which is plenty loud in my context with master volume at noon and High and Low volumes at 9 & 10:00 respectively. But I'm selling that amp to get a Mark V series amp.

Considering 40 watts is more than enough for me right now, I'd assume that 35 would be enough but of course part of me wants to consider 90 watts, for the clean headroom and such. Plus the 90 watt has the option to lower the wattage. Is the lower watt settings detrimental to the overall tone? So tell me the Pros and Cons of both the 90 and the 35!

The output volume on the 90w is pretty powerful, so any of the watt settings can be either deafening, or bedroom level appropriate.

I am a home player have a 90w head and play mostly in 45 or 90w. The different watt settings bring down the volume to a bedroom level. They do change the character of the tone slightly but definitely wouldn't call it detrimental by any means. To me the 10w has a great harmonic overlay which you won't find in 45 / 90w. 45w is lower volume than 90w but also allows you to use some of the different rectification options in Channel 1 and 2 (using tube rather than diode). Adds a bit more bounce to the feel of the sound in its responsiveness.

 

[Pole]

I'm a V35 owner (and home player.) I'd say the only downside to the 35 is having to choose between Fat or Crunch mode on channel 1. This amp would probably be perfect for me if it had a 3rd channel only so I could set it up as Fat/Crunch/IV, but that's far from a deal breaker.

 

[John_not_Pet]

I'm a V35 owner (and home player.) I'd say the only downside to the 35 is having to choose between Fat or Crunch mode on channel 1. This amp would probably be perfect for me if it had a 3rd channel only so I could set it up as Fat/Crunch/IV, but that's far from a deal breaker.

How's the effects loop on the V35? That's also important to me, Ive heard alot of bad things about the loop in the V90

 

[John_not_Pet]

I'm sure this subject is beat to death but I'm new here.

I'm currently playing a 40 watt amp, which is plenty loud in my context with master volume at noon and High and Low volumes at 9 & 10:00 respectively. But I'm selling that amp to get a Mark V series amp.

Considering 40 watts is more than enough for me right now, I'd assume that 35 would be enough but of course part of me wants to consider 90 watts, for the clean headroom and such. Plus the 90 watt has the option to lower the wattage. Is the lower watt settings detrimental to the overall tone? So tell me the Pros and Cons of both the 90 and the 35!

The output volume on the 90w is pretty powerful, so any of the watt settings can be either deafening, or bedroom level appropriate.

I am a home player have a 90w head and play mostly in 45 or 90w. The different watt settings bring down the volume to a bedroom level. They do change the character of the tone slightly but definitely wouldn't call it detrimental by any means. To me the 10w has a great harmonic overlay which you won't find in 45 / 90w. 45w is lower volume than 90w but also allows you to use some of the different rectification options in Channel 1 and 2 (using tube rather than diode). Adds a bit more bounce to the feel of the sound in its responsiveness.

How true are the stories I hear about the effects loop overloading delay and reverb pedals?

 

[tfletcher02]

I'm a V35 owner (and home player.) I'd say the only downside to the 35 is having to choose between Fat or Crunch mode on channel 1. This amp would probably be perfect for me if it had a 3rd channel only so I could set it up as Fat/Crunch/IV, but that's far from a deal breaker.

How are the effects loop and "brittleness" in the 35 versus what some talk about in the V? Do Tube changes have relevance here?

I have thought about putting a flux five in front of a V:35 as a "3rd channel" ...but would really like a third channel and effects loop that work well!

 

[jaslan]

How true are the stories I hear about the effects loop overloading delay and reverb pedals?

When I first got my 90 W, the loop was squashing a Boss chorus pedal and a TC Viscous Vibe until I realized I needed to turn the send level down. Pedals with instrument level inputs shouldn't be a problem. You just need to adjust the send level.

 

[Thaymz]

I'm sure this subject is beat to death but I'm new here.

I'm currently playing a 40 watt amp, which is plenty loud in my context with master volume at noon and High and Low volumes at 9 & 10:00 respectively. But I'm selling that amp to get a Mark V series amp.

Considering 40 watts is more than enough for me right now, I'd assume that 35 would be enough but of course part of me wants to consider 90 watts, for the clean headroom and such. Plus the 90 watt has the option to lower the wattage. Is the lower watt settings detrimental to the overall tone? So tell me the Pros and Cons of both the 90 and the 35!

The output volume on the 90w is pretty powerful, so any of the watt settings can be either deafening, or bedroom level appropriate.

I am a home player have a 90w head and play mostly in 45 or 90w. The different watt settings bring down the volume to a bedroom level. They do change the character of the tone slightly but definitely wouldn't call it detrimental by any means. To me the 10w has a great harmonic overlay which you won't find in 45 / 90w. 45w is lower volume than 90w but also allows you to use some of the different rectification options in Channel 1 and 2 (using tube rather than diode). Adds a bit more bounce to the feel of the sound in its responsiveness.

How true are the stories I hear about the effects loop overloading delay and reverb pedals?

I haven't really noticed anything like this being an issue. That said, I use the Axe fx in 4CM so might be an issue with individual pedals only? The only thing I've noticed when engaging the FX loop is that you get a drop in volume which is expected and this also seems to reduce the amount of treble but I think this is just perceived that way due to the volume. You can adjust the send level on the loop to suit.

 

[IronSean]

First, 35 watts is more than loud enough I'm sure. You'll have two channels/sounds instead of three, and you lose a couple modes with it, but you can cover the majority of the sounds you'd want with it as long as you don't need clean and crunch to be one button away.

The only things I've heard "bad" about the loop on the V is that some people prefer the tone with the loop disabled. It's however a subtle different, and the difficulty in volume matching with just the Master versus the Master and Output means loop off often be louder when comparing and louder always sounds better.

And with the 12AT7 swap many people are finding the no longer even care to disable the loop.

If it's overloading a pedal, it's likely just because the pedal is meant to be instrument level in front of the amp, and the effects send level wasn't reduced to match it. My delay/chorus/etc pedals in the loop all function perfectly at the stock send level.

 

[jmusolino]

I have both a 90 combo and a 35 head. I'm using an additional Mesa 1x12 V30 ported cab on the 90 and 2 Mesa 1x12 C90 ported cabs with the 35. My usual modes on the 90 are Fat/Mark I/Extreme, with Fat/Extreme on the 35 if using it alone, but I'll mix those up when using both amps together. I keep the cleans on the 90 watt (or 35 watt) for clean headroom. The other channels are on 10 watts at home, and the middle or high wattage settings gigging. Again, just for headroom. Interestingly, I find the Extreme modes work really well with no GEQ to get a sort of Clapton Live Cream set of tones. Of course, they can do metal, but I'm more of a fusion/blues/non-metal player. I have 3 Eventide Factor pedals (to the 90 loop) and a couple of H9 Max pedals (to the 35 loop), and they play really nicely with each other. No problems at all, no discernible difference to my ears. I love both amps, and I can tell you the 35 is plenty loud. On both of mine, even gigging, the output volumes are set pretty low. I use a Radial Switchbone as an A/B/Y. Running both amps together, with 6L6s in the 90 and EL84s in the 35 is tonal heaven. The beauty of your dilemma is that, whatever you choose, you win!

 

[Pole]

How's the effects loop on the V35? That's also important to me, Ive heard alot of bad things about the loop in the V90

How are the effects loop and "brittleness" in the 35 versus what some talk about in the V? Do Tube changes have relevance here?

I have thought about putting a flux five in front of a V:35 as a "3rd channel" ...but would really like a third channel and effects loop that work well!

I haven't had any issues with the loop or any brittleness. The last couple of pages in the Saturation Mod thread talk about using an AT7 in V2 to add more girth and reduce any harshness with extreme presence/treble settings. I personally haven't experienced that, but most of my dials are set below noon, except for gain and treble, which are usually in the 1:30-2:30 range on ch2. That said, I am curious to hear the differences in person, especially after hearing the vids, I just haven't picked up a tube to try it out.

As for the loop, I've kept things very simple lately and just run an mxr 10 bands eq, HBE Psilocybe phaser, and Analogman Boss DD-3 delay. Zero issues.

 

[gag halfrunt]

If you never play a 90 side by side with a 35, I'm sure you'll be perfectly happy with the 35. I was planning on getting a 35, but my local pusher had both combos next to each other in the store, so I got to A/B them in real time.

The 35 sounds great, but the 90 was just...more. Just a tad better in every way. I cursed myself for doing the side by side because as soon as I was done, I knew I would forever be feeling the 35 was a compromise if I bought it. But the 35 is a great amp! It's a 95 where the 90 is a 100 - both are As in the gradebook, but the 90 is just a better A, if that makes sense.

 

[MkIII Renegade]

First, 35 watts is more than loud enough I'm sure. You'll have two channels/sounds instead of three, and you lose a couple modes with it, but you can cover the majority of the sounds you'd want with it as long as you don't need clean and crunch to be one button away.

The only things I've heard "bad" about the loop on the V is that some people prefer the tone with the loop disabled. It's however a subtle different, and the difficulty in volume matching with just the Master versus the Master and Output means loop off often be louder when comparing and louder always sounds better.

And with the 12AT7 swap many people are finding the no longer even care to disable the loop.

If it's overloading a pedal, it's likely just because the pedal is meant to be instrument level in front of the amp, and the effects send level wasn't reduced to match it. My delay/chorus/etc pedals in the loop all function perfectly at the stock send level.

Without a doubt, 35 Mesa watts are more than enough. 8) I almost never play at more than 15 watts with my MkIII or IV.

 

[doublescale1]

The Mark V:35 can be hella loud. I just played an outdoor beech party gig, with a full PA, and never had to leave 10watt mode: ch1 gain @ noon and Master @ 11 o'clock. Our outdoor stage was 30 ft. deep, and I had no problem hearing my amp behind me, I didn't need too much of me in the monitor, maintly vocals and the other guitarist & keys on the other side of the stage. I have found the V:35 to be a great sounding, versatile, well thought out gigging amp.

 

[tbonesullivan]

From my experience, the main difference will be "feel" at higher volumes. The 90 watt version does have a bunch more modes and customizations in the power amp, which has a huge influence on the feel of the amp, and how it responds. If you aren't pushing the power amp hard though, it isn't as easy to notice much of a difference.

So, YMMV depending on how you are going to be using it. In general though the 6L6 power amp will have a more round sound than one with EL84s.

 

[bandit2013]

I cannot speak for the MKV:35 or the MKV:25 but I can reflect on the 90W model (including the JP-2C if requested).

The Mark V 90W does have a lot of features to offer, CH1 and CH2 can make use of the tube rectifier when using the 45W mode, also the Variac power setting will also give you more sag if that characteristic is desired. Reverb is good. CH3 is a screamer but can be tamed easily. The individual master volume on each channel can be sent to the power section direct (turning off the FX loop) or though a global master and solo function when using the FX loop in active mode. The actual loop is bypassed unless you activate it with foot switch or assign it to a channel on the rear panel. Even if assigned you can still enable it on the other channels with the footswitch).

The only drawback on the 90W version is the FX loop level. It is not instrument level and will cause input buffers to be overdriven on some older gear that is designed for instrument level. It is not a total wash though as there is a solution for this. Line level shifter may be required in the loop. Some of the newer pedals may be line level compliant (look in the online documentation on the effects that you own or are considering). I am still debating if I want to get a line level shifter, If I do I can use my instrument level effects with a mixer as well as the Mark V. I only have two units that are instrument level since I replaced most of my gear with pedals that are line level compatible (as well as instrument level). I may just get the line level shifter anyway (does not require any power as it is just a dual step up/down transformer) as I am curious to see how it will work in the FX loop of the Mark V as I do like my Line6 DL4 a bit more than the TC-Flashback3. Also if I want to slave into the Mark V from another amp using the FX loop I will need it. (that would apply if I want to use the Mark V preamp to run to another amp).