Mark V, JVM4 observations... Thoughts?

[jaslan]

I have had my MV with the vertical 2x12 cabinet for a few years now and absolutely love it.
I recently picked up a JVM410 combo for a really good deal. For clean and crunchy tones I am very happy with it but for high gain my initial observation is that it is definitely inferior to the MV.

First, the JVM has a much higher noise floor (the high gain hiss) than the MV. At comparable volumes to the MV in MIV or even extreme mode, the JVM has sinificantly more hiss in OD1 red or OD2 orange or red. OD1 orange seems to be about the same amount of distortion as MIV mode (my favorite CH3 mode) but still has a noticably higher noise floor. It is not a problem really but just highlights just how low the noise is on the MV. Could there be any noise gating technology built into the MV? By the way, I have tried the JVM with no pedals or loop connections and different cables, etc. I have never felt the need for a noise gate with my MV but the JVM kind of makes me want to try one.
Any ideas on that?

Second, when I use CH 3 on my MV, I have the bass almost all the way down, and the mid a little below half. Then, I have the GEQ set up pretty much in a V with the bass end a little lower than the treble sort of like a "check" mark. With the JVM, in the OD channels, I have the bass AND the mid both almost at zero and still can't help feeling I wish I could still cut more mid out. It still has that "boxy" or "nasal" sound, if that makes sense. Playing a fast, articulated, type of riff (especially on the wound strings) sounds more "messy" than on the MV in CH3. I wonder if putting a GEQ in the effects loop (after the gain, like the MV) and scooping some more mid and maybe a little more low out would clean it up and help get that "focus" of the MV.

I will say that Marshall did a great job with the footswitch on the JVM. You can set up "presets" or assign switches to individual buttons on the panel, or a combination!

Does anyone with experience with the JVM have any thoughts or ideas, particularly about the OD channels?

 

[bandit2013]

The Mark V dose not have a noise gait and as far as I can tell that does not exist in any Mesa amp but I could be mistaken.

It boils down to the power supply and gain stages, how each preamp tube is configured with its common or switched operating point. Preamp tubes will also contribute to noise levels as some will be noisy and some will not. Mark amps have a specific design in how the gain stages are stacked and what other functions will be shared with the other half of the tube. Also the layout of the design and component selection also contributes to noise levels of the amplifier. This all applies to solid state amps as well as tube amplifiers. I have had some noisy tubes in my Mark V and have also had very quiet tubes. It also depends on what tube is used where if you are one who has experimented with different types or brands of tubes. I cannot relate much about the JVM or a JCM on that matter but I can attest to the other Mesa amps that I have and some may have a different noise characteristic than others. Seems when using EL-34's I have found the noise floor goes up vs using the 6L6GC. Still, I prefer the EL-34 in the RA100 more so than the 6L6 tube even if there is some additional noise. This may be different if you compare the two with the same power tube type (assuming that the JVM is EL-34). Also, I may be way off here as I have only used Mesa since 1989 and have not changed my preference. May have considered something else just for something different. Not all amps are created equal as each has its own characteristic tone. Sorry, not much of any help on this.......

 

[Nicklotsaguitars]

Hated the JVM. Far too sterile for Marshall sounds. Had the 210 head, picked it up for £300, gave it to a mate a year later.
The switching is to die for, red high gain is unusable. Green and yellow drive are ok for a 800 sound in a tight spot but nothing on even the modern 800 incarnations. The JTM45 sound is ok but of very limited use for me.
That switching though, that's a killer

 

[jaslan]

Did some research, mainly on a Marshall forum, and found a thread discussing noise when using the OD channels. The main solution is to keep the gain below half. So, if you like OD1 orange with gain at 3 o'clock, try OD1 red with gain at 11 o'clock. Same amount of gain with much less noise. In fact, it almost seems like, in the OD MODES, the gain knob, after about halfway, doesn't really add more distortion as much as it just starts adding noise and alot of low and mids. It also helps get a "balanced" spectrum in that each of the low, mid, and high seem to be in the same ball park and you can dial the eq to taste rather than having the low and mids dominating the tone. I am actually pleased with the high gain tones I am getting with it now but don't worry, I still like my MV mo better!

I guess this is somewhat like learning to keep the bass down at lower levels in CH3 of the MV.

I am running them in stereo and it makes it very interesting having the slightly different sound on each side of the room.

 

[Joshwah333]

I just got onto this forum - should've joined earlier! I'd like to chime in on this from my experience owning both a Mark V and JVM 410.

Sadly, I sold my Mark V - I regret it for sure, but recently picked up a Mark V35 and love it. I did not give myself enough time with the Mark V to experiment with settings/preamp tube replacements and was disappointed with the tones I was getting.

The reason I sold my Mark V was because the JVM, ENGL Powerball II and ENGL Ironball had much more gain. I should have tried JJ preamp tubes! I should state I mainly play metal - controlling gain with playing style is my objective. The JVM has the most gain available and is noisy as hell. Quite frankly, it's still my favorite amp, but my Mark V35 is catching up to it.

I read that a ISP Decimator G String is the solution to curing noise in the JVM. This pedal allows noise gating to the guitar signal front of amp AND through the effects loop. I have read reviews of people using this setup on the JVM with success. I have not acquired one yet, but it's on the list!

I do put an MXR 10 band EQ in the JVM410 loop and get a phenomenal metal scooped tone. I highly recommend it!

 

[Nicklotsaguitars]

That gain and subsequent noise on the JVM. It needs the Chinese red script valve in V1. Anything else I put in was just too noisy

 

[Monstercastle]

I'm a fan of the JVM410H. I've rolled a lot of tubes through it and prefer the Shuguang 9th gen Chinese tubes in the preamp sections. It has that Marshall keraang much more so than any of the other new production tubes. I've got SED =C= EL34's in it and have another quad for a spare, so I'm good for a while. The key to the noise on the JVM is to switch between modes for gain changes and keep the gain knobs at noon. I find it sounds best with pretty much everything at noon. I've been gassing for a Friedman Runt 50, but I then I plug into the JVM and the gas subsides.

That said, the Mark V head is my #1.

 

[jaslan]

Yes, the gain knob at noon or lower is great advice. Very little loss of gain but HUGE reduction in noise and the mids and lows dont go through the roof.
I am actually very happy with it now though I still prefer my Mark V, probably mostly because of the post gain 5 band EQ. I have been looking into getting the boogie 5 band EQ pedal and putting it in the JVM effects loop. It is pricey though. Also looking at less expensive eq options like the Boss or MXR EQ pedals.

Curious about anyone's opinion of the EQ pedals in the loop.

 

[Monstercastle]

I've not tried an EQ n the loop of my JVM, but I keep an MXR 10 Band on my board and use it on my Mark. Not for major tweaks, and usually only for very slight cuts in very specific frequencies. The only time I boost is in the home studio to fatten up the low end at low volumes.

 

[Bill11]

"First, the JVM has a much higher noise floor (the high gain hiss) than the MV"

Hi Jaslan,

I've had my Mark V since 2009 and my jvm410H-JS for about a month, so I am still learning my way around the 410H. A great resource that has helped me learn about the 410 is the jvm forum here: http://jvmforum.com

After I did some research on the 410H's before I purchased, I learned enough to know that I would likely be better off with the jvm410H-JS, the Joe Satriani model, as it has a number of improvements and additions that the standard jvm410H's do not have. But it all depends upon what you need and what you play.

The jvm forum is devoted to the jvm and mostly the jvm 410. It also details mods that can be made to control hiss and other issues that some 410 owners have encountered. Its a great forum with great folks, like this Boogie forum, so I encourage you to head over there and get some detailed information from longer term, hard core jvm owners.

As for the Mark V vs the 410H, I plan on keeping them both. They are both great amps on which I discover new sounds and tones, and that's fun!

Good luck.

 

[jaslan]

...With the JVM, in the OD channels, I have the bass AND the mid both almost at zero and still can't help feeling I wish I could still cut more mid out. It still has that "boxy" or "nasal" sound, if that makes sense...

I wanted to revive this thread for a couple of notes...
I still favor my MV by quite a bit. I did buy an MXR 10 band EQ (18V version) for the effects loop and it does help but I was still getting a very boxy or nasal sound from it and just couldn't make myself happy with it. I would play it because I paid for it and felt like I should but it was really more of a MV appreciation session. I found myself waiting to get back to the MV. My MV has a 2x12 vertical rectifier cabinet (closed back) and the JVM 410C has 2x12 open back in it. I decided to try unplugging the onboard JVM speakers and plugging my rectifier cabinet into the JVM (it has a 1x8 Ohm jack) and I was really surprised at how much better it sounded. Now I wonder if it is the speakers themselves or the open back vs. closed back cabinet. The JVM has a G-12 and a Vintage and I think my rectifier cabinet has two Vintage speakers. It is probably more likely to be the open back that is making the difference. Maybe it is just the nature of open back cabinets or maybe it is something in the room but the volume doesn't seem to change things. Or could it be related to the resistance rating of the speakers themselves? I mean, if I take an 8 Ohm and a 16 Ohm version of the "same" speaker and use them (on the correct speaker outputs for that resistance, of course) would there be a difference in sound? I understand that the current is what drives the speaker so a different resistance just means the output of the amp needs a different voltage to produce the same current so maybe that would cause a change in the sound of the output stage of the amp but not sure.

Anyway, I would be happy to hear any inputs about the open back vs. closed back or speaker differences, resistance ratings, etc., on the sound...

I actually built a new cabinet for it already and I think it turned out nice but now I think I need to do the head and speakers separately so I can make the cabinet a closed back type.

Rebuilt JVM Cabinet

 

[Tucker44]

I'll try and add what works for me. My MV combo usually sounds nasally when on it's own(except when miked at a gig). I usually gig with it on top of a lonestar 410. I love the tone. it open and clear. I also have a RK412. The open back side is my favorite especially when used with the 410 cabinet. The closed back side sounds boxy either on its own or with any of the others. I'm thinking of seeing if mesa would build me a open back for both side of the RK412.

I used to own a 94 tremoverb on top of an oversized 412. I didn't know what I had at the time. That amp could vibrate the pictures off the neighbors walls. It had an awesome CACHUNK. I wish I had of kept that amp but I did learn that some of the limitations of that amps tone for me was the oversized cab. it was real boomy for most of what I play.

anyway after going thru a roadking2 I've found my tone in the MV and I realize I like the open back tone.

I hope this helps in your tone search.