Mark V or VII

[Mike_NBPT]

Hi All,

I hope this is not too repetitive. I am in the market for either a Mark V90 or Mark VII. I have owned the Mark V35 and the Mark IV which I liked but I favored the Badlander which lead me to the Dual Rectifier...which is my go to amp. However, I would love a Mark amp again for something different than the recto sound. For owners of both the V and VII, is there one you favor over the other? To me, the VII seems like the way to go with the CAB IR, purer signal path...but the price hurts. How does the 2C+ and IV modes sounds on both? How is the Mark VII mode...

I have watched a few videos on Youtube, but looking to get more opinions.

Thanks!

 

[rarebitusa]

Welcome... just one Mesa player's opinion. Full disclosure 1st... I am a V:90 and Badlander fanboy. While I don't own the VII (wish I did), I will speculate a bit based on the Badlander experience, which was the design predecessor. Mesa does leverage their designs.

If the cost didn't matter I'd probably own a VII. It has all of the modern features and none of the V's drawbacks. It's voicing across the 3 chans is much more consistent. The Cabclone IR is really good. The Crunch tone is excellent.

The V:90 design can be criticized for attempting to do "too much" and perhaps loses some tonal focus. There's the FX loop tone suck, Ch 3 harshness, finicky repeatability in setup. But IHMO there are solutions for each. The V:90 has a number of great features for shaping the tone. If you liked the V:35 you'll get the idea.

.but the price hurts.

Yes it does. In today's gear market you can find excellent deals on a V:90.

If you want a Mark to supplement your Rect, I'd probably look at the V35 again.

Good luck

 

[bandit2013]

I have both. You asked a loaded question, here is my loaded answer. it is just my opinion so others may offer up a different story.

I will start with the Mark V90: Current list price is $3,149 on Mesa's website. It may be harder to get a new one these days since the release of the Mark VII. The V90 is still available on Mesa's website. I had thought about getting another one before the product line gets dropped. There are plenty of them to be found on the used market. $1,650 to $2,400 in your basic black trim.
What I like about the Mark V90:

• it has more power mode configurations available. Some may seem transparent and some are not.
  • Lead channel power modes: Pentode and Triode function on the extended Class A tubes. This works on 90W and 45W only. 90W on pentode, 85W on triode, 45W on pentode, 25W-35W on triode. The 10W mode is triode only. Couple that with the full power mode or the variac power mode.
  • CH1 and CH2 has a tube tracking switch so you can make use of the Rectifier in the 45W mode for a slight spongy feel. I felt this was more transparent. The MWDR or Roadster it is quite notable when running tube tracking vs diode.
• it has a total of 9 different voicings, clean, fat, tweed, edge, crunch, Mark I, IIC+, IV, and Extreme.
• All channel switching is done with the Mesa old school technology. If you planned on making use of midi, you will need a Mesa Matrix unit as that can be configured to work with the Mark V din cable to replace the footswitch.
• GEQ circuit is in front of the FX loop. Actually, it uses the transistor output circuit to create the FX send level. Some FX units may not work well with the higher impedance source. Signal levels are not all that hot, but they do fall into the line level range +4dBu
• Global volume control and solo boost when using the FX loop in active mode. That gets turned off when the FX loop is switched to hard bypass. This is similar to the MWDR and Roadster as they too can be disabled.

The Mark VII: Current list price is $3,499. Not as many on the used market but can be found for $2,700 up to $3,200 in your basic black trim. The Mark VII is more of a throwback to the Mark III in some ways as well as the JP2C.

• Only has three selectable power modes available, 90W, 45W and 25W. There is no variac power mode with this amp
  • The lack of the pentode and triode switch for the lead channel would be nice to have but so far I have not missed that feature.
• Only seven distinct voicings as two are repeated on two channels: Clean, Fat, Crunch VII, IIB, IIC+, IV.
• All channel switching and feature activity is managed by a midi controller.
  • Cool feature is you can daisy chain two Mark VII together with a single midi cable and run both amps with one footswitch. Mesa claims the limit is up to 15 amps in total. I have two Mark VII and that is what I am doing so I can run a stereo setup.
• GEQ circuit is located in its traditional position, after the FX loop recovery stage.
• Does not have a global volume or solo boost function.

So how do they compare, there are a few videos out there comparing the two amps in some ways. I tried to do a side by side video. I would not call it all that good as that is not my thing. There are some similarities to each other but yet there are some differences too. You asked about the IIC+ and IV modes. The IIC+ mode on the Mark VII is practically dead on to the JP2C CH2. I can get much the same range of gain with or without the pull switches on the gain or presence controls (JP2C). They are the same in preamp character as I have tried slaving into the JP2C and Mark VII to hear how the power section alters the tone. The IIC+ mode on the Mark V is a bit softer in gain structure. Not as bold and robust as the Mark VII or JP2C I used for comparison as I do not have an 80's IIC to compare too.

Mark IV modes, similar and different. I did compare the Mark V90 to the real deal. Not sure which I liked better as they were about the same. The IV was a B version so there could be some differences with the original format IVA. The Mark VII sort of has more aggressive gain structure, a tad more compression. So far that is my favorite grinder. The second would fall onto the JP2C or the Badlander on crush mode.

Now for the crunch and VII modes, the Mark VII is making use of the lead drive circuit for these modes, but it gets diverted by relays to fit in between the first and second gain stage typically used for the tone stack driver when looking at the IIB, IIC+ and IV circuit paths. Crunch drops the boost stage on the lead drive circuit and hammers the tone stack. It would be similar to the crunch on the Mark V in some ways but it is not the same circuit. It is more to the Badlander crunch in design with the exception the tone stack is plate driven and not pushed into a dc coupled cathode follower circuit (design used by the Roadster and MWDR). The VII mode uses the full lead drive circuit, again it is in front of the plate driven tone stack. Very similar to the Badlander Crush mode. It has more compression than the Badlander but that could be due to the method of how the tone stack is driven. The gain characteristics of crunch sort of fall in between the IIB and IIC+ modes but it can be dialed in to be as aggressive as the IIC+ mode. The VII is like having a blend of the Mark V90 extreme mode and the aggressive nature of the IV mode of the Mark VII. Some tricks you can use on a typical mark amp like boosting the gain and treble and dropping the midrange and bass work quite well on CH3. That trick does not do much for the crunch or VII modes.

If either of them interest you, best to sit down with one and find out in person how the sound when in the room. Recorded sounds from videos and such may be different than it is in the room through a speaker cab. Never explored the cab clone IR yet.

 

[Mike_NBPT]

Appreciate all the feedback!

This reaffirms to me I think the Mark VII is the way to go. Although the price is high, It may be the last (famous last words) amp purchase I want to make. Between a Mark VII, Rev G Dual Rectifier, and MWTR, I think I have all the sounds I need(do we really need any of this), as well as what I have time for.

I enjoyed the cab clone IR with the Badlander so having that with the VII is ideal. I like recording two amps in stereo and have a Captor X for the other amps. The VII also seems simpler to dial in, and having somewhat less features reduces anxiety. As a big Mesa fan too, buying the last Mesa amp Randall designed I think is very cool.

Will keep you all posted...and thanks again!

Mike

 

[DECEMBER]

Playing a VII at a store is what made me want one, but finances led me to get a used V for half as much.
I do wish I had the new Mk VII mode instead of the Mark I mode (which is essentially useless because it's so dark and bass-heavy). But the more I find out about the VII, the more I'm glad I got a V...
No master volume. No rectifier tube. 5 preamp tubes instead of 7 (yeah, the V has 7 & the VII has 5... kinda ironic). And the GEQ AFTER the FX return?! What a ridiculous place for it. I hear that the V is the ONLY Mark that has the EQ in the right place... strange. I run 3 amps in stereo wet/dry/wet, with the V as the preamp, FX send, splits to return dry (post-EQ) to the V power amp, and thru a stereo FX chain that returns to the 2 other power amps. 1 preamp, 3 power amps. So I need the EQ before the send so I have the same preamp sound in all amps, one dry, two with stereo FX. If the EQ was post-return, I'd have to buy another GEQ to put 1st in the loop, so it would affect all amps, and I'd have to keep the GEQ on the amp off, because it would double up on the Mark amp.
But the V reverb is also pre-FX send, and that's a dumb spot for reverb. Though, it's far more important to have the GEQ pre-send than to have the reverb post-return, so I'll take it as it is if that's how it has to be.
The Slave out on the V is the same as a reactive load line out, but you can't use it silently without putting a reactive load in place of the speaker. The sound of the slave out sounds different depending on which load or speaker is connected. I record direct with the slave out into IRs I made of my speakers. I have several load boxes for the 3-amp, 5-speaker, 9-mic stereo w/d/w rig that I recreated in the DAW with IRs.
So the CabClone on the VII would be useless to me. I just need the dry slave out, no built-in IRs. Though a built-in dummy load would have been nice.

 

[Nandrewjackson]

I, too, can't play without channel master + global master vol, after having that feature. Of course, if I really wanted a mark7, i couldn't get one anyway due to $. And GEQ after FX loop is a total fumble.

But, with less "features" in the signal chain, I'd bet playing the 7 full volume , guitar straight to the input, is quite an experience.

 

[bandit2013]

JP2C and Mark VII have three masters. You can configure the Mark V90 to behave that way if you disable the FX loop (hard bypass on the back panel). Same with the Roadster and MWDR. However, having a separate channel volume for balancing is a bonus feature and having the global master/solo boost is also a huge +.

I got used to having separate masters for each channel. That is how the Royal Atlantic RA100 is setup. Badlander also has separate masters.
So, I am not at any loss with the Mark VII or the JP2C. However, having more control over the loudness with a single control is better. The Mark VII is one loud amp to start with. More like the Mark III or Mark IV I had in the past. It just sounds so good that keeps me entertained. Still getting used to the amp. We have started using it in our jam sessions lately. Most of the time we have been running the Badlander as it is easier to manage at a lower volume level.

Sitting down with the amp for at least 30 minutes will give you an idea if it is the right amp or not. That may not be enough time to determine how this will work in a live setting though. Just know this upfront, The Mark VII is very similar to the Badlander and to the earlier mark amps. It is a power house. Very robust. It is not a bedroom level amp by any means unless you decide to run the amp in silent mode and use headphones. Much like the Badlander. I much prefer to hear and feel it than to be burdened with headphones.

There are pros and cons with everything.

 

[DECEMBER]

There are pros and cons with everything

One would expect a $3,800 amp to have no cons. The Mark VII would have been perfect if they gave it a master volume and resonance control. No resonance is the one surprising flaw of the Mark V. Many much cheaper and smaller amps have a resonance control, and most amps with a presence control also have a resonance control. So I'm really surprised the Mark V doesn't have one. It can get really boomy, depending on the cab, and especially with reactive loads, and adjusting the bass on the preamp isn't the same. Also, running the V in stereo with another power amp, it would really help to have the resonance to be able to balance the stereo image. A Carvin V3 is the 2nd power amp, also four 6L6GC, and it has Deep, Bright, and Mid Cut on the power amp. But even with Deep at max, the Mk V usually has more bass, and without a resonance control, there's no way to get them balanced.
Leaving out the master volume was probably a move to get people to buy their attenuator, adding another $600 to the cost.
The biggest flaw of the VII is the GEQ post-return... that's a total deal-breaker for me.

 

[Elliot Twist]

I, too, can't play without channel master + global master vol, after having that feature. Of course, if I really wanted a mark7, i couldn't get one anyway due to $. And GEQ after FX loop is a total fumble.

But, with less "features" in the signal chain, I'd bet playing the 7 full volume , guitar straight to the input, is quite an experience.

I like one Master Volume, because I'm not a bedroom guitarist.
However, I run a Line 6 POD HD500(orX) or a DigiTech RP360XP on the Loop of my amps for post effects.
Those type units have a Master Volume on them that can choke the power stage.
If you're not running something like that on you amp there's always the JHS pedals LITTLE BLACK AMP BOX or Carl's Custom Guitars The Volume Box that'll choke the loop.
And there's always a Power Soak. Those sometimes have a giant volume knob.

 

[soloistthree]

I have a Mark VII, JP, IV-B, and III green, I LOVE that the Mark VII plays like my old III, it's just an intense amp that does everything so well that I don't find myself needing MV, or any other supposed features of the V90. Also, the Cab Clone IR and load box are, to me, far more useful features to have. Additionally, I've read all kinds of stories about the V being the black sheep that I've stayed away from it. The VII absolutely lives up to the its flagship status

 

[spawnofthesith2]

The biggest flaw of the VII is the GEQ post-return... that's a total deal-breaker for me.

Just curious why this is a flaw in your book since historically speaking that's where the GEQ is "supposed to go" on a Mark? I'm not entirely certain what practical difference it would make outside of maybe hyper specific use cases?

I have a V and IV and used to have a III, wherever the GEQ is has never made a difference that I've thought about or noticed. Except one time I ran the preamp of my IV into the power amp of my IV and was all confused when it sounded like a honky turd. That's when I found out about the different GEQ locations and realized I had managed to bypass both

 

[rarebitusa]

I have a Mark VII, JP, IV-B, and III green, I LOVE that the Mark VII plays like my old III, it's just an intense amps that does everything so well that I don't find myself needing MV, or any other supposed features of the V90. Also, the Cab Clone IR and load box are, to me, far more useful features to have. Additionally, I've read all kinds of stories about the V being the black sheep that I've stayed away from it. The VII absolutely lives up to the its flagship status

Man you are GAS'ng me.

 

[endofall]

Honestly the need for a global master volume on a mark VII is easily solved by placing a volume pedal in the loop. I’ve owned the V and the VII and for me the VII was superior in tone. I found the V to do a lot decently but nothing great. However, every mode and function of the VII is fantastic. I would easily give up the solo boost and the master volume for better tone. The cabclone also is a reactive load with on board IR’s which is very different than just a di out so that’s a bonus as well. The VII has been worth the money for me so far.

 

[spawnofthesith2]

RE the global master: Its kind of useful, but honestly I've always felt that it's not like totally scalable without ever having to adjust channel volumes, I usually find myself having to make small adjustments to the channel volumes going from where I have the global master at home vs. at gigs

 

[rarebitusa]

the need for a global master volume on a mark VII is easily solved by placing a volume pedal in the loop.

+1

 

[mace]

I thought I’d really miss the global OUTPUT control on the VII. I kind of miss it when playing out but not too much. Same with SOLO, although I miss that a little more than the lack of global OUTPUT. I’ve had to add a pedal in the loop for a volume boost.