Mark VII Channel volume differences

[mace]

Yeah, the packing job was a bit….ahh… tight. I had to remove a couple power tubes to get the foot pedal and casters out!

I was also bummed there is no slipcover for the foot pedal. That kinda sucks, actually.

Enjoy your new toy! I am really loving the ease of use of dialing in the VII overall, I’m just not using channel 1.

 

[Revelation]

Yeah, the packing job was a bit….ahh… tight. I had to remove a couple power tubes to get the foot pedal and casters out!

I was also bummed there is no slipcover for the foot pedal. That kinda sucks, actually.

Enjoy your new toy! I am really loving the ease of use of dialing in the VII overall, I’m just not using channel 1.

I found channel 1 rivals the Fender Deluxe Reverb. Serious chimey sound and it's not boxy. The clean mode sounds better on humbuckers and single coil better on fat

 

[mace]

What a saga! Got the replacement combo on Thursday and it had shippng damage. The casters/footswitch crammed in the combo had impacted the tube cage. Taking the amp out of the bag the cage was dislodged (white plastic pegs stuck in cage and removed from amp chassis) and one power tube was broke open and bent at the base. Very bummed to see this.

Soapbox: Mesa needs to get their act together on packaging. These heavy accessories should not be packed LOOSE inside the combo. It is really short sighted penny pinching to save a couple inches on shipping box size but putting the glass tubes in harm’s way of the loose caster bag. Just dumb with a $3700 amp.

So, I ended up driving a couple hours to sweetwater to return both bad amps. I gave the second replacement amp a good run through before going home. It is in perfect shape so far!

Anyway, now the (third) amp can finally be put to use! (All channels have similar volumes at the same GAIN and MASTER settings as a bonus!).

So far the VII has sounded fantastic!

 

[Revelation]

I'm so glad you finally was able to get an amp that works properly. I absolutely love the Mark VII combo amp. The clean channel rivals my Fender Twin, and I am able to get very good sounds out of all the modes on each channel. Plus the layout of the controls for each channel was done right. This is clearly my favorite amp out of the 4 amps I own.

I agree with the packaging. It was so difficult to remove the 4 casters inside the amp. They never should have put them in there. Just put them in the box with the amp.

 

[rarebitusa]

What a saga! Got the replacement combo on Thursday and it had shippng damage. The casters/footswitch crammed in the combo had impacted the tube cage. Taking the amp out of the bag the cage was dislodged (white plastic pegs stuck in cage and removed from amp chassis) and one power tube was broke open and bent at the base. Very bummed to see this.

Soapbox: Mesa needs to get their act together on packaging. These heavy accessories should not be packed LOOSE inside the combo. It is really short sighted penny pinching to save a couple inches on shipping box size but putting the glass tubes in harm’s way of the loose caster bag. Just dumb with a $3700 amp.

So, I ended up driving a couple hours to sweetwater to return both bad amps. I gave the second replacement amp a good run through before going home. It is in perfect shape so far!

Anyway, now the (third) amp can finally be put to use! (All channels have similar volumes at the same GAIN and MASTER settings as a bonus!).

So far the VII has sounded fantastic!

Congrats... you have been successful in also adding more VII GAS to an already elevated level

 

[bandit2013]

What Mesa should do with the casters, mount them onto the cabinet where they belong. Just about every cab I bought that came with casters were attached to the cabinet.

The last vertical 212 just before I got the Mark VII did not have the casters installed, they were floating around in the box, loose, not in a bag or separate container. I did not see any damage to the cab, also did not see the 4th caster, it was sort of embedded in some of the foam packing material.

Whomever decided to sh!t-cake the packaging needs to rethink their mistake and review what was used in the past. I used to believe that Mesa did a great job on packaging. That changed as I soon discovered that the Mark VII came in a much smaller and tighter carton compared to how the JP2C was packaged. That box was huge and the two amps are basically the same size.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

What a saga! Got the replacement combo on Thursday and it had shippng damage. The casters/footswitch crammed in the combo had impacted the tube cage. Taking the amp out of the bag the cage was dislodged (white plastic pegs stuck in cage and removed from amp chassis) and one power tube was broke open and bent at the base. Very bummed to see this.

Soapbox: Mesa needs to get their act together on packaging. These heavy accessories should not be packed LOOSE inside the combo. It is really short sighted penny pinching to save a couple inches on shipping box size but putting the glass tubes in harm’s way of the loose caster bag. Just dumb with a $3700 amp.

So, I ended up driving a couple hours to sweetwater to return both bad amps. I gave the second replacement amp a good run through before going home. It is in perfect shape so far!

Anyway, now the (third) amp can finally be put to use! (All channels have similar volumes at the same GAIN and MASTER settings as a bonus!).

So far the VII has sounded fantastic!

Hmm I’m thinking I got your defective Mark VII combo — because I just received a Demo version from Sweetwater — that has the exact same issue with Ch1 Fat being waaaaay louder than ch2…actually any setting that affects volume in ch1 when cloned in ch2, ch1 is waaaay louder. Even the 25 watt in ch1 is waaaay louder than 90 watts in ch2.

However, I think ch1 balances well with my preferred lead settings in ch3 — I also very much love the tone, sound and feel of ch1 As Is… ch2 feels a bit flat in comparison. I would love it if ch2 could somehow get goosed to the same level as ch1 without having to increase the Master in ch2 to equal ch1

But what’s alarming here is that Sweetwater put back into stock an amp that was reported as defective —- and is in fact defective smh — assuming of course, it’s the same amp. If it’s not, then it’s an early sign that Gibson’s historically poor QC processes have taken a hold at Mesa Boogie

 

[mace]

Check your PM for S/N of the amp I had.I did not register it for warranty. I’m curious if it is the same one!

Regardless, it sounds like the amp found a good (loud) home.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Check your PM for S/N of the amp I had.I did not register it for warranty. I’m curious if it is the same one!

Regardless, it sounds like the amp found a good (loud) home.

Let me check the S/N and confirm

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Confirmed — it’s your previous amp. In a way I am relieved that it’s not systemic poor QC developing at Mesa now led by Gibson…but at the same time incensed that Sweetwater just restocked a defective amp.

 

[bandit2013]

Whenever you see a Demo at sweetater, it could be a retuned item. My sales rep said they had a demo available if I was interested at a reduced price. I was originally after the Mark VII with the cream/black jute faceplate. I asked was it a floor model or a returned item. He checked and said it must be a returned item. My response was I would rather have a new unused amp, never opened. I can change the faceplate when Mesa gets caught up with production. I just did not want another Mark V90 haunting me. It was marked as a Demo, always ask what its origin is before committing to buy it. I would assume they checked the amp out but I do not know how far they go with it.

As for the volume differences, I would not doubt it is with the volume control or wiring to the board. The volume controls should be following the FX recovery tube. If it is just a bad wire, solder joint or solder blob on the board or weak solder joint on the pot itself, does not seem to sound like a complex fix. That is until you look inside the amp.

I would suspect it has something to do with the wiring on the master volume controls. I just noticed that all of the channel volume pots are double ganged. I would assume it has two volume sections, one before the FX loop and the other after it. Have not seen the schematic. I would guess one of the wires may have a stray wire shorting out the one part of the volume pot.

Here is a close up on the bottom of the image. I did not realize the volume pot was double ganged before now. I circled the channel master pots and labeled them in the close up images pulled from the image above. Perhaps with the combo it may be easier to get the chassis out, it was a bit tricky to remove from the head. Getting it back in had its challenge too.

 

[mace]

Interesting. So the channel MASTERs are controlling two things at once? I’m not a EE guy and don’t know what double ganged means.

 

[bandit2013]

Interesting. So the channel MASTERs are controlling two things at once? I’m not a EE guy and don’t know what double ganged means.

Double Ganged is more of a mechanical term. Rotary control with two potentiometer elements rotating on a single shaft, both mechanically liked to the shaft (ganged). Since there are two resistive elements it is double. However, each potentiometer is separate and electrically isolated from the other. It is a dual pot if that helps. So yeah, the volume control does two separate things. One is connected to the volume control following the FX loop. The other is ? not sure, I have no clue but I assume it is either a gain or volume control of sorts that may follow the tone stack (that is just a wild guess, may be associated with the output of V1B or input to V1B). Without a schematic it is just a guess. The JP2C does not have this design. All of the pots used for the tone, gain, volume and presence are single pots, no double pots like found in the picture of the Mark VII. The only amp I am aware of that does this but with the gain control is the RA100, it runs two gain circuits. What is going on with the Mark VII has my peaked my curiosity. I have no plans on pulling the chassis out though.

Here is the picture again, I made changes to the highlights. This is CH1 volume location. This potentiometer has two resistive elements that share the same rotating shaft, electrically they are isolated from each other. If you look at the image, note that what I marked as POT-A are just the contacts, note that the two soldered tabs are very close to each other, Almost touching. The center tab is pushed down. At least you have a reference image of a Mark VII that has all of the volume controls working correctly. This may not be the issue though, but just a thought.

 

[bandit2013]

Oh yeah, it could be how the FX send level is adjusted. That would make sense.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

If there is a problem in channel 1 of my amp — to my ears it is not a problem with channel 1 as it sounds amazing as is — the problem is that ch2 sounds flat and very low volume in comparison and would love for the assumed channel 1 problem to be replicated to channel 2 so they can both sound amazing. IMO the volumes across channels 1 and 3 balance quite well. channel 2 is the odd ball, and maybe we’ve been all assuming the problem is with channel 1, it very well may be channel 2 that is the problem…. It sounds dead flat in comparison to channels 1 and 3

 

[bandit2013]

Interesting. I would question if the presence on CH2 is insufficient. I have no issues with any of the three channels, actually I have to done it down a bit with the presence and treble. I would not say it is an ice-pick but it can be bright. If it is related to the volume, again that double pot used on the channel volume control could be related to your issue.

I would call it in or email Mesa on that issue. No point in keeping it silent from them. Do the email first, if you call customer service you get stuck with Gibson people in Tennessee. I doubt they are scanning all the forums for customer reported issues.

I only removed the chassis to get a gut shot of the amp. Future reference in case I have an issue after the warranty expires. Schematics would be really good if they are complete.

Makes me wonder how much attention they are spending on the testing of the product. If they actually do that play through to confirm all is good. Perhaps they just hit it with the hammer and nothing more or did they cut that process out and leave it up to the customer to verify if it is good or bad? I guess I lucked out with mine, it sounds great. I was not so lucky with the Mark V90 that amp is not what I feel a Mark amp should sound like, at least the one I feel I am stuck with. I doubt I will ever buy another Mark V amp. At least it was one bad apple out of the rest of the Mesa amps I bought over the years. Wish I held onto the Mark III. Just not willing to spend the money they are asking for vintage gear to get another one.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Update: Sweetwater swapped out my Mark VII combo and the replacement now sounds perfect across all channels. Got a chance to A/B both amps before shipping out the defective one…and on both amps channel 1s sounded about the same volume at similar settings. So, this confirms that, the problem was with channel 2 not Channel 1 on the previous combo. both clean channels sound just as loud and glorious on the replacement.

 

[Death]

If you ever need customer service for Mesa, call and leave a voicemail. I couldn't get through to a live person all day but the second I left a voicemail, I got a call back in 5 minutes.

 

[mace]

Update: Sweetwater swapped out my Mark VII combo and the replacement now sounds perfect across all channels. Got a chance to A/B both amps before shipping out the defective one…and on both amps channel 1s sounded about the same volume at similar settings. So, this confirms that, the problem was with channel 2 not Channel 1 on the previous combo. both clean channels sound just as loud and glorious on the replacement.

Glad to hear they got it sorted. I couldn’t compare my replacement to the original because the replacement had internal shipping damage (smashed tube and such).