The legend or the MKIIC+

[les_paul]

I have a Mark IV and have been thinking about a Mark IIC+ for over a year now. My reasoning is that I don't use RHY 2 a whole lot. So the question is: would it be worth it to shell out for a IIC+ or can my Mark IV get close enough to those tones to warrant forgetting about channel 2 altogether?

FWIW I'm not particularly interested in the Metallica or Petrucci tones. Pretty much a little more original than those. My complaint about the IV is the overall tightness and I was wondering if the IIC+ was any tighter without additional pedals/EQ.

 

[mrd]

So are you saying the MKIV isn't tight enough, or it's too tight? If you're saying it's not tight enough, I would have to say you're either dialing your amp in a very unusual fashion or... you're high as ****.

Don't own a MKIIC+ nor have I ever played one, but I have a hard time believing the tightness of either amp is so different that it would warrant switching over. From what I've read, I think they are pretty close in that regard.

 

[Paw]

Mark IV not tight enough? turn down the bass knob to 1 or 2. The IV feels tighter to me than the IIc+.

Good luck

 

[mule#1]

The IV should be tighter to a fault! I have spent my time trying to loosen it up. I have had some success at it to. The IIC+ would be a lot brighter for sure.

 

[cremona]

With the c+ you can play a open chord and it sounds like there is a whole world of distorsion and crunch , like having 3 overdrive pedals turned on at the same time,but the sound is huge and unrestricted, now normaly when you go from the open chord to a tight riff , most amps cant handel this and the sound is all over the place, but not the c+ it just dos exactly what the guitar is doing and just throw that extremly thight chunga sound that made metallica`s guitar sound so mythical and metal heads drowl if thats what your after,if not just lay down a different setting you can get eny sound you want IMO

but you need to have the bass pot below 2, then you just ajust the bass frq on the Eq to shape the bass you want.

I have no idea about the mark 4,

 

[giorikas81]

If you are playing a les paul then it is not the mark IV to blame. Most of them are flubby by default!!! There are some that have good bass power without beiing too loose. A custom shop model had that for example and it was really light in weight if that had something to do with.

Different pickups or better a good eq pedal before the amp to cut some of the bass before the input is I think a viable way to tighten the whole rig.

 

[njsurf]

I play a les paul and have no problem with flubbiness on my Mark IV. Mine is a combo, not sure if that makes a difference. I also runs it with a closed 2x12 cabinet. I run my bass very low on all channels. Around 2 or 2 1/2. If I want a deeper bass sound for certain songs I just kick on the eq. As long as the first slider is not too high you should be fine.

Best of luck.

Jeff

 

[Shep]

a simlu c+ is so much more tighter than a mk iv, the power supply in a c+ is SO much bigger. the mk iv is alot more modern sounding. the bottom end in a mk IV is bigger which makes it feel looser. The C+ is the best. i use my mk iv more but as its a good gigging amp. i think the rhy 2 channel on my mkiv is closer to the c+ lead just with less gain.

 

[MrPolatis3]

Hi,
both are different animals. I m totally in line with Cremona's description regarding MKII C+ tone treatment. As Mark Snyder quoted in Guitar Afficionado #1, this amp is "magic" in many ways. Sharp and Bold at the same time, Dark and bright etc. But it also depends a lot on the preamp tubes inside. A mullard or a RCA in V1 will change noticeably the tone, same for V3 and V4.
The Mark IV is a swiss knife as everyone knows, in a nutschell this amp is incredibly versatile. Tubes choice (both power and preamp) is a great matter and has an decent impact on the overall tightness. STR 435/430/440 or even better STR 415, all these power tubes have the specificities.
On top, the guitar (wood, bridge , neck, pu's) is also key.
Cheers;

 

[dodger916]

a simlu c+ is so much more tighter than a mk iv, the power supply in a c+ is SO much bigger. the mk iv is alot more modern sounding. the bottom end in a mk IV is bigger which makes it feel looser. The C+ is the best. i use my mk iv more but as its a good gigging amp. i think the rhy 2 channel on my mkiv is closer to the c+ lead just with less gain.

+1 Shep, especially the Rhy 2 comment, but I don't know if I'd say the Mark IV has a bigger bottom end, at least not mine. In my experience, the MIV looser bottom (as compared to a C+) makes it seem bigger, but the C+ has a broader, tighter, more focused bottom, especially with STR415s. For me it's the feel of the C+ that really makes it special and my favorite rhythm guitar amp for my style, especially with a Strat. But I could never give up that Mark IV liquid Lead even though I use Rhy 2 for much lead work (lower gain). Since I've recently begun toying with my Les Pauls again, I found the MIV Lead channel is kick-*** for rhythm with a Les Paul: drive around 7, gain around 4-5 (pulled), and the mid pot at 6 or 7, especially in Class A with EL34s. Pure 70's/80's tonal bliss!

I've also found STR420s and vintage Tung-Sol 12ax7s reduced some of the modern voicing of the Mark IV, which I obviously prefer.

 

[JOEY B.]

a simlu c+ is so much more tighter than a mk iv, the power supply in a c+ is SO much bigger. the mk iv is alot more modern sounding. the bottom end in a mk IV is bigger which makes it feel looser. The C+ is the best. i use my mk iv more but as its a good gigging amp. i think the rhy 2 channel on my mkiv is closer to the c+ lead just with less gain.

+1 Shep, especially the Rhy 2 comment, but I don't know if I'd say the Mark IV has a bigger bottom end, at least not mine. In my experience, the MIV looser bottom (as compared to a C+) makes it seem bigger, but the C+ has a broader, tighter, more focused bottom, especially with STR415s. For me it's the feel of the C+ that really makes it special and my favorite rhythm guitar amp for my style, especially with a Strat. But I could never give up that Mark IV liquid Lead even though I use Rhy 2 for much lead work (lower gain). Since I've recently begun toying with my Les Pauls again, I found the MIV Lead channel is kick-*** for rhythm with a Les Paul: drive around 7, gain around 4-5 (pulled), and the mid pot at 6 or 7, especially in Class A with EL34s. Pure 70's/80's tonal bliss!

I've also found STR420s and vintage Tung-Sol 12ax7s reduced some of the modern voicing of the Mark IV, which I obviously prefer.

The term "tight" might get confused with "dynamic" when comparing the Mark IIC+ DRG to the Mark iV. The 105 power transformer in the C+ has more reserve power to handle the musical peaks without much sag, even at extreme volumes. The vOLUME 1 setting of the C+ will affect the tightness and the maximun bass pot settings when in the lead channel. The 240 hz slider on the EQ will control the muddiness, provided that you are using an EVM-12L or MS-12 speaker setup. The Celestions will have more issues with certain frequencies, so they will have a different ideal EQ setting.