The Mark Series and Progress

[dlpasco]

Random thought: it seems like the general consensus is that, in terms of tone, older is better with Mesa Boogie Products.

(a lot of these are generalizations I've soaked up from reading the forums)

"The Mark V isn't as raw or aggressive as the Mark IV"

"The Mark III is more aggressive than the Mark IV"

Petrucci apparently has 3 Mark IIC+'s, which get used frequently, and a Mark III, which looks like it is collecting dust.

"There has never been any dual rectifier as great as the 2 channel rev F/rev G"

Obviously the capabilities of the amp lineups have improved over time, but for the love of mike, why would Mesa water down the quality of their products, particularly in light of the fact that they are their current revenue streams, relative to the products they have discontinued?

I guess that I'm asking: have these families of amps really degenerated *that* much? Are we splitting hairs?

Just curious to know what people think. Mesa *is* the house of tone. I'd think that they'd avoid unintentional diluting their own brand.

 

[tomc3084]

Random thought: it seems like the general consensus is that, in terms of tone, older is better with Mesa Boogie Products.

(a lot of these are generalizations I've soaked up from reading the forums)

"The Mark V isn't as raw or aggressive as the Mark IV"

"The Mark III is more aggressive than the Mark IV"

Petrucci apparently has 3 Mark IIC+'s, which get used frequently, and a Mark III, which looks like it is collecting dust.

"There has never been any dual rectifier as great as the 2 channel rev F/rev G"

Obviously the capabilities of the amp lineups have improved over time, but for the love of mike, why would Mesa water down the quality of their products, particularly in light of the fact that they are their current revenue streams, relative to the products they have discontinued?

I guess that I'm asking: have these families of amps really degenerated *that* much? Are we splitting hairs?

Just curious to know what people think. Mesa *is* the house of tone. I'd think that they'd avoid unintentional diluting their own brand.

In no way have they degenerated. Most people who claim amp A is better than amp B, most of the time, have never played amp B. Take what you hear on the internet with a grain of salt. If something sounds awesome to you, don't let internet posts make you feel like you have an inferior product. What matters most is what sounds best to YOU, don't get caught up in all the hype, it will just make your head hurt.

 

[Heritage Softail]

I had a MKV and although it is very good at many things, it was not excellent in the two main areas I wanted. So I saved up and bought a MKIIC GEQ Simulclass reverb model. The cleans are the Robert Plant Big Log tone if you want that. The high gain side is great. The variety of things in the MKV were not things I wanted, so not saying it was bad. Just not the best for my needs. And that is most important, not so much the latest Internet hype. Bear in mind, the MKV gives you a slice of an amp in that mode, not the entire amp. A loop EQ and a moderate boost with the MKIIC can give you everything and more that is in the V. There has been no new Mark amp since the IV really. The V is marketed as a collection of the great tones of past amps.

On Recto versions, there are a few and I have found some within the same model are better than others. I have an old Single S2 that has the driven mojo I like.

Some have an FJA modded recto. Google that beast. Pretty awesome. I have found a good noise gate and fast palm muting hand helps the Recto sound beastly. They are just a great design. It is one that others get measured by.

I love my older Mesa amps. They do the things I want at a level of excellence.

 

[Rob Lockwood]

I do think that Mesa have diluted their tone over the years - deliberately. Whether you think that's a good or a bad thing probably depends on what sort of guitar tones you want from an amp and whether you put versatility above finding one exact 'sound in your head' or not. The earlier Mark series amps (Mark I and II particularly) had a fairly limited range of tones really but they had a very distinctive Boogie sound. That was the thick powerful chimy clean channel that would crunch up to some extent with Volume 1 cranked up and the Mark series mid heavy vocal lead sound. Both shapable with the EQ if fitted. This was a really recognisable sound and as far a I can tell it was unique to Boogie. If you didn't want that sound you bought a different manufacturers amp.

My reference Boogie tone is an old Mark IIb that a great local guitarist used, it defined that vocal Boogie sound for me. I am using a Mark IVa and it can get pretty close but I would like really like a IIb myself because that is the sound that I hear in my head that made me buy Boogie in the first place. I owned a Mark III and didn't find that sound there at all, but it was a more versatile amp - which was how Mesa advertised it. The Mark V is many times more versatile again but I've tried a few and to me it just doesn't seem to do the Boogie lead sound like the old ones as many people have commented - however it does an awful lot more that they couldn't.

It seems to me that along the way Mesa have 'invented' two classic sounds that are their own. The early Mark series sound (MKI, II and to some extent MkIVa) and the classic rectifier metal sound. However rather than concentrating on those 'finds' and re-issuing models over and over that have that sound (as I would say Marshall have done over the years) Mesa always seem to try to build the amp that does more - more channels, more modes even if it compromises the one sound that people know.

So I think that the classic Boogie sounds will always be best found in the older amps that made them originally and people who want to find those specific sounds are likely to prefer the older amps, but if versatility and options are the most important to you, or even chasing you own unique sound, the later amps will give more.

Just my thoughts on it:-

 

[Markedman]

I've been thinking about this post. I was basically a Marshall/Fender user all my life, I'm 50, so I've owned a lot of amps and at one time had 10 or more different Marshall heads, old and new at the same time, 800 and 900 series, plus JMP & JTM's. Back in the 80's & 90's I used a Lee Jackson Metaltronix "perfect connection", MXR, Boss, TC Electronics, Marshall, etc. distortion/O.D. pedals to get my sound. I've also owned mondo amounts of solid-state amps for practicing. Boogie = Big $$$/Santana, so no boogie for me please. Over the years I've thinned the herd keeping only the cream of the crop. My favorites until I "discovered" boogie were a 1972 Marshall Super lead head with a 4 X 12 cabinet with Celestion G65's and a 1970 JTM 20 with a 4 X 10 cabinet, useable cleans with a raw aggressive bite, but I used a 2005 valve-state 2000 50 watt combo more often because of convenience, a bit sad looking back. You can understand my excitement when I bought that first boogie from a pawn shop. A Mark IVb with an EV12L. I played that amp every second I could, called all of my guitar buddies and raved about the Mark IV imploring them all to try Mesa amps insisting there is no finer amplifiers. About a month later I saw a 22+ for $350 and bought that and was impressed, next came a DC-5 for $300, holy crap that amp was great, real raw and aggressive. Next month, a Mark III and a studio pre-amp, bye bye DC-5 & 22+, I'm done buying boogies at that point, the studio pre/Marshall Super lead or Mark III with IV back-up are all I'll ever need. Wrong! A 100% mint Padauk/wicker Mark IIB stack comes up on Craigslist for $1200, sure is beautiful and comes with anvil cases but really, I'm done. My bass player says, "let's go get it, if you don't buy it, I will." The Mark IIB with the Studio Pre as the "stomp box" in front is my main amp because it rules any set-up I have for overall tone quality and holy sh!t facial expressions. I still use the Mark III for metal - Pantera/Metallica/Slayer - because it slays that type of sound with the outstanding tube cocktail I have in it, 6l6 winged "C" quad & SPAX7, mesa ax7, SPAX7, muallard ax7, GT ax7 V1 - V5. The Mark IVb has a slight delay between picking and hearing the note, I'd say 3-5 ms. enough to notice at first which takes a couple of songs to get used to, and the sound is way too compressed or focused for my liking. My Mark IVb may go on the block soon to free up studio space and help finance a 64/65 strat.
If the Mark IV was the only amp I ever owned, I would be very, very happy, it is still best ever at-home practice amp and I understand it has the same lay out as a Mark IIC+, but no frigging way does it come close to sounding anything remotely like the Mark IIB w/ S.P. Even then, there is something about the quality of components used and the wire length and path taken with earlier Marks. Kinda like Vinyl vs. MP3, Ruth Criss vs. McDonalds, some people can not be bothered, care about, or know that there is a difference, or like me, have a bias when it comes to fixing something that isn't broke in the first place. They're luvin' it! It can get diluted & blurry in here sometimes, I was using a Valve-state 2000 after all.

 

[MichaelC4]

I've also owned mondo amounts of solid-state amps for practicing.

I knew I wasn't the only one that used Solid State for practice. I like saving my tubes for shows and the studio.

 

[Markedman]

If Mesa ceased making amps in 1985 with the Mark llC+, that amp would be more coveted than any Dumble, Fender, Marshall, etc. Other Marks are great too in there own way and IMHO most guitarist will sound like themselves through whatever amp they're playing, but the Mark llC+ is probably the best amp ever in the history of amplification. It has that extra something special high gain awesomeness that raises the hair on the back of your neck and sends tingly feelings through your entire spine.

 

[MrMarkIII]

Technology, like life itself, goes in one direction only. Even the ancient Rolling Stones still crank out original material. Otherwise, you're in an oldies band.

How would you feel about your life if you realized that everyone you know thinks the best you ever were was 30 years ago, and that you are currently a mere shadow of your former self. Feel good now?

Got to keep moving, because something is creeping up behind you.

 

[screamingdaisy]

Random thought: it seems like the general consensus is that, in terms of tone, older is better with Mesa Boogie Products.

(a lot of these are generalizations I've soaked up from reading the forums)

"The Mark V isn't as raw or aggressive as the Mark IV"

"The Mark III is more aggressive than the Mark IV"

The counter to this is that the Mark IV was more refined sounding than the Mark III, and that the Mark V is more refined than the Mark IV.

"There has never been any dual rectifier as great as the 2 channel rev F/rev G"

I have a Rev F and a Roadster and for live use I think the Roadster is the better sounding amp.

Just curious to know what people think. Mesa *is* the house of tone. I'd think that they'd avoid unintentional diluting their own brand.

I think Mesa is in the business of giving guitarists what they want. If you follow the progression of the Mark it's a series of evolutions with the goal of giving the gigging guitarist a better product. The Mark I was excellent, but if you wanted to switch between clean and high gain you needed to carry a second amp... hence the Mark II. The Mark II was excellent, but if you wanted a crunch tone between clean and high gain you needed to carry a second amp... hence the Mark III. Crunch mode never really worked out well on the III... so they revised it on the IV, and revised it again on the V.

In the process Mesa evolved the tone. The I and IIA/B had the fat 70s sound that they dropped in favour of the faster, tighter response of the IIC. In the III Mesa tried to go even more raw than the IIC+ before pulling back and moving in the direction of what eventually became the IV. In the IV they went bigger, deeper and more modern. In the V they simplified the layout and made it easier to dial in, and in the process of hardwiring certain settings they took away some of the ability to fine tune certain details. While some people complain that it doesn't sound identical to a IIC+ or IV most people don't seem to give a ****. They like the sound and can't be bothered with the direct comparisons.

As for whether Mesa's going the wrong way or not I think that's debatable. How many of us would be happy if the Mark II, III, IV and V sounded exactly like the Mark I with no ability to dial in any of these other sounds the Mark has become famous for? Metallica owned IIC+s yet they built entire albums around the sound of the Mark IV. Five years ago the IV was a niche amp that very few people cared about, yet now the Mark V has achieved mainstream success, is quite popular with the non-metal crowd and has sold over 8,000 units in 4 or so years.


I feel something similar has happened with the Dual Recto. It was basically 2 channels of high gain with a really sub-par clean channel and a marginal effects loop. People who's music all relied on having good cleans had to carry a separate amp for the purpose. Mesa improved the quality of both the cleans and FX loop, but people who needed a separate lead and rhythm channel still needed the second amp for cleans.... hence adding the third channel.

Most of the hate towards Rectos seems focused at the original 3 channels. I've never played one so I won't comment on them, however most people do seem pleased with the latest round of revisions on all the Recto models. All I know is that while my 2 channel Rev F has a great sounding vintage and modern high gain it has a really mediocre clean and an effects loop that sucks the life out of it and changes the volume when you bypass it via the footswitch, making that feature somewhat unusable. On the other hand, my Roadster has two outstanding clean channels, and great sounding vintage and high gain channels, and a great effects loop, and great reverb, and the ability to use a tube rectifier on vintage and diode on modern, and the solo boost, and it has much more midrange presence. It's a no brainer why my Roadster sees all the action while my 2 channel collects dust.

People like to ***** that Mesa doesn't make them like they used to but I for one am happy they don't. If you really have to have the specific sound of one of those early units there's no shortage of them for sale. It's not like it's that difficult to get a IIC+ or 2 channel Recto, and relative to most other holy grail amps they're still relatively cheap.

 

[dlpasco]

Screamingdaisy: I love it when you weigh in on conversations like this. That was very insightful. Thank you.

 

[swbo101]

In the V they simplified the layout and made it easier to dial in, and in the process of hardwiring certain settings they took away some of the ability to fine tune certain details.

+1

I've played the MarkV and like it, but this for sure is my only complaint.

Screamingdaisy: I love it when you weigh in on conversations like this. That was very insightful. Thank you.

+1, as well.