What to buy?

[Pearce117]

Ok I just got rid of my Mark III. I'm still steaming over that hole ordeal. When you buy from Guitar Center pay for the coverage! So on to the gear.

I'm trying to get as close to the Metallica Mark IIC+ tone as I can get I'm looking at trying one of these.

Triaxis Pre
Studio Pre
Quad Pre

Boogie 50/50 Power amp Or a 2:90 power amp

I've herd that the Studio Preamp is as close as you can get to the circuitry of the Mesa Mark IIC+ Especially with the 50/50.

 

[elvis]

I have a studio pre and a 50/50 running into a pair of recto 1x12 cabs (I have also used 3/4 back cabs). I don't know how close it is to a MKIIIC+, but it sure does sound great. More importantly, the studio pre was not designed to be a IIIC+ as much as it was designed to give lots of tonal options in the studio, both clean and dirty. I have been able to get a lot of different sounds, most very useable. The post-EQ is a very powerful tool as well.

 

[Pearce117]

I was never after a Mark III or a IIIC+ I just got it for the price I wanted a IIC+

 

[profusion]

Quad + 50/50 gives me some awesome tones.

Never played a real Mk IIC+ or III, so I have no idea how they compare. I use an iso cab with a V30, so it's not very Mesa-like, anyway.

 

[Pearce117]

Or I can go with a Mark IV?

 

[jaquetapus]

If you play live a lot, I'd recommend the TriAxis. It is very nice to have more than 2 [Studio] 3 [Mark IV] or 4 [Quad] sounds to choose from. Put a 2:Ninety behind it, turn on deep and modern and you'll have a freakin huge Mark series sound. I actually prefer my TriAxis rig to my IIc+. [but don't tell anyone or I might be burned at the stake!] On the other hand, I don't really have the space to open the c+ up and let it really breathe, it could just be that the TriAxis sounds better at low volumes.

-dave

 

[Friedmett]

The Quad is my vote.

It nails Metallica pretty close and much more.

It has a lifetime of tones.

 

[crane]

You can get nice Metallica tones from a Quad or a Triaxis (never played a Studio pre).
Like jaquerapus I prefer the Triaxis for his versatility and every channel has a monster tone.
The Quad sounds good too, but I haven't finished my tubes test on it, and it is for now far away from the Triaxis to my ears. However it has a very good argument : less compressed than the Triaxis !

PS with the TA you'll save up some space and weight in a rack.

 

[ryjan]

Hell, I think you could pull the trigger on any one of those preamps and be pretty happy with the tone. The Quad, from what I've read, is closest to the IIC+ wiring, But the Triaxis will nail the IIC+, MarkI, IV, Recto, and doeas a good raw Mark III lead sound as well. Theres one on my local Denver craigslist right now for $1000. Jump on it!

 

[elvis]

Oops, I meant to write that the studio pre is like a mark II, not a III. It was really late last nite...

 

[Pearce117]

LOL I know how you feel :lol: Well any way I got the TA I still need to go back and get the 2:90 power amp from the guy I payed $1,000 and he wants $550 for the 2:90 power amp. He also has a new JC-120 and a JC-77 I don't know what one to get do they sound the same? because I've herd and played on a 120 but never herd the 77 before. It looks just like it but with 10's and just the one channel and I think that's all I need because I obviously wanna run an A/B switch with Drive on the TA and Clean on the Jazz Chorus.

 

[TOOLGUY]

I have the pre and a 2:50 (also have a 2:90).
I think it can come close to a c+ sound (at least what I have heard on cd's).

If it were me and I had a clean slate I would do either the quad or a TriAxis ( in fact I am thinking about selling off the pre and the 2:50 for one).
Don't get me wrong,I LOVE my pre. The thing is for live stuff it sort of sucks if you need a nice clean and a heavy lead. This is where either the quad or TriAxis will shine. If you plan on staying on a lead channel all of the time (or don't care if your cleans have a bit of gain/bright too them ) then yes,save a few bucks and get a nice used pre.
Jd

 

[Pearce117]

Ok Now I need HELP!!!!!!!!!!!! I had a mark III. I was playing this thing every day one day it started to have surges of power well long story short it fried. Now I have had my new TA 3 FREAKING HRS and its acting funny!!!!!!!!!!! What the hell is going on?????


I'm running my gear like this

Guitar to Mesa input.

Mesa output to Nady EQ Input

Nady output to Randall 300 Head input and then out to a 4x12 cab

I don't have a power conditioner will that kill my gear????
Or may it be the wiring in my apartment????

 

[elvis]

Wow - it's hard to say. A power conditioner is certainly a good idea. One with a voltage meter would help you see if your apartment power is up&down. However, most gear can take a fair amount of abuse in that respect. I would try to strip down the rig to the bare minumum to try to find the problem. Is it the amp, or the preamp, or the EQ, or some combination?

 

[jaquetapus]

If your head at the end of that chain has an effects loop, try running into its return instead. It could be you're loading the pre of the head up too much.

-dave

 

[Turumbar82]

If your head at the end of that chain has an effects loop, try running into its return instead. It could be you're loading the pre of the head up too much.

-dave

Yeah, don't run your preamp into the regular input of your amp. You are just running one preamp into another and that's going to make for a long of noise. If you are using a head always run your preamp into the fx loop return.

 

[Pearce117]

ok thanks this Randall is old as hell and has no fx loop and that sux

I have a few questions:
- is the studio pre-amp really a mark IIC pre-amp, or is that just a sh!t rumor?
- which is better (for a Mark IIC or C+ tone) a studio pre-amp or, a quad-pre?
- can a presence knob be added to the studio pre-amp?

 

[elvis]

The studio is not EXACTLY the same as a IIC+, but it is really close. I would guess that the tone is also really close. The studio and IIC differ in features, such as fat and bright, but the settings on the pre include similar settings as the IIC based on schematics I have seen.

The gains do differ slightly here and there, so one may have slightly more or less in the lead stage, and I don't know what the bias voltages are, which could affect it. But go on Youtube. There are recordings made with the pre that sound pretty close.

Presence is not usually a preamp feature - more of a power amp feature. If you try a 20/20 or 50/50 with a studio pre, you get presence control from those.

I have a studio pre and 50/50, and I can't imagine having any problem getting whatever tone I want, especially with the post-eq. That thing is super-powerful. The one thing you get with a quad is more flexibility, but I have never heard one, so I don;t know what they sound like.

 

[Pearce117]

Thanks for your reply I'm just having a hard time getting what I want out of my guitar lol. I did call mesa/boogie and talk with a couple of guys and they are telling me that a Studio Pre is close........Hear it comes (BUT) its not a IIC its a really early Mark III. They went on to say the most close you will ever get is with a Quad and a 2:90. That is what they came up with buy mixing all the stuff they have and doing a side buy side and the quad is almost Identical I was told as far as guts go...... I'm selling my TriAxis on ebay and I'm just going to get a IIC+ to hell with all the trying to copy it I'm going to own one. I hope I can find some one willing to do a trade with some cash

 

[elvis]

I agree - you'll never get EXACTLY the same thing unless you buy an actual MarkII.

Good luck!