It may be worth to note that the old IIC+ power sections were hardwired in triode, making the amp feel more fluid. The Mark V had an option on Channel 3 to switch from triode to pentode, getting perhaps a little closer to the original sound and feel of the IIC+
@ it is correct that Petrucci used pentode setting in the MarkV IIC+ mode. What I had referred to in my previous comment was that the original Mark IIC+ amps were hardwired in triode (according to Mesa boogie).
@@MiguelSantos-qm9oz Yes...but TRIODE MAKES NOT ONE BIT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE MESA TONE!!!! ANY ONE THAT THINKS TRIODE MODE IS THE KEY to the Mesa sound never played a Studio or Quad...THEY HAVE THE MESA SOUND>>>AND NO POWER SECTION!!! SO EXPLAIN HOW TRIODE MODE IS SO IMPORTANT?.
@@MiguelSantos-qm9oz AND Petrucci did not use the Pentode setting on Mark Mode...he had a Quad Pre Amp and he used a pentode power amp...(I believe he DID use a Mesa power amp...but he has stated that was not at all required...as he used others as well back then.)
They both have a tiny bit of that cocked wah thing going on but its so much more pleasant on the iic+ to me. But both sound great and i imagine they voiced the 7 with extended range in mind which would explain why its voiced like that. As far as the input i feel like mesa is idiotproofing their amps but losing some versatility as a tradeoff.
The Mark VII actually has more saturated gain and is more compressed, the older mark amps have plenty of gain but less gain, but have a bigger open sound and more SUSTAIN and power, you get that from the volume knob he is talking about. Guitarist always think they need more gain, but it's not gain they actually are wanting, it's big open power and SUSTAIN. Mike bendanelli at Boogie said it best, more gain is more treble response, thats the basis behind his mods over the years for more gain. There is a difference between treble and presence, older mark amps are brighter ( presence ) newer mark amps have more saturated gain, (Treble ).
I'm pretty sure the Mark VII will have plenty of the IIC+ thing.. as long as its on its own. It definitely sounds more compressed and less raw next to the OG Mark. Gotta say I much preferr the IIC+ here, the Mark VII would be what the JCM2000 is to the JCM800.
The IIC+ has being reissued recently , the IIC+ sounds awesome , warm valve tone . Thanks for demo . A mixture of Danzig , Stone Temple Pilots , Sex Pistols & More .
It’s interesting what you did when you dropped the 6600 slider below center line and put your presence knob at 3 o’clock. A good buddy of mine that has every Mark series in the line says that’s how he gets his to sound nearly identical to his DRG as well. I will apply the settings tonight on my seven. I appreciate the fantastic video!
Thank you for doing this video. It’s EXCELLENT in both presentation and communication! Very much appreciated, and I’ve also subscribed. Yeah…I agree with most of the comments. VII more compressed, IIC+ more open. I mean…that’s just a general overall thought. They both have their great points…and honestly no negatives, to me. Bottom line as someone who primarily records and doesn’t gig…I would really not be able to tell the difference in a good mix. As in they both would kill it. But I must say I have deep love for the IIC+. It’s just beautiful. I use a Mark V and I love it, both the IIC+ and the IV modes. Equally. I owned a Mark IV 85W combo with a simul-satellite (for stereo) in the 90s and it makes me sick that I sold it…solely because I was not doing music for a long while but I could still kick myself! I loved the IV and it was very much like the IIC+ with the gain staging from all I remember. However, I don’t know about the transformer. But it was an absolute BEAST and SO versatile…ok, I’m getting sad again! 😂 Anyway, thank you again. Best video I’ve seen on this yet…BY FAR!
Mark IV has it too on the lead channel. The fixed gain level started with the 5. I'm a fan of the Mark VII but honestly, you really can't beat the older amps.
What a great explanation and demo. Happy to subscribe. Any idea why one couldn't just add a transparent boost before the Mark VII to get the initial gain stage flexibility in the IIC+?
Now that the IIC reissue is upon us, it makes this a much more interesting discussion and I'm sure once your reissue arrives and we can hear it compared to the OG, the real question will start to be whether buyers feel like it's still worth that $3700 price tag vs the VII. I feel like MOST players probably (if only choosing between the two) would probably be better suited with the VII because of the extra flexibility the 3 channels offers, the cab clone, IR loader, built in load box, Midi, etc. It's a LOT of amp and justifies the price tag. I've owned a couple of studio preamps and I feel like they were every bit of the MK IIC magic but I felt like I was restricted and compromising with them because I couldn't have the clean sound I wanted AND the gain sound I wanted. I had to crank the clean to cascade more gain into the lead channel and that was ultimately why I ended up selling them (also because the second one I got for $700 was a new old stock unit that had never been played and a guy on reverb offered me $2500 for it 🤑)
Best review man. Kudos. My take from this comparison is that the IIC+ Is much more raw, organic, open and had a much better sounding crisp tone with plenty of clarity and in your FACE👊 Presence. To the average Joe it won't matter much but to be honest there's a HUGE difference between the 2. Obviously thd IIc+ is king and no other mark series can replicate that TONE.... IT'S SICK. The VII whilst sounding great sounded more bass geavy and lacked the crispness and clarity of the IIC+ , also it just didn't gave the wall to the balls smooth gain of the IIC+. Awesome and informative. I hope you can make a vid between the OG and the new reissue. Kudos and Rock on bro...😎💯👍🤘
MIke ,,straight off the top ,,you made so much sense ,,thank you a million Man ,, i was confused a lot in alot of amps ..I knew i like Mesa and mashall plexi ..Soldano .black star ,,,but when you demonstrated the 2 amps ,,then when you got to the Mark 11 c plus ,,,that tone ,,that tone ,is the holy grail ,kinda plexi with much more aggresion and defined mids and highs and to think it was an 80s amp that went under the Radar ,,,why for me ? ..the answer is ,,I am a huge Over drive fan ,and i need Over drive with expression ,,,Im not in chug or death metal ..simple ..Im into Hard rock and true metal ...i want that ..AC/dc ,,Loud ness .Van halen ,,Judas priest ,,accept tone on steriods ,,that mark 11 c ,,,,,wow !!! ,,,, must get ,must have ,,Ride the lightning Bro ...LOve you Mike ..God bless from Australia ..!!!
On the JP-2C you can manipulate the Volume one with the pull gain option (on channel 2 it's kinda 6 and 7.75, on channel 3 kinda 7.25 and 9, afaik that's the only difference between channel 2 and 3), you get 4 different settings. But i get it, i played a MArk III with leftover IIC+ transformers, and that thing was insane. Another thing that's different , too i guess, on the old mark II and IIIs you could use mixed tubes, like 6ca7/6l6 or kt77/6l6 or el34/6l6, if you have simul (D). I guess that mixing option for simulclass went away with the mark IV. Cool amp collection, rock on!
Hey brother, I also noticed that you have 25 w engaged on the Mark VII for this video ? Was this intentional ? Is this necessary to get closer to the original feel?
Yea if you desire that cascading gain control a Mk III is definitely your best, cost effective option. A IIC+ does offer a myriad of tones but getting a good compromise live between clean/heavy rhythm/lead is not that easy. Maybe to a specific user it's not that important. You covered it well the VII is just more versatile with, as you pointed out, those welcomed modern features. The JP2C, a great amp, is certainly more targeted to the original IIC+ vibe.
I like them both. The Mesa Mark series distortion is 'the' sound for me, always. And I'd gladly sacrifice the warmth of the OG ii c+ for the feature set of the mark VII all day. That's just me.
Where do you take your amps to get serviced? I have a Mark II A that I accidently left on with the speaker cab cable disengaged. Need to get it looked at.
Or buy the VII, and put an inexpensive transparent volume boost in front of it, that you can adjust as desired, and turn on/off as desired. Even better, one with some tone controls. Also, the mark overdrives also greatly benefit from transparent overdrives in front of them, and those might also reduce the need for this extra volume knob. Also keep in mind that many vintage amps appear to be in good condition, but all it takes is one tiny part gone bad to throw the sound off, and if you don't have access to the same or similar models for comparison, you may never even know. So be careful!
Wrong! Putting a boost pedal in front of Mk VII won't give the same effect tone wise as just putting Volume 1 on 10 on a C+. Why? High voltage on the first gain stage of the C+, it makes all the difference
@coldbastard6859 Interesting, I didn't know that. Also, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I used to own a mesa quad preamp, and I found that a transparent boost in front of it did help improve the tone, but thanks for clarifying that this isn't the same.
I own a Mark IV. It does indeed have a separate drive & gain control. It was the last Mark series to have that. The Mark V went to a preset drive you can’t control. The upside is it has ridiculous amounts of gain so it’s arguable you don’t need it. The Mark IV is an amazing amp though & they include instructions for getting the circuit to the Mark IIc+ settings. A fantastic demo of the sound is Theocracy Matt’s Mark IV vs JP2C video here. He also does a video where he plays songs from every Metallica album with it.
Youre the first one to admit that, finally brother, its UNDENIABLE the difference the newer amps from the vintage ones, and its tied to the old Transformers! Thats why i made sure i had vintage amps. The only ''reissues'' ive seen nailed is the Bogner Fish preamp (since they dont carry transformers) (i own one). But i had the dilemma with regarding the Marshall Plexi, since a vintage 1969 goes for like 6 or 7k i could get a 1959hw for a fraction of that price.
Sadly, it is true. Older transformers have "that sound," especially in Marshalls and old Mesa Mark series amps. That's not to say there's not a lot of GREAT modern amps being produced. Anything from Friedman, Headfirst, Carstens, Ground Zero, etc. sound absolutely insane. But if you want the 100% authentic vintage sound, the old amps are where it's at.
I sold my 2c+ 60w because it had worse cleans than my 100w 2b loop moded and it was only because it had the smaller transformer - swaping tubes didn’t help
2:05 WRONG! mark IV got a smaller Transformer on the revision B. The first Rev A have all the same Transformer like the IIc+. Got this information from a guy that worked 25 years für mesa and even developed stuff for them.
I don’t own any boogies - always preferred the mark series tho. From a pure design and build point of view there’s no way you can accommodate everything in one amp vs an amp dedicated to 1 particular design and style.
The Mark III Red stripe sounded exactly the same as a IIC+. I have them both. They are the exact same in sound. You want that sound, spend way less and get a mark III Red stripe.
If I designed the Mark VII (and the Mark V for that matter), I would have kept the first gain control for all channels and went with preset Lead Drive levels. The Volume 1 and Treble controls are the 2 knobs I use most to adjust for different guitars and my loud and lower volume sounds. The Lead Drive is more like a set it and forget it control, I only ever use it to keep the lead channel stable and what of Pull Bright? It's a lifesaver if you're playing a dull sounding guitar. I'd like to be shocked about stupid stuff Mesa Boogie does but I've seen them do it over and over again over the past 20+ years so I'm not surprised Also this whole claim about the type of transformer used in the Mark IIC being illegal to reproduce or whatever is a bunch of crap. It's copper and steel, what could possibly be illegal about that? The transformer technology of the 1980s is largely still the same they do it now in terms of the materials and construction methods. What the problem is in reality I think is that Mesa Boogie don't want to spend the extra money getting custom transformers made. Everything else in the amp aside from the LDRs are still being made; the importance of the LDRs has been way overhyped anyways. It's a switch, it's no different in function than that of a relay. The problem with the earlier Mark II relay switching scheme was that it popped when changing channels, the LDRs were meant to be a quieter replacement. In the years since relay switching schemes have evolved considerably and are entirely silent in operation so the need for LDRs is no longer necessary. When an LDR in it's active state the DC ohms are at zero so it's not altering the signal path of the Lead Channel at all. An aspect that often goes underappreciated is the differences in the Graphic EQ circuits of the IIC. The operating voltage of a IIC GEQ I measured was at like -60v and used a different transistor set. On the Mark III and IV GEQ the voltage was much lower which translates into lower headroom. I felt the IIC+ GEQ had more 'power' to it and by that I mean I could literally feel it in the foundations with the insane amount of bass from the 60Hz slider. I've had far more Mark IIIs and Mark IVs in my day and neither of those amps ever rattled the place like that. The conclusion I've come to with the Mesa Boogie Mark series is that a large part of the sound is in the Graphic EQ and where it's placed in the signal path. In the IIC to Mark IV it was at the very end of the signal chain before the poweramp. In the Mark V Mesa Boogie changed everything around putting it before the effects loop send as well as changing the GEQ circuit itself with an even lower voltage design (as well as swapping the polarity from a V- to V+). I'm wondering if they reverted to the original GEQ scheme in the Mark VII. Trying to do it any other way simply cannot be an accurate reproduction regardless of it's inconvenience.
If I designed the Mark VII (and the Mark V for that matter), I would have simply perfected the Mark IV B, because that amp (and the "A" edition as well) is arguably the greatest amp ever made, and better than any Mesa since.
@@worldline7147I agree or at least in principle. The front panel layout on the IV is everything you'd wish a III or IIC+ to be, no more compromising settings in favor of one sound at the expense of the others. I loved that part about it, unfortunately though it wasn't just simply a separation of independent channel controls, Boogie changed the circuit trying to stuff in as many features as possible at the cost of the baseline sound of the III or IIC+ I think. The IV definitely sounds closer to the earlier marks than the V but that's because how much the signal path changed especially with the placement of the GEQ being earlier in the chain rather than being right at the end where it was with the IV and prior. I believe the IV can be modded to get that earlier sound, it won't be easy but it's possible: Item #1 is changing the output transformer, an 80s era Mark III Simulclass OT would be ideal. Next is rewiring the outer sockets for triode mode only. This would require changing the screen-grid resistors from 2.2k/5w back to 470R/5w and refixing the bias voltage divider resistors to the class-A pair. #2 is increasing the voltage going to graphic EQ from the -35v or so volts in the IV to closer to -50v to -60v it was in II series. This will give the GEQ more clean headroom and make each Hz band more effective. Boogie used the same transistor set from the late II series in everything they made after with a GEQ so the voltage ratings are good there but Boogie changed the filter caps from the 2x 220uF/80v used in the original C+ to filter caps with lower voltage ratings @63v (probably the real reason Boogie changed it, they're cheaper), so they'd need to be changed out. The other necessary change is the output coupling cap from the GEQ from 1uF to 10uF. Why I use the word necessary is because that's where a big part of the 'hugeness' of the 2C+ comes from. It's quite impressive on it's own but it sometimes gets to be too much mixed in playing with a band so it makes sense why Boogie changed it. They designed the IV with the idea of a highly versatile workhorse with a world of sounds for the professional guitarist, not a Metallica machine.
Honestly, Mesa Boogie Mark amps intrigue me until I have to share a live show time slot with a band that uses them. Then I cringe from the excessive amounts of treble, volume, and gain... That or I can't hear them at all. Either way if I see a Boogie pulled out I go grab my ear plugs immediately. Those are the only two scenarios I've ever seen. Them seem like cool studio amps if anyone can actually dial in anything that is usable.
Mark II is more versatile with different tones, but if you go for that "special tight mark distortion alá Metallica or Dream Theater" you wont hear a difference in a mix between the two.
I agree. I like the Mark VII. It records exceptionally well. But the IIC+ DRGX is just an absolute monster. In the room it sounds huge, raw, aggressive, punchy, and tight. It will rattle your skull.
I agree that they sound different…but I have to say, I think the VII sounds better. The IIC+ sounds muddy and boxy in comparison. And you didn’t compare the clean channels, where the VII is much better. Aside from high gain lead, the IIC+ really isn’t very good. People just have Metallica burned in their heads, but the tones and audio quality of Master Of Puppets really aren’t very good. It’s the songs and the playing that did it. I guess if you want something that deliberately sounds old and nasty, the IIC+ is better. I would also say that on the Mark V, all of the circuits they added ended up making it possible to sound over-processed and thin. But they really hit the sweet spot on the Mark VII. It’s got fewer options, but a bigger, more dynamic and aggressive sound. But still more refined than the old ones. Ultimately though, you can make all of them sound basically the same, especially in a mix. The same DNA is in all of them.
This is true. In a mix, it would be harder to decipher the difference between the two. If you had an A/B box, you could probably get them pretty close. I like the Mark VII. I think it records very well. It sits in a mix nicely with minimal tweaking and it has a lot of great options. But in the room, the IIC+ absolutely mows it down. Raw, aggressive, punchy, dynamic, gnarly, and wild. It just has "that" sound.
@@eldoradoguitars6456Some if it is a matter of taste, for sure. Depends what you’re looking for. I think the work they did on the JP-2C influenced them to go in a more pure direction with less complications for the Mark VII and it really worked.
Categorically disagree. I've owned every Mark from IIb onward. The IIc+ has more rich harmonics than any of the more modern ones, and does not have the weird EQ spikes that the III (upper mid) and V and VII have (high freq.). The IIC+'s sing way more for leads, and have the most full and round rhythm sound. They make every chord you play sound good, and they round out any harsh frequencies and harmonics. Nothing compares to their sweetness and fullness. That's still to say, I love my Mark V. It's a great amp. But the IIc+ is lightning in a bottle.
I totally agree with you. The corksniffery surrounding the Mark IIC+ is pretty ridiculous. I think both the JP-2C and Mark VII both be made to sound better than the 2C+. Hell, I actually think my III green stripe sounds better than most Mark IIC+'s. And the newer amps won't have failing components or require you to make huge compromises in the other channels just to get "that" tone out of the lead channel
I am going to state for the record that the mojo is NOT in the transformers...I had a studio pre amp...with little tiny dinky transformers and it had ALL the esa mojo when paired with a decent power amp...and that didnt have to be mesa to make it as good as a 2c+ (in fact Petrucci used a Quad for his most famous recordings....little dinky transformer and I believe while he DID use a mesa power amp it WAS NOT used in triode but pentode for more power...so there is half the Mark 2c+ myths gone right there...triode and the transformers being the be all and end all!!!) THE ORIGINAL 2C+ circuit was simple and dead clean of ANY extras...open one and you will see,,,NONE of the clutter of later Marks)
I sold my 2c+ 60w because it had worse cleans than my 100w 2b loop moded and it was only because it had the smaller transformer - swaping tubes didn’t help
Man, what an improvement they made on that Mark II. The VII sounds like an updated beast.
It may be worth to note that the old IIC+ power sections were hardwired in triode, making the amp feel more fluid. The Mark V had an option on Channel 3 to switch from triode to pentode, getting perhaps a little closer to the original sound and feel of the IIC+
Petrucci used Pentode for more power on all his recordings...so the sound you are used to ISNT triode at all
@ it is correct that Petrucci used pentode setting in the MarkV IIC+ mode.
What I had referred to in my previous comment was that the original Mark IIC+ amps were hardwired in triode (according to Mesa boogie).
@@MiguelSantos-qm9oz this is incorrect. IIC+ DRG is triode (outer sockets)/pentode (inner sockets). HRG and SRG are pentode.
@@MiguelSantos-qm9oz Yes...but TRIODE MAKES NOT ONE BIT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE MESA TONE!!!! ANY ONE THAT THINKS TRIODE MODE IS THE KEY to the Mesa sound never played a Studio or Quad...THEY HAVE THE MESA SOUND>>>AND NO POWER SECTION!!! SO
EXPLAIN HOW TRIODE MODE IS SO IMPORTANT?.
@@MiguelSantos-qm9oz AND Petrucci did not use the Pentode setting on Mark Mode...he had a Quad Pre Amp and he used a pentode power amp...(I believe he DID use a Mesa power amp...but he has stated that was not at all required...as he used others as well back then.)
Great demo of these two special amps! Thank You... 👍👍 🎸🎶😎 🇺🇸.
Super informative, love the breakdown of the differences!
They both have a tiny bit of that cocked wah thing going on but its so much more pleasant on the iic+ to me. But both sound great and i imagine they voiced the 7 with extended range in mind which would explain why its voiced like that. As far as the input i feel like mesa is idiotproofing their amps but losing some versatility as a tradeoff.
The Mark VII actually has more saturated gain and is more compressed, the older mark amps have plenty of gain but less gain, but have a bigger open sound and more SUSTAIN and power, you get that from the volume knob he is talking about. Guitarist always think they need more gain, but it's not gain they actually are wanting, it's big open power and SUSTAIN. Mike bendanelli at Boogie said it best, more gain is more treble response, thats the basis behind his mods over the years for more gain. There is a difference between treble and presence, older mark amps are brighter ( presence ) newer mark amps have more saturated gain, (Treble ).
100% spot on
I'm pretty sure the Mark VII will have plenty of the IIC+ thing.. as long as its on its own. It definitely sounds more compressed and less raw next to the OG Mark. Gotta say I much preferr the IIC+ here, the Mark VII would be what the JCM2000 is to the JCM800.
Couldn’t you just boost it on the front end and call it a day for the newer ones?
That makes sense why messing with the treble will affect the saturation/gain response. I’m going to get a vii. Can’t afford 25k for a iic+
@@benpotter4905 25k? They are over $3000 for a brand new 2C+ between 3 and 4k. Expensive, but no where near 25k.
The IIC+ has being reissued recently , the IIC+ sounds awesome , warm valve tone . Thanks for demo .
A mixture of Danzig , Stone Temple Pilots , Sex Pistols & More .
It’s interesting what you did when you dropped the 6600 slider below center line and put your presence knob at 3 o’clock. A good buddy of mine that has every Mark series in the line says that’s how he gets his to sound nearly identical to his DRG as well. I will apply the settings tonight on my seven. I appreciate the fantastic video!
Thank you for doing this video. It’s EXCELLENT in both presentation and communication! Very much appreciated, and I’ve also subscribed.
Yeah…I agree with most of the comments. VII more compressed, IIC+ more open. I mean…that’s just a general overall thought. They both have their great points…and honestly no negatives, to me. Bottom line as someone who primarily records and doesn’t gig…I would really not be able to tell the difference in a good mix. As in they both would kill it. But I must say I have deep love for the IIC+. It’s just beautiful. I use a Mark V and I love it, both the IIC+ and the IV modes. Equally. I owned a Mark IV 85W combo with a simul-satellite (for stereo) in the 90s and it makes me sick that I sold it…solely because I was not doing music for a long while but I could still kick myself! I loved the IV and it was very much like the IIC+ with the gain staging from all I remember. However, I don’t know about the transformer. But it was an absolute BEAST and SO versatile…ok, I’m getting sad again! 😂 Anyway, thank you again. Best video I’ve seen on this yet…BY FAR!
@@evenstephen2000 Thanks for the comments and sub! Agree 💯
Mark IV has it too on the lead channel. The fixed gain level started with the 5.
I'm a fan of the Mark VII but honestly, you really can't beat the older amps.
What a great explanation and demo. Happy to subscribe.
Any idea why one couldn't just add a transparent boost before the Mark VII to get the initial gain stage flexibility in the IIC+?
Now that the IIC reissue is upon us, it makes this a much more interesting discussion and I'm sure once your reissue arrives and we can hear it compared to the OG, the real question will start to be whether buyers feel like it's still worth that $3700 price tag vs the VII.
I feel like MOST players probably (if only choosing between the two) would probably be better suited with the VII because of the extra flexibility the 3 channels offers, the cab clone, IR loader, built in load box, Midi, etc. It's a LOT of amp and justifies the price tag.
I've owned a couple of studio preamps and I feel like they were every bit of the MK IIC magic but I felt like I was restricted and compromising with them because I couldn't have the clean sound I wanted AND the gain sound I wanted. I had to crank the clean to cascade more gain into the lead channel and that was ultimately why I ended up selling them (also because the second one I got for $700 was a new old stock unit that had never been played and a guy on reverb offered me $2500 for it 🤑)
Best review man. Kudos. My take from this comparison is that the IIC+ Is much more raw, organic, open and had a much better sounding crisp tone with plenty of clarity and in your FACE👊 Presence. To the average Joe it won't matter much but to be honest there's a HUGE difference between the 2. Obviously thd IIc+ is king and no other mark series can replicate that TONE.... IT'S SICK. The VII whilst sounding great sounded more bass geavy and lacked the crispness and clarity of the IIC+ , also it just didn't gave the wall to the balls smooth gain of the IIC+. Awesome and informative. I hope you can make a vid between the OG and the new reissue. Kudos and Rock on bro...😎💯👍🤘
Great videos man! You should def compare the Mark III & C+ in a video 👌🏻
great job
MIke ,,straight off the top ,,you made so much sense ,,thank you a million Man ,, i was confused a lot in alot of amps ..I knew i like Mesa and mashall plexi ..Soldano .black star ,,,but when you demonstrated the 2 amps ,,then when you got to the Mark 11 c plus ,,,that tone ,,that tone ,is the holy grail ,kinda plexi with much more aggresion and defined mids and highs and to think it was an 80s amp that went under the Radar ,,,why for me ? ..the answer is ,,I am a huge Over drive fan ,and i need Over drive with expression ,,,Im not in chug or death metal ..simple ..Im into Hard rock and true metal ...i want that ..AC/dc ,,Loud ness .Van halen ,,Judas priest ,,accept tone on steriods ,,that mark 11 c ,,,,,wow !!! ,,,, must get ,must have ,,Ride the lightning Bro ...LOve you Mike ..God bless from Australia ..!!!
On the JP-2C you can manipulate the Volume one with the pull gain option (on channel 2 it's kinda 6 and 7.75, on channel 3 kinda 7.25 and 9, afaik that's the only difference between channel 2 and 3), you get 4 different settings. But i get it, i played a MArk III with leftover IIC+ transformers, and that thing was insane. Another thing that's different , too i guess, on the old mark II and IIIs you could use mixed tubes, like 6ca7/6l6 or kt77/6l6 or el34/6l6, if you have simul (D). I guess that mixing option for simulclass went away with the mark IV. Cool amp collection, rock on!
@timothymartin2137 You lie, you cannot put 4 EL34s in a mkiv. They will go in the outer sockets ONLY
Hey brother, I also noticed that you have 25 w engaged on the Mark VII for this video ? Was this intentional ? Is this necessary to get closer to the original feel?
Yea if you desire that cascading gain control a Mk III is definitely your best, cost effective option. A IIC+ does offer a myriad of tones but getting a good compromise live between clean/heavy rhythm/lead is not that easy. Maybe to a specific user it's not that important.
You covered it well the VII is just more versatile with, as you pointed out, those welcomed modern features. The JP2C, a great amp, is certainly more targeted to the original IIC+ vibe.
Great demo.
Always goosebumps when you rip some Alice in Chains through your gear haha.
I like them both. The Mesa Mark series distortion is 'the' sound for me, always. And I'd gladly sacrifice the warmth of the OG ii c+ for the feature set of the mark VII all day. That's just me.
Not me,, tone first.
Yep I'll take it because i can eq in the difference. And the fact i record in a daw. I have tricks to get "that tone".
@@realtruenorth Do you have any links to your music?
Where do you take your amps to get serviced? I have a Mark II A that I accidently left on with the speaker cab cable disengaged. Need to get it looked at.
Dave Friedman maintains most of my amps. However, Mesa amps I still send back to Mike Bendinelli at Mesa HQ.
@@eldoradoguitars6456 any idea how I can get in contact with Mike Bendinelli?
@@tonym5715 mesaboogie.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/requests/new
@@eldoradoguitars6456 nice! Thanks
Or buy the VII, and put an inexpensive transparent volume boost in front of it, that you can adjust as desired, and turn on/off as desired. Even better, one with some tone controls. Also, the mark overdrives also greatly benefit from transparent overdrives in front of them, and those might also reduce the need for this extra volume knob. Also keep in mind that many vintage amps appear to be in good condition, but all it takes is one tiny part gone bad to throw the sound off, and if you don't have access to the same or similar models for comparison, you may never even know. So be careful!
Wrong! Putting a boost pedal in front of Mk VII won't give the same effect tone wise as just putting Volume 1 on 10 on a C+. Why? High voltage on the first gain stage of the C+, it makes all the difference
@coldbastard6859 Interesting, I didn't know that. Also, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I used to own a mesa quad preamp, and I found that a transparent boost in front of it did help improve the tone, but thanks for clarifying that this isn't the same.
Should have zoomed in a little closer
Hi. Whats the year of your amps ? Thanks
1983 IIC+ DRGX
I own a Mark IV. It does indeed have a separate drive & gain control. It was the last Mark series to have that. The Mark V went to a preset drive you can’t control. The upside is it has ridiculous amounts of gain so it’s arguable you don’t need it.
The Mark IV is an amazing amp though & they include instructions for getting the circuit to the Mark IIc+ settings. A fantastic demo of the sound is Theocracy Matt’s Mark IV vs JP2C video here. He also does a video where he plays songs from every Metallica album with it.
Youre the first one to admit that, finally brother, its UNDENIABLE the difference the newer amps from the vintage ones, and its tied to the old Transformers! Thats why i made sure i had vintage amps. The only ''reissues'' ive seen nailed is the Bogner Fish preamp (since they dont carry transformers) (i own one). But i had the dilemma with regarding the Marshall Plexi, since a vintage 1969 goes for like 6 or 7k i could get a 1959hw for a fraction of that price.
Sadly, it is true. Older transformers have "that sound," especially in Marshalls and old Mesa Mark series amps.
That's not to say there's not a lot of GREAT modern amps being produced. Anything from Friedman, Headfirst, Carstens, Ground Zero, etc. sound absolutely insane.
But if you want the 100% authentic vintage sound, the old amps are where it's at.
wtf cant they just remake the old transformers i dont get it ...they know they would fly off the shelves
I sold my 2c+ 60w because it had worse cleans than my 100w 2b loop moded and it was only because it had the smaller transformer - swaping tubes didn’t help
2:05 WRONG! mark IV got a smaller Transformer on the revision B. The first Rev A have all the same Transformer like the IIc+. Got this information from a guy that worked 25 years für mesa and even developed stuff for them.
I don’t own any boogies - always preferred the mark series tho. From a pure design and build point of view there’s no way you can accommodate everything in one amp vs an amp dedicated to 1 particular design and style.
The Mark III Red stripe sounded exactly the same as a IIC+. I have them both. They are the exact same in sound. You want that sound, spend way less and get a mark III Red stripe.
If I designed the Mark VII (and the Mark V for that matter), I would have kept the first gain control for all channels and went with preset Lead Drive levels. The Volume 1 and Treble controls are the 2 knobs I use most to adjust for different guitars and my loud and lower volume sounds. The Lead Drive is more like a set it and forget it control, I only ever use it to keep the lead channel stable and what of Pull Bright? It's a lifesaver if you're playing a dull sounding guitar. I'd like to be shocked about stupid stuff Mesa Boogie does but I've seen them do it over and over again over the past 20+ years so I'm not surprised
Also this whole claim about the type of transformer used in the Mark IIC being illegal to reproduce or whatever is a bunch of crap. It's copper and steel, what could possibly be illegal about that? The transformer technology of the 1980s is largely still the same they do it now in terms of the materials and construction methods. What the problem is in reality I think is that Mesa Boogie don't want to spend the extra money getting custom transformers made. Everything else in the amp aside from the LDRs are still being made; the importance of the LDRs has been way overhyped anyways. It's a switch, it's no different in function than that of a relay. The problem with the earlier Mark II relay switching scheme was that it popped when changing channels, the LDRs were meant to be a quieter replacement. In the years since relay switching schemes have evolved considerably and are entirely silent in operation so the need for LDRs is no longer necessary. When an LDR in it's active state the DC ohms are at zero so it's not altering the signal path of the Lead Channel at all.
An aspect that often goes underappreciated is the differences in the Graphic EQ circuits of the IIC. The operating voltage of a IIC GEQ I measured was at like -60v and used a different transistor set. On the Mark III and IV GEQ the voltage was much lower which translates into lower headroom. I felt the IIC+ GEQ had more 'power' to it and by that I mean I could literally feel it in the foundations with the insane amount of bass from the 60Hz slider. I've had far more Mark IIIs and Mark IVs in my day and neither of those amps ever rattled the place like that. The conclusion I've come to with the Mesa Boogie Mark series is that a large part of the sound is in the Graphic EQ and where it's placed in the signal path. In the IIC to Mark IV it was at the very end of the signal chain before the poweramp. In the Mark V Mesa Boogie changed everything around putting it before the effects loop send as well as changing the GEQ circuit itself with an even lower voltage design (as well as swapping the polarity from a V- to V+). I'm wondering if they reverted to the original GEQ scheme in the Mark VII. Trying to do it any other way simply cannot be an accurate reproduction regardless of it's inconvenience.
If I designed the Mark VII (and the Mark V for that matter), I would have simply perfected the Mark IV B, because that amp (and the "A" edition as well) is arguably the greatest amp ever made, and better than any Mesa since.
@@worldline7147I agree or at least in principle. The front panel layout on the IV is everything you'd wish a III or IIC+ to be, no more compromising settings in favor of one sound at the expense of the others. I loved that part about it, unfortunately though it wasn't just simply a separation of independent channel controls, Boogie changed the circuit trying to stuff in as many features as possible at the cost of the baseline sound of the III or IIC+ I think. The IV definitely sounds closer to the earlier marks than the V but that's because how much the signal path changed especially with the placement of the GEQ being earlier in the chain rather than being right at the end where it was with the IV and prior.
I believe the IV can be modded to get that earlier sound, it won't be easy but it's possible:
Item #1 is changing the output transformer, an 80s era Mark III Simulclass OT would be ideal. Next is rewiring the outer sockets for triode mode only. This would require changing the screen-grid resistors from 2.2k/5w back to 470R/5w and refixing the bias voltage divider resistors to the class-A pair.
#2 is increasing the voltage going to graphic EQ from the -35v or so volts in the IV to closer to -50v to -60v it was in II series. This will give the GEQ more clean headroom and make each Hz band more effective. Boogie used the same transistor set from the late II series in everything they made after with a GEQ so the voltage ratings are good there but Boogie changed the filter caps from the 2x 220uF/80v used in the original C+ to filter caps with lower voltage ratings @63v (probably the real reason Boogie changed it, they're cheaper), so they'd need to be changed out. The other necessary change is the output coupling cap from the GEQ from 1uF to 10uF. Why I use the word necessary is because that's where a big part of the 'hugeness' of the 2C+ comes from. It's quite impressive on it's own but it sometimes gets to be too much mixed in playing with a band so it makes sense why Boogie changed it. They designed the IV with the idea of a highly versatile workhorse with a world of sounds for the professional guitarist, not a Metallica machine.
Honestly, Mesa Boogie Mark amps intrigue me until I have to share a live show time slot with a band that uses them. Then I cringe from the excessive amounts of treble, volume, and gain... That or I can't hear them at all. Either way if I see a Boogie pulled out I go grab my ear plugs immediately. Those are the only two scenarios I've ever seen. Them seem like cool studio amps if anyone can actually dial in anything that is usable.
Exactly what I want loud and depends on your speaker Choices I want that aggressive 4 6L6’s and 5 ECC83’s in the preamp section frigging raw power .
"I decided to make a quick video". Proceeds to make one 25 mins long lol.
Mark II is more versatile with different tones, but if you go for that "special tight mark distortion alá Metallica or Dream Theater" you wont hear a difference in a mix between the two.
The Carstens Grace smokes them both 😉
Why would u want it to sound like something that's already been done
Because the thing that has been done is selling for $10,000
Because it sounds amazing.
If you have to ask, you don’t understand.
iiC+ all the way....
I agree. I like the Mark VII. It records exceptionally well. But the IIC+ DRGX is just an absolute monster. In the room it sounds huge, raw, aggressive, punchy, and tight. It will rattle your skull.
I agree that they sound different…but I have to say, I think the VII sounds better. The IIC+ sounds muddy and boxy in comparison. And you didn’t compare the clean channels, where the VII is much better. Aside from high gain lead, the IIC+ really isn’t very good. People just have Metallica burned in their heads, but the tones and audio quality of Master Of Puppets really aren’t very good. It’s the songs and the playing that did it.
I guess if you want something that deliberately sounds old and nasty, the IIC+ is better. I would also say that on the Mark V, all of the circuits they added ended up making it possible to sound over-processed and thin. But they really hit the sweet spot on the Mark VII. It’s got fewer options, but a bigger, more dynamic and aggressive sound. But still more refined than the old ones.
Ultimately though, you can make all of them sound basically the same, especially in a mix. The same DNA is in all of them.
This is true. In a mix, it would be harder to decipher the difference between the two. If you had an A/B box, you could probably get them pretty close.
I like the Mark VII. I think it records very well. It sits in a mix nicely with minimal tweaking and it has a lot of great options.
But in the room, the IIC+ absolutely mows it down. Raw, aggressive, punchy, dynamic, gnarly, and wild. It just has "that" sound.
@@eldoradoguitars6456Some if it is a matter of taste, for sure. Depends what you’re looking for. I think the work they did on the JP-2C influenced them to go in a more pure direction with less complications for the Mark VII and it really worked.
Categorically disagree. I've owned every Mark from IIb onward. The IIc+ has more rich harmonics than any of the more modern ones, and does not have the weird EQ spikes that the III (upper mid) and V and VII have (high freq.). The IIC+'s sing way more for leads, and have the most full and round rhythm sound. They make every chord you play sound good, and they round out any harsh frequencies and harmonics. Nothing compares to their sweetness and fullness.
That's still to say, I love my Mark V. It's a great amp. But the IIc+ is lightning in a bottle.
@@guitaristcomposer7395 And I think it sounds like mud. It makes sense that leads high up on the neck are the only thing that sounds good to me on it.
I totally agree with you. The corksniffery surrounding the Mark IIC+ is pretty ridiculous. I think both the JP-2C and Mark VII both be made to sound better than the 2C+. Hell, I actually think my III green stripe sounds better than most Mark IIC+'s. And the newer amps won't have failing components or require you to make huge compromises in the other channels just to get "that" tone out of the lead channel
I am going to state for the record that the mojo is NOT in the transformers...I had a studio pre amp...with little tiny dinky transformers and it had ALL the esa mojo when paired with a decent power amp...and that didnt have to be mesa to make it as good as a 2c+ (in fact Petrucci used a Quad for his most famous recordings....little dinky transformer and I believe while he DID use a mesa power amp it WAS NOT used in triode but pentode for more power...so there is half the Mark 2c+ myths gone right there...triode and the transformers being the be all and end all!!!) THE ORIGINAL 2C+ circuit was simple and dead clean of ANY extras...open one and you will see,,,NONE of the clutter of later Marks)
100% this. I've owned a couple of studio preamps and it was literally Images and Words in a box.
This dude loves his Mark series, and he's been through a lot of "Marks" if you know what I mean.
I sold my 2c+ 60w because it had worse cleans than my 100w 2b loop moded and it was only because it had the smaller transformer - swaping tubes didn’t help