Mesa Mark IVa vs IVb vs V vs V25 vs "IIC+"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 апр 2022
- MIKKO Mega Djent plugin used on all guitars: ml-sound-lab.com/mikko
Mesa Mark series amps are the holy grail for me personally. Here we have a 1992 Mark IV Rev A, 1994 Mark IV Rev B, Mark V and a Mark V 25. Also I've had a real 1984 IIC+ over and I was able to match the Mark V with it so we can sort of compare a real IIC+ with all of these amps. Which one sounds best to you? 
Видеоклипы
Look forward to the video. Holy Grail for me too for the past 30 years and I have owned many . I had a lovely Mk 3, a Hardwood Mk IV with matching 2x12 cab, the fantastic and very underrated Heartbreaker, and a Mk V combo, all great amps in their own right. I hope you will be adding more Boogie amps to your line up in the future. I'm enjoying the 'Humble' very much! Cheers from the UK.
So happy to hear that! Mark series is where it's at for me. Just so much control over the feel and sound. Nothing really compares to it.
@@mlsoundlab I share in the massive love for the Mark series too, but I suggest getting a sufficient taste of the Wizard amps as well. I could live happily ever after with the Mark IIC+, IV, and V that I previously owned, but they all eventually got replaced by a growing Wizard collection (MCI, MTL MKII, MCII KT75, and MTL/MCII Hybrid in this order).
I think that these amps compare very well and sit in the same wheelhouse, but the Wizards have some advantages, for my taste, with the most notable standout things being the uncompressed, aggressive if you want it, ability to dial in a loose and bassy tone without getting bloated like a Recto would, and the hardest hitting amps on the market given their massive transformers. And all of this comes in addition to the amps being super easy and versatile to dial in, with it being very difficult to dial in a bad tone given the wide sweet spots, which is something that anyone who has had a love affair with a Mark series amp could not say with a straight face.
I would happily send you one or two of these Wizards if you could then turn them into an amp sim, but shipping from the USA does not help the cause.
Honestly, the IIC+ is a cool amp and I owned one for many years and the high gain tones I know are legendary. But I prefer the Mark IV lead channel out of all of the mark series. It took the lead channel to entire new level with tighter low end and smoother gain.
You boys should check out the new Mark IIC+ by ML!! It sounds mad heavy!! 🤘🤘 I have never heard a better geetarr sound than Metallica/Overkill/Exodus had in the 90's and at least the 'Tallica boys used Mark II!
Great video. Love the Mk IV A too, best amp ever 😊
thanks for tthis comparison ! the mark V 25 sounds quite good here
I'm currently saving up to get a Mark V 90 watt, and ironically, I was already planning on using a Suhr reactive load and Mikko Djent for the cab.
Seeing this is giving me major hype!
Awesome shoot out! I fought with the middle channel a long time on my Rev A. What I found worked well was an overdrive in front and a separate graphic eq (disable the Mesa EQ for that channel) after the preamp. It will never be the Lead channel but it definitely brings R2 back to life.
Hey Mikko, great video as usual. What load box did you use on this comparison? Also I would love to hear comparison between Mesa MkV vs Amped ML5. I know it sounds crazy, but since I bought ML5, my Triaxis are collecting dust in the corner.
I'm actually using the Suhr Reactive load with all the amps in this video going into the MIKKO plugin and using the Mega Djent cab.
I owned Mk III Red Stripe and Mk IV Rev B, played on Blue Stripe and Mk V. Now I own a C+ DRGX and I have to say that this one is the best hands down. The voicing, the liquid lead, everything is just right. Add to that a parametric eq (or 2 of those) and this amp has the best metal tone money can buy.
I've sure went quite deep into geeking over these amplifiers. The Mark V just has insane versatility in it and it truly can sound like all of these other amplifiers. The thing is - it's not always clear how to get those sounds. F.ex. I have to use the Extreme mode on it to get it sound like the Mark IV and I have to use the Mark IV mode on it to make is sounds like the real IIC+. Many strange things like that which you can only find out by doing reamp A/B testing with metering. Also the graphic EQ seems to be very different on some of these amps. Especially on the IIC+ it was very subtle.
Great video! Would love to see how these compare to the ML5 plugin. The MKIVa sounded best to me. But, would love to see an update to the ML5 plugin with the Vorna technology (and maybe a few preset updates) and see how it compares to these. :)
We're planning to update ML5! :)
@@mlsoundlab Awesome! Can’t wait for that one!
@@mlsoundlab have ML5 already, looking forward the vorna version
Hey mikko!! What drum plugin did you use in the demo song? Sounds killer!
I'll need to make a video about it soon - I have a very quick setup going with essentially no post processing on anything.
The sub lows on the IV are so good. I’m thinking I want a IVa now
I had to play a show last night as a two-piece band (our bassist caught covid the day before). Boosting the bass knob and 80Hz slider on my trusty Mark IVa generated enough sub lows to compensate for the missing bass guitar frequencies and balance the band's overall frequency response without compromising the guitar tone at all. No flub, just OOMF.
Maybe use some more lights next time hehe. Hard so see. Great video ! I love the mark IV
Thanks a lot for the awesome video!
I also prefer the Mark IVa but I was surprised how thin the Mark V sounded, even compared to the mini mark. Why didn't you raise the 80Hz slider a little more? Or isn't there more low end to be squeezed out of the V?
The Mark V actually needs to be on the Extreme mode to have that beefy low end to it. Compared to the Mark IVs it definitely sounds thin but it's tighter in the end. I'll probably make another video demonstrating how to make the Mark V and Mark V 25 sound pretty much identical to the Mark IVs. The Mark V can actually sound much tighter than the other amps here which is what I wanted to show. :)
That would be a great video! I'm really looking forward to watching it
@@mlsoundlab Very cool video. Actually, I've been using my Mark V with the "Mark IV mode" setting most of the time (very close to your "Mark IIC+" setting), that's why decided to pull a trigger on a real Mark IV and see whether I can get the tone even better. So, finally, I bought my Mark IV Rev. B in a short chassis, and as a first exercise I tried to dial Mark IV to get the identical tone to my Mark V. I manage to get it super-close, like you never would discern in a real mix setting, and would need to listen really carefully to hear the difference. As for the settings, the main difference between Mark V and Mark IV appeared to be the middle frequencies i.e. 500-900 Hz: Mark V really had a lot of them, and you need to push them down on Mark IV to get close to Mark V tone. At the end of the day, I can state that Mark IV does the same amazing tone as Mark V, but provides much more tweakability of the lead tone, exactly as I wanted. And Mark V is a little more compressed indeed.
When you say the v:25 has a built in load box, are you referring to the cab clone xlr out? Do you have to use the built in IRs then?
Damn this really brings back some memories of how much I struggled with the V 90W's overly dry, tight, and boxy tone that could never be remedied even after trying out the saturation mod with specific preamp tube swapping and other pre and post EQ and pedal tricks. The lead channel on the IV is much more pleasing to my ears and the real IIC+ is a legend for a reason. I hope there is a ML4a amp sim on the way very soon! And then perhaps following that up with a Verona refresh for the ML5, because its channel 2 is magical.
Thank you so much for the feedback! ML5 Vorna is definitely something we're looking towards!
-Kai
I see you're not the only one. I don't mind dry and tight, after all I own a VHT Pittbull, but yeah, it's boxy and lacks a significant amount of low end and I have a love hate relationship with my Mark V for that very reason. The crunch channel can sound HUGE, so IDK what they were doing with the lead channel.
@@Eliphas_Elric Yeah I wound up finding my way to the promise land with my Wizard amps. The Wizards are kind of in a similar world as the VHT regarding dry and tight. That said, I had a runion with the V's Crunch mode at GC a few times recently and I still miss and love it.
I have 5 of mark series amps, Green stripe, Red stripe, Blue Stripe and a a IIC+.. if they were vastly different they wouldn't have just swiped each version with just a magic marker swipe or a black dot or a + sign. The big difference in the IIC+ and the Mark III was the third channel. Mesa got noticeably different with the Mesa badging vs the Boogie badges. The Rectifier series,The lone star, Road King,Nomad, etc came later and did sound different... The stiletto was probably the most different being EL34 based shooting toward the Marshall tone. Even my newer Mark 5 EL84 based amp sits in my studio with the older mark III'S and IIC+ it too sounds really close even all these years later with totally different power section/ tubes. The petrucci amp is a modern Mark amp and you can line up all the Mark series amps and NO one in the audience would ever know the difference and most guitar players blind folded couldn't pick them out one from the other especially with the transparent EVM 12L black shadow speaker or an MC-90 black shadow. The IIC+ landed production in the right time to become the flagship vintage boogie. Thats when 80's music was huge and that amp was produced at the right time for the players who made it famous. it didn't make them famous. I would argue a Mark III purple, red, blue or green stripe Mark III could have been used by the players who made the IIC+ famous and those albums and concerts wouldn't have sounded any different. They just weren't available at the time those bands recorded those albums. They stopped the IIC+ when the mark III came into production. They stopped the III when the Mark IV started and so on....they are all great amps and tonally are the same. Most of those bands stopped playing the IIC+ and went to the mark III when it came out because the sound was basically the same but the 3 had a third channel, everyone loved that.
So how do I tell if mine is a REV A or B? Mine has the faceplate of your REV B but I was told it's a REV A.
Great comparison! Rev A wins for me.
I keep going back and forth between A and B on which is my favorite.
I have a Mark III green stripe and it sounds basically the same as the IV Rev A, maybe a little less compressed, but I absolutely love the tone of these Mark amps. I also TOTALLY get why you'd need 2 GEQ's like the JP2C has.
IV Rev A sounded mighty. Gotta get my hands on one eventually. I own a Mark V and while I love it I find I need an overdrive or boost to really get the third channel where I want it.
Yeah the Mark V has been my #1 amp for a long time but if I really want the best guitar tone possible I go for the IV. The versatility of the V is unbeatable though.
I have an early 1994 Mark IV Rev A and it has the new Boogie logo, also, it's the best amp that I've owned and tried. A friend of mine has 2 Rev B Mk IV and a Mark IIC+ and the Rev B's sound phenomenal, but I much prefer the darker and more "liquidy" sound that the Rev A has. To me, it sounds a lot closer to the IIC+
Rev a is supposed to be brighter tho
Might we be seeing some new Mesa plugins???? 🤔
Definivtly Rev A for me but the mini 25w is the second : lower price and cool machine on your test. I prefer the little 25 at the mk v in your test
mark IV rev A needs to have it´s own plugin!
I love the sound of the Mark V 90 the most.
cool amps
Mark IV rev B for me. I’ll never sell mine. It has the insane sub lows that thump but stay tight right at the end of the note like the iic+ does making it more thick/chunky while not bleeding into the mids or the highs. When set correct, everything is layered just right.
The Mark V is an amazing amp but it NEEDS to be cranked to get to the mark IV and iic+ territory in terms of feel and tone.
IVb for the win. Thanks for the video.
You're welcome! 💪
What speakers? Version A/B, not Revision A/B. Their board revs are actually more around F and G. Also you could get both versions with both logos.
Anyways the A sounds best to me, which is always reassuring because that’s the one I bought.
does the mark iv have a good effects loop? I had a mesa single rectifier solo head and it was a disaster I think the amp dated from 2005. I love the mark iv but I have a fear of the effects loop
thank you for your video it's cool to be able to make a comparison
It's good enough to run your pedal based delays in it. I prefer a rack delay
Mark IV Rev A seemed to be the best
IVa sounds best here. I’ve had several a and b versions. And I don’t follow you entirely. The A are brighter and the B a bit darker and compressed. It could be your tubes. Anyhow. The IV’s differences are very subtle. :)
Mark IV is the GOAT.
You can hear in this video that the Mark V just doesn't have the same low end "oomph" as the Mark IV and as a Mark V owner it drives me up a wall. I mean in a live mix with a bass player and kick drum it won't matter but still, I want to FEEL my downtuned palm mutes.
The Mark IIC+ doesn't have it either, but as guitarists, that limitation often keeps us from dialing too much low end in our amps. Tones that sound big and thunderous when played alone often sound droney and terrible in a full band mix with a bassist.
Oh boy I'm glad I sat through 9 minutes of talking for 2 minutes of playing with those tones, think you might need an eq pedal bro you got too much mids
The whole reason why I love these amps is that you don't need a boost/drive nor EQ pedals. Mark series amps have post EQ built in. That 750hz fader is what is used to fine tune the mids - these tones are actually slightly scooped still. I think I balanced the Mark IVs pretty perfectly here - I actually already shot another video showing how to make all these sound as close to the Mark IV as possible.
Too much mids ? It is a pretty scooped mids tone.
Seems like the new Mark Vll does a better 'Mark lV' than the Mark V does from other videos I've heard. Maybe it's time to pull the trigger in a Mark amp.
Haven't tried the VII but they continue removing options. The Mark IV has 3 push/pulls for the lead channel that have a big influence on the tone. I'd say the different between a push/pull is as big as the difference between a IIC+ and a IV. So them taking away those features doesn't seem too promising to me.
All the Mark IVA and B are labeled the opposite. A version is the older Mesa/Boogie logo and B versions has the Boogie logo. The sound files sound like the correct versions.
You can't tell by the badge, because there is overlap during the transition plus the fact you could get either badge on either version if you requested it or swapped it out later. You have to look at the effects loop, that's the only way to know for sure.
I hope that all of this playing around with the Mark series amps means that there is an exciting update around the corner on the plugins from with the newer technology for these magical amps! A Verona redo of the ML5 and also a ML4 (along with a ML2C+ if I am being greedy) would get me out of the hardware modeling game and into plugins for my digital needs.
IVa wins for me.
5:32 settings
Well if you really had dialed the c+ using the pull knobs you would found the "tump". Pulling the Master volume and Bass knob gives you twice as much tump as you'd find on any Mark IV. No, thanks, Mark IIc+ is the best amp Mesa ever made and will ever be. Metallica sound is shit btw. I'd dial a John Petrucci tone from "six degrees of inner turbulence" on my C+ amps and giggle all day, never looking for that Metalishit tone here.
I've had a real 1984 Mark IIC+ as a loaner for a few months so I definitely know THE REAL ONE throughout. It became very clear to me that the reason is it considered so tight is because it doesn't have nearly as much gain as a Mark IV. For me the real IIC+ became a one trick pony with essentially one sound that I would use which is an amazing sound. Something people should know is that the graphic EQ on that real Mark IIC+ is very different to these modern graphic EQs. For getting that graphics EQ V shape on these modern Mesa Mark series amps you have to turn that 6600hz fader way down and the 2200hz fader up more. And as far as Petrucci's best tones go.. Systematic Chaos is Mark IV and for me that's as good as it gets. The Suspended Animation IIC+ tones were awesome though.
What a terrible review. So much talk, drop tuning, very little demonstration. If people want to see really how this thing should have done go watchs Kyle bull. Terrible.
Jeez, it wasn't THAT bad. From all the talking in the video, I learned the tonal difference between the Mark IV A and B versions as well as how to visibly tell them apart. I'm a big Mark guy and even I didn't know any of that.
Kyle Bull is cool, but Marks aren't his expertise. I watched his video with the III, IV, and V. He really struggled to dial a good tone on the Mark IV and resorted to using boost pedals trying to get a decent sound. If you're dialing in those 3 amps and the best tone you could get is coming from the Mark V, you're doing something wrong.
And I could be mistaken but doesn't Kyle tune his guitars down to drop C?