My point here is this, the price of ownership for the Mark VII will cost you the same for the Triple Crown 100W at a street cost of $3,499.00 plus tax. If you are so lucky, you may even get free shipping.
So, which one do you choose? What is your game? Both amps will deliver the goods and are capable of use with extended range guitars like the 7-string if that is in your bag of tricks. However, they are completely different amps.
TC100
Triple Crown 100 or even the 50W will provide a traditional vintage sound reminiscent of the Marshall Silver Jubilee 2555 but more refined and polished. I have a reissue, 2555x in the 100W format. Yep, the three channels are very much like the Silver Jubilee in most respects. So, if you are after some plexi-tones, you can find that mostly with the clean channel. The drive mode is where you get that character. The TC clean channel is where all of the dynamics reside if you are into that play soft it is clean, play hard it bites with an attitude. You can basically dial in the gain to step over the CH2 gain structure. The Triple Crown is very much like its predecessor in respects to the two separate preamp circuits. The Clean channel uses its own set of preamp tubes and the hi/lo gain channels run a different pair to preamp tubes so there is no sharing of the gain stages except for the FX send/return, phase inverter and reverb circuits. The Lo gain or vintage low gain is much like the Silver Jubilee amp but yet different. The three channel voices were carried over from the Royal Atlantic 100W amp. It was not until I bought a Marshall Silver Jubilee where I was able to draw a connection to what the TC sounds like. The main difference is the method used by the 2555 for a clipping circuit (LEDs). The TC (or RA) does not use LEDs for a clipping method. It is all plate driven distortion. Then there is the Hi gain channel. It brings in an additional gain stage to push the amp into some Mark like characteristics. Both Hi and Lo gain circuits have a post gain tone stack where the clean channel retains that pre gain tone stack topography.
The Triple Crown also has one of the most silent switching methods used when changing channels. No pops or funky artifacts of reverb wash that I have yet to notice. The FX loop is line level so your budgetary FX processors that are instrument level may or may not work very well. You will need to have at least a +8dBu capable FX unit. It is not the end of the world though as there is one device that could be used in the FX loop so you can keep using the instrument level stomp boxes you may favor. There is a re-amp interface made by Radial engineering that is intended to make use of instrument level fx units in a line level circuit. EXTC-SA will work for a single amp application. Now I see they have a stereo version of it. I have not tried this since I tossed out most of my instrument level FX units after finding they did not work with the Mark V90. There is one FX pedal I do recommend, the Mesa 5BGEQ but that one seems to be missing from the Mesa lineup. There are others that will work too. Boss EQ-200 is good. Probably more than you need as it is a stereo unit but can be configured to separate the left and right so I can use one on the input and one in the FX loop if that works.
I have never made much use of the multi-soak feature. I have tried it and it works great for attenuation. It was nothing like that of the Royal Atlantic so the multi-soak effect of getting different levels of power tube saturation was not as interesting with the TC100.
Mark VII
The Mark VII, something different than the Triple Crown. It does bring in some vintage tones from three legendary amps of Mesa's past. IIB, IIC+ and IV. The IIB mode is new to me as I never had a IIB amp to compare it too. IIC+, do not have an original to compare it to either. Closest I have on hand is the JP2C loaded with the STR415 tubes. I can say that the STR445 carry some of that weight to drive the amp to match the JP2C in many respects. I was very surprised to hear the similarities with the IIC+ and IV modes were almost indistinguishable from the JP2C CH2 and CH3 pushing power through a quad of the STR415 Sylvania tubes I bought from Mesa Boogie (they are a bit difficult to get). So, in respect to amazing sounds from CH3, I did not find any reason for alarm as all three modes had their unique characteristics and tone that quite rewarding.
One other mode of unfamiliarity was in fact more familiar than I expected it to be. Mark VII mode is very close to the Badlander Crush mode. Come to think of it, the crunch mode is also similar to the BAD crunch mode. Sure, the circuits are completely different and unrelated. The BAD has the basic Rectifier circuit with cold clipper and cathode follower tone stack driver, whereas the Mark VII just repositions the lead drive circuit into a new circuit path before the tone stack sort of lends itself to a similar character of the Badlander. To top if off, the STR445 tubes do have that 6CA7 character to them so there is a hint of that EL34 flavor but not as pronounced as you would find with the BAD if EL34 were your preference.
Then we have the two clean modes. Both are very much the same as what you get with the other Mark amps from the past. What is also great is that you can push the gain to make them less clean. I can almost mimic the driven clean character of the BAD using the clean mode but obviously the BAD will have more teeth in its delivery and distortion range vs the Mark VII pushing the clean into clipping.
I have not noticed any pops or inherited noises when channel changing. It may do this at the start but if it does, I did not take notice. It does have a mute on the reverb circuit so some wash in effect may take place with a moderate reverb setting. I was not paying much attention if this is an issue as I do not change channels much.
Dynamics of the Mark VII are similar to that of the JP2C and the Badlander. The amp is a bit more aggressive on wanting to hold its clip, but I have been able to manage cleaning up the amp with guitar volume roll back. As for the FX loop, I have yet to encounter any issue, but I can say one thing is that the VII signal strength is a bit more than the JP2C when sharing a common stereo FX pedal. The Mark VII has more influence than the JP2C. Not sure where it sits in the signal level range. Sure, any line level compatible FX unit will work just fine with any of the amps I have, including the Mark V90. If I had instrument level effects to try in the FX loop, I would say it is a good fit. Even the JP2C has a higher than instrument level FX send level around -8dBu to -6dBu so your instrument level fx device may be pushed to its limit since they are rated for -20dBu which is lower than what I had measured when I looked into signal levels from three amps (TC, JP2C, MkV90). The -10dBu is still classified as line level if not mistaken.
All of the Blah, blah, blah and no sound clips? Are you kidding me? Sorry, I do not have anything that compared the TC100 to the Mark VII. Even if I did, that does not really help much. Trying one or both out in person is probably the best way to find out which is best for you. Recordings do not capture the feel, response or even the harmonic content along with the air movement, punch or other over/under tones from the guitar cabinet and so on. I have my own opinion which I prefer. I can say this, both are fun amps to enjoy so it boils down to your end goal in mind if you have one. First hand experience: there is a learning curve with both. The TC100 or TC50 can sound harsh with fresh new EL34 tubes so it takes about a week of use for them to mellow out. You may want to dial back on the presence and treble a bit until that happens. Once they mellow out they sound really good. Mark VII can also be very bright too. I have not had mine long enough to see how the power tubes age. Also, this is the first time I have been exposed to the STR445 power tubes. So far I like them.
So, which one do you choose? What is your game? Both amps will deliver the goods and are capable of use with extended range guitars like the 7-string if that is in your bag of tricks. However, they are completely different amps.
TC100
Triple Crown 100 or even the 50W will provide a traditional vintage sound reminiscent of the Marshall Silver Jubilee 2555 but more refined and polished. I have a reissue, 2555x in the 100W format. Yep, the three channels are very much like the Silver Jubilee in most respects. So, if you are after some plexi-tones, you can find that mostly with the clean channel. The drive mode is where you get that character. The TC clean channel is where all of the dynamics reside if you are into that play soft it is clean, play hard it bites with an attitude. You can basically dial in the gain to step over the CH2 gain structure. The Triple Crown is very much like its predecessor in respects to the two separate preamp circuits. The Clean channel uses its own set of preamp tubes and the hi/lo gain channels run a different pair to preamp tubes so there is no sharing of the gain stages except for the FX send/return, phase inverter and reverb circuits. The Lo gain or vintage low gain is much like the Silver Jubilee amp but yet different. The three channel voices were carried over from the Royal Atlantic 100W amp. It was not until I bought a Marshall Silver Jubilee where I was able to draw a connection to what the TC sounds like. The main difference is the method used by the 2555 for a clipping circuit (LEDs). The TC (or RA) does not use LEDs for a clipping method. It is all plate driven distortion. Then there is the Hi gain channel. It brings in an additional gain stage to push the amp into some Mark like characteristics. Both Hi and Lo gain circuits have a post gain tone stack where the clean channel retains that pre gain tone stack topography.
The Triple Crown also has one of the most silent switching methods used when changing channels. No pops or funky artifacts of reverb wash that I have yet to notice. The FX loop is line level so your budgetary FX processors that are instrument level may or may not work very well. You will need to have at least a +8dBu capable FX unit. It is not the end of the world though as there is one device that could be used in the FX loop so you can keep using the instrument level stomp boxes you may favor. There is a re-amp interface made by Radial engineering that is intended to make use of instrument level fx units in a line level circuit. EXTC-SA will work for a single amp application. Now I see they have a stereo version of it. I have not tried this since I tossed out most of my instrument level FX units after finding they did not work with the Mark V90. There is one FX pedal I do recommend, the Mesa 5BGEQ but that one seems to be missing from the Mesa lineup. There are others that will work too. Boss EQ-200 is good. Probably more than you need as it is a stereo unit but can be configured to separate the left and right so I can use one on the input and one in the FX loop if that works.
I have never made much use of the multi-soak feature. I have tried it and it works great for attenuation. It was nothing like that of the Royal Atlantic so the multi-soak effect of getting different levels of power tube saturation was not as interesting with the TC100.
Mark VII
The Mark VII, something different than the Triple Crown. It does bring in some vintage tones from three legendary amps of Mesa's past. IIB, IIC+ and IV. The IIB mode is new to me as I never had a IIB amp to compare it too. IIC+, do not have an original to compare it to either. Closest I have on hand is the JP2C loaded with the STR415 tubes. I can say that the STR445 carry some of that weight to drive the amp to match the JP2C in many respects. I was very surprised to hear the similarities with the IIC+ and IV modes were almost indistinguishable from the JP2C CH2 and CH3 pushing power through a quad of the STR415 Sylvania tubes I bought from Mesa Boogie (they are a bit difficult to get). So, in respect to amazing sounds from CH3, I did not find any reason for alarm as all three modes had their unique characteristics and tone that quite rewarding.
One other mode of unfamiliarity was in fact more familiar than I expected it to be. Mark VII mode is very close to the Badlander Crush mode. Come to think of it, the crunch mode is also similar to the BAD crunch mode. Sure, the circuits are completely different and unrelated. The BAD has the basic Rectifier circuit with cold clipper and cathode follower tone stack driver, whereas the Mark VII just repositions the lead drive circuit into a new circuit path before the tone stack sort of lends itself to a similar character of the Badlander. To top if off, the STR445 tubes do have that 6CA7 character to them so there is a hint of that EL34 flavor but not as pronounced as you would find with the BAD if EL34 were your preference.
Then we have the two clean modes. Both are very much the same as what you get with the other Mark amps from the past. What is also great is that you can push the gain to make them less clean. I can almost mimic the driven clean character of the BAD using the clean mode but obviously the BAD will have more teeth in its delivery and distortion range vs the Mark VII pushing the clean into clipping.
I have not noticed any pops or inherited noises when channel changing. It may do this at the start but if it does, I did not take notice. It does have a mute on the reverb circuit so some wash in effect may take place with a moderate reverb setting. I was not paying much attention if this is an issue as I do not change channels much.
Dynamics of the Mark VII are similar to that of the JP2C and the Badlander. The amp is a bit more aggressive on wanting to hold its clip, but I have been able to manage cleaning up the amp with guitar volume roll back. As for the FX loop, I have yet to encounter any issue, but I can say one thing is that the VII signal strength is a bit more than the JP2C when sharing a common stereo FX pedal. The Mark VII has more influence than the JP2C. Not sure where it sits in the signal level range. Sure, any line level compatible FX unit will work just fine with any of the amps I have, including the Mark V90. If I had instrument level effects to try in the FX loop, I would say it is a good fit. Even the JP2C has a higher than instrument level FX send level around -8dBu to -6dBu so your instrument level fx device may be pushed to its limit since they are rated for -20dBu which is lower than what I had measured when I looked into signal levels from three amps (TC, JP2C, MkV90). The -10dBu is still classified as line level if not mistaken.
All of the Blah, blah, blah and no sound clips? Are you kidding me? Sorry, I do not have anything that compared the TC100 to the Mark VII. Even if I did, that does not really help much. Trying one or both out in person is probably the best way to find out which is best for you. Recordings do not capture the feel, response or even the harmonic content along with the air movement, punch or other over/under tones from the guitar cabinet and so on. I have my own opinion which I prefer. I can say this, both are fun amps to enjoy so it boils down to your end goal in mind if you have one. First hand experience: there is a learning curve with both. The TC100 or TC50 can sound harsh with fresh new EL34 tubes so it takes about a week of use for them to mellow out. You may want to dial back on the presence and treble a bit until that happens. Once they mellow out they sound really good. Mark VII can also be very bright too. I have not had mine long enough to see how the power tubes age. Also, this is the first time I have been exposed to the STR445 power tubes. So far I like them.
