Im kinda stumped here for a good head and i was looking at these 2 amps, can someone tell me the pros and cons and troubles with them. I will be running it through a stiletto 4x12 cab with v30s and I need it to be very versatile i like smooth vai esque tones and i also want to do heavy rhythms and it needs a good clean.
Mesa Mark iic+ vs. Mark iv
- Thread starter esharp727
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
JOEY B.
Well-known member
esharp727 said:
With the stomp of a foot? If so, then a MkIV or V would be the better choice. 8)
ryjan
Well-known member
It really depends on what is more important to you. From what everyone who has ever played one says the MarkIIC+ is said to have the best lead tone of any boogie (I have never played though one) but you are limited by the 2 channel, shared eq as far as live playing goes. The MarkIV has 3 seperate channels with shared mid and bass on the rhythm channels and an independant eq for the lead. Plus the tone of the MarkIV is rivaled by very, very few. If you want to know every feature about these amps just go to mesa-boogie's website and check out the online user manuals.
It depends on what you mean by versatility.
The Mark IV has 3 sep channels but two share an EQ so you will have to compromise on balancing Ch1 and Ch2.
The Mark IIC+ has 2 channels but it's really just one so you have to balance them which is usually a compromise.
If you're looking for a stage amp with lots of tones readily available by footswitch, the IV is going to kill the IIC+ in that aspect, but both are versatile in terms of possible tones achievable. The IIC+ has better tone in my opinion (I've got both) and a much better lead but the IV is what I gig with for the above reasons.. and also because I'm protective of the IIC+s
The Mark IV has 3 sep channels but two share an EQ so you will have to compromise on balancing Ch1 and Ch2.
The Mark IIC+ has 2 channels but it's really just one so you have to balance them which is usually a compromise.
If you're looking for a stage amp with lots of tones readily available by footswitch, the IV is going to kill the IIC+ in that aspect, but both are versatile in terms of possible tones achievable. The IIC+ has better tone in my opinion (I've got both) and a much better lead but the IV is what I gig with for the above reasons.. and also because I'm protective of the IIC+s
esharp727 said:I have enoughh money maybe ill just get both
On the IV, the EQ is switchable on and off, so I usually EQ it for my rhythm playing and stomp off it for leads.
ryjan
Well-known member
Do you have enough money to get me one too? :lol: :lol: :lol:
JOEY B.
Well-known member
esharp727 said:
I have found a good "workaround" for the shared tone controls of the C+. It involves using the EQ AUTO function and a guitar with seperate volume and tone controls for each pickup (aka Les Paul), with a pot upgrade kit from RS Guitarworks and the Seymour Duncan "Treble-Bleed mod". 8) It may not work for everyone, but I can live with it.
tony777
Well-known member
Same here, I use Ibanez guitars with their 4 pole pickup switcher, which enables me to wire almost everything.JOEY B. said:
So the tone control at the guitar is only working in the positions where I use clean sounds. and the positions where I use distortion the tone control is off. I then roll back the tone control to about three.
The guitars have high output humbuckers, which is splitted for cleans.
At the C+ I have a V shaped GEQ always on.
Volume 1 is at about 7 non pulled. Treble at 10 pulled, Middle at 8, and Bass at 1 or 2 non pulled.
This solution gives me fender cleans and boogie leads.
Similar threads
