Kind of surprised at the negatives....

I am just a little surprised at some of the "I don't like the Mark V because of...."

Its one thing to try an amp and realize it isn't the perfect fit for your needs, but I can't imagine a better Mark series amp. In fact, I can't imagine putting a Mark V head to head with competing amps (if you can find something even close) and not walking away with the V and a grin.

Odd negative comments I have noticed:

"It pops when going from 10 watt to 45 or 90 watt channels" - How many amps even go from 10 to 90?
"I wish the modes were foot switchable" - how many amps have multiple, distinctly voiced modes per channel?
"The Mark I mode is too dark" - EQ knobs? Graphic EQ? Contour Preset? Two other modes that are fairly bright?
"It doesn' have enough low end" - I had a Mark IV A, the V has about the same amount of low end. Did people expect Recto low end?
"I wish it had MIDI" - if you can afford $2K for an amp, you can probably swing another $350 for an amp gizmo if you really need it
"I don't like the EQ, it feels cheap" - This EQ is much like my Mark IV, minus almost 20 years of wear and tear. How many others amps even have GEQs?

I know tastes differ in amps, but do some people expect the V to play the tunes for them and make the morning coffee too?

I agree with you on everything...I love this amp...it's the greatest one I've owned so far...the popping isn't all that bad and doesn't bother me at all. The bass in this amp is probably due to the settings and yeah some people expect it to be just like a recto, so what can you say to that.

Now...I've owned a Marshall JVM410 in the past...and I gotta say I wish it did have midi switching so you could switch modes within each panel from the footswitch...but I wonder why Mesa left it out...sound impact?? hmm...dunno...frankly I don't care that much

This amp kicks arse, and people love to nit-pick

I agree with your comments. Every amp available today has something about it you may not like or wish it could do this or that.
The V can do a lot and do it well. I can find my tone in every channel.
What kills me is the "not enough bass" comments. The only reason I can see someone wanting more bass is if you played thrash metal using drop tunings etc.. Even then you starting to get into the bass guitarist sonic range and you can't tell the difference who is who.
I believe the reason that Boogies sound excellent in band situations is the fact that fit well in the mix.

I think some people wanted more from the amp.

However, when it is all said and done, I hope people are buying and keeping this amp because it has the tone they want. I have been slowly tweaking my settings and every day find I am happier and happier with what I am getting from the amp.

People shouldn't buy gear for the bells and whistles, they should buy it for the tone.

I've been playing the Mark series amps for about 12 years now. I've owned 2 IIC+ heads, a bunch of III's, and a few IV's. I sold off my IIC+ heads for financial reasons, if someone offered to trade me their IIC+ for my Mark V I'd do it in a SECOND without blinking.

I'm eating some major crow here guys, i jumped all over anyone who was talking bad about the V, especially the guys who claimed the Mark IV lead channel sounds better. Guess what, those guys weren't bullshitting.

The Mark V is just like a Dual Purpose motorcycle. You know, it can do an ok job at most anything, but it does not do great at any one thing. Channel 2 of the V is a big improvement over R2 on the Mark IV, but I'm really suprised that i think the Mark IV lead may have an edge over the V. The V IS more compressed, harder to dial in, and just doesn't have any life to it.

And harder to dial in is something i NEVER thought would be the case, but i was able to nail the sweet spots on a IIC+ in no time. After 2 weeks with the V, I'm still looking.

I'm really bummed out because i had high hopes for the amp. I don't care what Doug West says, this amp is NO IIC+. Not close IMHO. It's not denial or anything, just use your ears guys and you be the judge,

I could not disagree more. Extreme is the gain channel I have been waiting for, Mark series clarity, 5150 character and Recto power in channel. I find the preset switch to be better than my Mark IV GEQ ever was plus the graphic on the V for clean is unbelievable. All of the "gripes" people seem to be having I do not have. The channel pop issue only occurs when you're going from one channel to another that involves 10 watts. Which I only use at home, 45 to 45 to 45 is no problem. Best clean yet, best channel two yet and ya it's not exactly a IIC+ or IV but if you let it be what it is, all those voices are still good on their own.

At the end of the day, Binner is right. There is no other amp that is even close to this one.

But at least if Danyeo's ebay sale goes through he'll have $2000 to play with for a new amp

I tested one out in store and though I agree that it defiantly doesn't nail any of the amps it is set to imitate, it has its own voice and feel which I dig. I think one reason that many people aren't feeling the GEQ is that the mid slider doesn't seem to do much, however the bass and treble sliders have more effect. I found it quite easy to dial in and had a great lead tone in the MIV mode in about a minute, though it was not the MIV tone I know and love, its different altogether, but like I said, cool.

The reasons for many disappointed Mark V customers are simple:
#1) Nothing ever lives up to the hype.
#2) Folks just like their "old" amps and the sound they get from them. They're used to them, have used them for any number of years and gigs. There's always something to be said for that comfortable pair of old shoes.
#3) See #1.
I'm sure the Mark V is a great amp, 'cause all Boogies are great amps. But I've played Mark IIIs for twenty years, and when I finally got a Mark IV, I spent days and days tweaking it, only to realize I was just trying to get it to sound like my Mark III.
If it ain't broke, etc. To say nothing of old dogs, new tricks, etc. :lol:
Of course, I will get a mark V, eventually.

It almost seems like a mistake naming the voices after classic amps. Would they have been better off saying "Chan 3 Agressive mode sounds just like my Mark IV" Channel 3 Urgent Mode sounds like a Mark IIC+? Hard to say...

I agreed with most of what you said until you singled out my EQ slider comment. There is nothing you can say to make me believe the EQ sliders are on par with previous Mark amp EQ sliders. They feel cheap and are not as smooth as previous Mark EQ sliders... there is no debate. My comment was about the feel and quality, not the sound.

binnerscot said:

I am just a little surprised at some of the "I don't like the Mark V because of...."

ts one thing to try an amp and realize it isn't the perfect fit for your needs, but I can't imagine a better Mark series amp. In fact, I can't imagine putting a Mark V head to head with competing amps (if you can find something even close) and not walking away with the V and a grin.

Odd negative comments I have noticed:


"The Mark I mode is too dark" - EQ knobs? Graphic EQ? Contour Preset? Two other modes that are fairly bright?
"It doesn' have enough low end" - I had a Mark IV A, the V has about the same amount of low end. Did people expect Recto low end?

"I don't like the EQ, it feels cheap" - This EQ is much like my Mark IV, minus almost 20 years of wear and tear. How many others amps even have GEQs?

I know tastes differ in amps, but do some people expect the V to play the tunes for them and make the morning coffee too?

Click to expand...

responses to three. of these.

mark one. Who wants to spend 2 grand on amp with only 2/3 of it useable?
(althought i did find it useable)

The Mark III's low end stomped all over this thats all i know.

Eq. Compared to a mark III, it really is cheap and crappy. No where near the prescision, and sound wise completely NEUTERED by comparison. The first slider on a Mark III dials in tight firm powerfull bass. On the mark 5 it dials in bloated, muddy bass that doesnt extend very far down at all. If they made it like they did the preset knob, theyd be onto something.Or rather onto what they already had and destroyed.

Oh, and VHT....
~mike~

I happen to love the Mark V and all of its modes and channels. To me it is quintessential Mark Tone.....but it is its own tone. People just have to get over it. It does not really replace the amps it is purported to do.

As my sig shows, I have both the IV & V and the V is overall a superior amp, through and through. However, when evaluating the 3rd channel (forget about the modes and switches and EQs et' al), the lead tone as a whole in the IV is >>> than any of the modes in ch 3 of the V. YMMV

I have absolutely no intentions of selling either one of these amps. In fact, the V is replacing my Shiva soon. As I have finally come across a channel switcher with as good (or better clean than the Shiva.

I dont know whats up with your mark IV, but mine with graphic EQ has twice the lowend capability as a recto...and using your eq to solve a dark channel takes away from using the way you'd REALLY wanna use it...

Ill take a mark II or IV over the V ANYDAY...or a tri-axis.

JAZZGEAR said:

I happen to love the Mark V and all of its modes and channels. To me it is quintessential Mark Tone.....but it is its own tone. People just have to get over it. It does not really replace the amps it is purported to do.

As my sig shows, I have both the IV & V and the V is overall a superior amp, through and through. However, when evaluating the 3rd channel (forget about the modes and switches and EQs et' al), the lead tone as a whole in the IV is >>> than any of the modes in ch 3 of the V. YMMV

I have absolutely no intentions of selling either one of these amps. In fact, the V is replacing my Shiva soon. As I have finally come across a channel switcher with as good (or better clean than the Shiva.

Click to expand...

Not to be a jerk, but if you think the Mark IV lead channel sounds better than anything on the Mark V lead channel, then how can the V be the quintessential Mark series tone?

IMHO, to hear THE Mark series tone you need to experience a IIC+ or a Coliseum. In a band setting, that midrange just cuts through, so clear and tight. All the Mark V has done is make me miss my IIC+'s even more.

I have owned a Mk IV for quite some timeand it has been my stage amp for the last 4 years.
I replaced the MK IV with the MK V and will honestly have to say that the MK V is the better sounding of the two, In fact the MK V sounds way better than the MK IV.

Although it seems like you have to break the amp in to workout some of the kinks.

Guess what my MK V Doesnt sound like a MK IV because it is not a MK IV.
Belive it or not it doesnt sound like a MK 1 or a IIc+ because its a MK V.

Thats why I bought the MK V . If I wanted to sound like all of those other amps
i would go and buy them

wnlively

I honestely dont care if it sounds like the originals or not. Its not like somebody will be able to tell a difference in a live or recording situation. Ive had alot of time with the mark V and i can say it slays.

DudewithFr0 said:

I honestely dont care if it sounds like the originals or not. Its not like somebody will be able to tell a difference in a live or recording situation. Ive had alot of time with the mark V and i can say it slays.

Click to expand...

Is that why people are still paying $3000 for IIC+ amps?

danyeo1 said:

DudewithFr0 said:

I honestely dont care if it sounds like the originals or not. Its not like somebody will be able to tell a difference in a live or recording situation. Ive had alot of time with the mark V and i can say it slays.

Click to expand...

Is that why people are still paying $3000 for IIC+ amps?

Click to expand...

Some people just want the originals. Just like cars. Id rather have an old corvette than a new one.
I think it has more to do with collecting than playing.

DudewithFr0 said:

danyeo1 said:

DudewithFr0 said:

I honestely dont care if it sounds like the originals or not. Its not like somebody will be able to tell a difference in a live or recording situation. Ive had alot of time with the mark V and i can say it slays.

Click to expand...

Is that why people are still paying $3000 for IIC+ amps?

Click to expand...

Some people just want the originals. Just like cars. Id rather have an old corvette than a new one.
I think it has more to do with collecting than playing.

Click to expand...

Not for me. Have you owned a IIC+, recorded with it, played shows with it? IMHO, the feel and tone of the V, IIC+ mode isn't there.

DudewithFr0 said:

I honestely dont care if it sounds like the originals or not. Its not like somebody will be able to tell a difference in a live or recording situation. Ive had alot of time with the mark V and i can say it slays.

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what is ever produced some poeple will never be happy with anything. Just human nature is all.

As for me - I've never owned a Mark anything. The only Mark I've ever heard live is the IV & then only a couple of times. All the Marks are as rare as hens teeth in Australia.
So I could care less if the Mark V sounds like any of its older cousins. I'd just luv to have a Mark V for itself, for its extreme versatility, for its own range of tones, and if it sounds as great as the IV I'd be more than stoked. :mrgreen: