The Boogie Board

Discussion Forum for Mesa Boogie Products
It is currently Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:28 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:01 am 
Offline
Mark I

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:28 pm
Posts: 30
donnyboiler wrote:
UpNorthMark wrote:
A Mark VI with a mid boost on the gain channel like the little Mark V has would be nice as well


According to the manual, it’s only channel one that has the boost. Channel two is a standard mid control apparently. Might be a cool thing to have though...

paulyc wrote:
donnyboiler wrote:
I’m glad people are liking my video. Here it is on the same gig doing ‘80s stuff with some micro-pitch, delay etc.

https://youtu.be/oeDysCNOfDQ

Y’know, I’ve thought about what I would want from a Mark VI. I owned the V for a year and loved it too. The more I think about it, I want the VI to just be a JP-2C with Simul-Class. The amazing thing about the JP-2C is not only does it sound and feel amazing, but every control does exactly what you’d hope and expect. It kind of achieves more with less - the perfect example being the mid-boost control on the clean channel which takes me right up to Tweed territory. Also I don’t miss Crunch mode or Mark IV mode at all and I really thought I would.


Buy a Simul Class poweramp and run W/D/W with it and the JP2C, I LOVE running mine with my Simul 295 this way...


Neat idea. I still want a Simul head though!


Actually, now that I'm really thinking about it, a Simul 395 would be even better, as it has switching of it's modes, better fit for the JP2C and it's MIDI.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:31 pm 
Offline
Mark III

Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:55 pm
Posts: 197
I don’t foresee another Mark series amp for quite a while, probably years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:06 pm 
Offline
Mark II
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 3:59 am
Posts: 78
Today I played my old Mark V alongside one of my current JP-2Cs. Very cool afternoon and plenty learned. The V is still a killer sounding amp.

I came away with the impression that, as brilliant as the V is, the JP has moved the game on in several key areas. CabClone and MIDI are obviously indispensable, but it's more than that. The way the controls respond, the way it achieves very nearly the same flexibility without all the complication - but more than anything, there is a purity, weight and muscularity to the JP that simply cannot be replicated on the V. Even switching the V to IV mode and working the sliders it doesn't feel as big. Even if I deliberately handicap the JP by putting it in 60W mode or running weaker settings, it still has more impact and more "realness" than the V at any setting. Somehow the V sounds slightly "further back" even if you set it brighter than the JP (interestingly this isn't the case with my V:25 which sounds beautifully pure).

I'll temper this by saying the V does have more complexity in the mids, and a slightly faster attack. It is still a magic amp, and Crunch mode admittedly has a Marshally snarl that doesn't quite exist anywhere in the JP.

For me though (and I realise I'm only one guy in a field of Boogie fanatics here) I felt I could get more tone, response and enjoyment out of two JPs set up differently than out of one JP and a V. That says it all for me - the V is very, very good but the JP is a masterpiece.

_________________
www.donstickguitar.net


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:14 pm 
Offline
Triple Recto

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:31 am
Posts: 3059
Location: North Carolina
Yes, the JP-2C is a masterpiece. Having two JP-2C is the magnum opus. No need to stop at just two. Not sure if there is a limit on how many JP-2C you can daisy chain together.

There are a few things going on with the Mark V that either should not be there or were added in haste and should have been unpopulated. Most of the focus could be narrowed down to V4 (primary culprit for the stale tone on CH3) and then there is V6 with a similar tone robbing capacitor. If you had the opportunity to compare all of the historic schematics starting from the IIC+ on up to the Mark V, all of the amps have identical drive circuits with a few exceptions, Mark V has a 120pF shunting the grid to the cathode on V4B and V6A. Perhaps the cap is there for oscillation control (lets face it the amp begins to squeal with moderate gain settings on CH3, also one reason why some have adopted the Jan Phillips 12AT7 for the V4 tube and or the V6 tube. I took a gamble and removed C39 from the V4B circuit, made the amp brighter but the added side effect was that it restored the missing midrange. That was a game changer for me. I have not bothered with the other cap on V6A circuit (C44 if you need to know). What a difference that made, and I can adjust the gain setting much higher using all 12AX7 tubes in the preamp. Before all of this I could not set the gain any higher than 9am or the amp would just freek out with too much feedback which is not musical at all. Now I no longer have a love/hate thing with the Mark V as it is far more enjoyable to play. Amp has no warranty anyway as it is past its 5 year thing. One has to appreciate the Mark V in a different light than the JP-2C.

TC-50 is a fun amp to no end as much as the TC-100. I still cherish the JP-2C as the top shelf amp. Too bad that Mesa used same midi commands for different function in the TC-100, if there was any overlap and common commands I would be running both the JP-2C and the TC-100 at the same time, they sound perfect together such that each on its own cannot replicate the combined tone.

_________________
Current amps: TC-100, TC-50, JP-2C, MK V, Roadster, RA100


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 9:16 pm 
Offline
Bottle Rocket

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Posts: 15
Actually bandit, it's irrelevant if the commands overlap or not, just set the amps to different midi channels and use a goodish quality controller to switch both or 3 or whatever.

Which actually is a good segue into why I logged into the forum tonight... Does anyone know (I could not find it in the manual) if the JP2C can power a midi footswitch by using the 7 pin port or is that a no no? I am looking into buying this:http://www.famcmusic.com/store/LF-JR


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline
Donating Member

Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:48 am
Posts: 641
Location: Central Texas
How does the amount of compression compare between a Mark V and a JP2C?

_________________
YOUTUBE: mesafanintexas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:17 am 
Offline
Triple Recto

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:31 am
Posts: 3059
Location: North Carolina
Jesse Daly wrote:
Actually bandit, it's irrelevant if the commands overlap or not, just set the amps to different midi channels and use a goodish quality controller to switch both or 3 or whatever.

Which actually is a good segue into why I logged into the forum tonight... Does anyone know (I could not find it in the manual) if the JP2C can power a midi footswitch by using the 7 pin port or is that a no no? I am looking into buying this:http://www.famcmusic.com/store/LF-JR


If you are using a different controller than the footswitch, you must use a different midi channel. Also the footswitch jack is only for the footswitch so I doubt you could use it for other. What I wanted to do was use one footswitch to control both JP-2C and the TC-100. Too bad that will not work. I would have to buy an aftermarket product to control both amps at the same time. I did daisy chain the TC-50 and TC-100 and that worked out great. Since the TC series has an FX loop function it would be nice to gain that with the JP-2C. They could have just added two more buttons, one for the FX and the other for the Shred mode. I wonder if the controller on the JP-2C footswitch could be modified to convert the reverb to FX loop instead. The amp sounds damn good without the reverb in use. A controller may be in order some day.

_________________
Current amps: TC-100, TC-50, JP-2C, MK V, Roadster, RA100


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:27 am 
Offline
Triple Recto

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:31 am
Posts: 3059
Location: North Carolina
talltxguy wrote:
How does the amount of compression compare between a Mark V and a JP2C?


It depends on what voice you compare to on the Mark V. Actually not much of a comparisson as the two amps do not sound the same. I would have to say the Mark IV mode on the Mark V would have more compression than either of the two channels on the JP-2C. The Mark V on CH3 is a bit more sterile where as the JP-2C gain channels are very dynamic and organic in characteristics. Extreme voice on CH3 of the V gets close to the character of the JP-2C but not exaclty as it does not have the same distortion qualities. Sure when recorded, they almost sound similar but in the room with each amp the Mark V has a bit of a quicker response and higher harmonic overtones. JP-2C is not too far behind that and you can dial in more presence to compensate. Since I took liberties to modify my Mark V that gap in difference is a bit closer (not using the 12AT7 in V4 any longer but that did help improve the Mark V to some extent, just not enough for me though, may just be my Mark V lacks the mojo as I have strggled with it for many years). Mark V has a thinner tone where as the JP-2C is thick, tight and articulate and does not seem to muddy up like the Mark V.

_________________
Current amps: TC-100, TC-50, JP-2C, MK V, Roadster, RA100


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:12 am 
Offline
Mark II
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 3:59 am
Posts: 78
Yeah. I think if you’re comparing apples to apples (IIC+ mode on the V to the dirt channels of the JP-2C) then the amount of compression is about the same. Channel two is a little less compressed than channel three. This is ignoring all the other differences Bandit mentioned.

I think all of these are pretty low in compression for such high gain circuits, certainly compared to Mark IV mode. But I’m coming from an EVH 5153 and a Cornford MK50, both of which I found very compressed. My old Soldanos and Bogners seemed more compressed at high gain too; but everybody hears things differently.

It’s worth pointing out that something like compression is not easy to compare sensibly, as everything has different compression characteristics; for example the Cornford cleans up beautifully and has great exciting high mids - which makes it feel uncompressed in the room, but when I recorded it, I noticed the level meters were very flat and it didn’t jump out of the speaker - which made it difficult to mix sometimes. The EVH 5150 III felt pretty darn compressed and almost antiseptic in the room, but it had a “tear your face off” quality that translates really well in a mix. The Bogner feels very, very organic and lovely under the fingers but the high mids just squish so hard it’s almost impossible to record it next to a Marshall-type amp and get convincing results.

I think, on balance, any IIC+ circuit is going to be relatively uncompressed, touch responsive and easy to mix relative to other options (it’s certainly my favourite) but others hear all the saturation and thick midrange and go “ooh it’s so gooey and compressed”. In short there’s no accounting for taste.

I think that (in a nutshell) if you like IIC+ mode on the V, you will love the JP’s channel three, and I think you’ll find its channel two clearer, crunchier and less compressed than either - discounting all other differences.

_________________
www.donstickguitar.net


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2018 5:51 am 
Offline
Mark III

Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:55 pm
Posts: 197
For me, the IV is warmer and rounder still, and it’s easier to get the gain I want out of the IV. The JP to me has something in the mids that the V had. Wasn’t as thrilled as a I had hoped after a few days. Don’t get me wrong, might be the best Mark amp to date, but the IV fits me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:05 am 
Offline
Triple Recto

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:31 am
Posts: 3059
Location: North Carolina
Hmm, I am not finding the relation between the JP and the Mark V in terms of mids. Could be the presence control settings or where you have the midrange set too as that seems to have a dual function depending if less than noon or greater than noon. Actually I am finding myself pushing the 750 Hz sliders up more on the JP than with the Mark V (to me that is a sorry excuse for a mark series amp, well it may just be limited to my Mark V, should have been called the Mark Zero, yeah, I am that happy with the V, not).

_________________
Current amps: TC-100, TC-50, JP-2C, MK V, Roadster, RA100


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group