JP2C or Mark VII?

I found the VII to be lacking in the lowend department. I had a JP2C when they first came out and didnt get that vibe with it. But Im going off memory, anyone compare them side by side and thought the JP has a bigger lowend ?
 
the4thlast1 said:
I found the VII to be lacking in the lowend department. I had a JP2C when they first came out and didnt get that vibe with it. But Im going off memory, anyone compare them side by side and thought the JP has a bigger lowend ?
Click to expand...
I have. I guess one could say the JP has more low end, others describe it as bassy or boxy. I liked it but like my VII more. It can still sound so mean I couldn't care less about these differences and I like the overall wider feature set as well. I personally did not benefit from the dual EQ on the JP.
 
Last edited:
One thing I will say and this is just my opinion is that the JP2C struggles in the crunch department compared to the VII. It's more of a 2 high gain channels from what I found but that suits my tastes more the the other.
 
milin_im said:
I couldn't bond with the 2 JP2Cs I've had in both the sound and feel compared to my Mark IVs. There was something in the low end that I didn't like, and I felt that I needed to push the presence more than I'd like to sound good, both pushed or pulled, but then it became kinda fizzy. With the VII on the otherhand, it feels better and I can run the presence relatively low without the amp sounding like it's missing something. I still prefer the IV to the VII though. I'm talking about channel III btw. What I have to say about the JP2C is that in the mix it comes alive, as it cuts better than the others, and starts feeling better too, I know it doesn't makes sense. Still, I sold my JP2Cs.
Click to expand...
How high do you typically run the presence on your IV's? I have mine around 7 usually.
 
I briefly owned a JP and VII together, and ended up selling the JP. I also have owned a V25, V, IVa, and IVb.

The JP didn't have quite the low end I wanted. The VII sort of resolved that, but had it's own things that I wasn't super into. I preferred the JP format...2 EQs, Shred mode, but preferred the IV mode tone on the VII. Ultimately, I really only used the VII as a 2 channel amp and didn't really tap into most of it's capable of. I wish they would've done 2 EQs, clean channel, 2C+ channel, and IV channel, with shred mode built in. All these modes...really I just wanted the 2 that were on the same channel to be on separate channels so I could footswitch between them.

Anyway, they both sound really damn good. Just depends...do you want all the features of the VII, or do you like the layout on the JP better? I am really particular about what I look for in low end response, and the VII just sounded a bit bigger to me.

I think at the end of the day, I would still prefer the IV over either of them. I think that amp was the sweet spot for me, personally. But you really can't go wrong.

I sold the VII earlier this year and went back to the EVH 100s. I just like 5150s, I guess.





 
rbasaria said:
I briefly owned a JP and VII together, and ended up selling the JP. I also have owned a V25, V, IVa, and IVb.

The JP didn't have quite the low end I wanted. The VII sort of resolved that, but had it's own things that I wasn't super into. I preferred the JP format...2 EQs, Shred mode, but preferred the IV mode tone on the VII. Ultimately, I really only used the VII as a 2 channel amp and didn't really tap into most of it's capable of. I wish they would've done 2 EQs, clean channel, 2C+ channel, and IV channel, with shred mode built in. All these modes...really I just wanted the 2 that were on the same channel to be on separate channels so I could footswitch between them.

Anyway, they both sound really damn good. Just depends...do you want all the features of the VII, or do you like the layout on the JP better? I am really particular about what I look for in low end response, and the VII just sounded a bit bigger to me.

I think at the end of the day, I would still prefer the IV over either of them. I think that amp was the sweet spot for me, personally. But you really can't go wrong.

I sold the VII earlier this year and went back to the EVH 100s. I just like 5150s, I guess.

Click to expand...

Love seeing you on here Raf. Wish you would stop by and post more often 👍

I got to try the VII at GC Hollywood months ago and I liked the JP better. I agree with you Raf, I think it's the layout that has me the most hooked on it, and of course I dig the sound. Since I already own a III and IVa, I was the most curious about the VII mode as I saw a vid of JP playing it on that mode on a Beato vid and it sounded like a monstrous Recto. I tried to cop that sound and I really didn't get close. It's very bold, fuzzy, mushy with no detail. Even with low gain and then boosted, it sounded nothing like a recto. I guess sort of the feel was recto-ish I can say. Also, the bottom end fell apart on higher volumes.
 
Appreciate that! I am so busy these days that I really only get on here when I have some random free time...which happened to be right now! haha.

Yeah, I don't get the VII mode lol. I heard cool clips and tried a lot of dialing, and just couldn't get it to do anything I liked. I had the amp about 10 months, so plenty of time trying to dial it in, but meh. Pretty sure if I ever get another Mark, it will be a IV. I think those amps were a lot more balanced. Something I find with the JP and VII is they have this somewhat ultra sharpness in the high end or something. It's like a modern sheen on top of the tone that the IV didn't have. It's not a bad thing at all, but I owned my pair of IVs for 2-3 years, and I preferred for that to not be as pronounced, I guess.

EDIT: Also, I never had an issue cutting at band practice or on stage. The VII absolutely commanded the mix in those situations.

 
Last edited:
To the o.p.
Dnt forget about how much a difference makes in a few easy tube rolls too.Theres a guy on another forum who switched out just 1 or pres,but all the power tubes on the vii and it turned it into a lethal flame thrower with massive tight punchy low end and a cut on the high end that would easily punch thru in band settings..
Same with the jp.(If its possible for you to grab some extra tubes to try) id say try that first before throwing in the towel on either. Obviously not possible if buying site unseen tho.I did this with my mkiii coli's and am so so glad I did and didn't sell them.
 
Last edited:
Little B said:
To the o.p.
Dnt forget about how much a difference makes in a few easy tube rolls too.Theres a guy on another forum who switched out just 1 or pres,but all the power tubes on the vii and it turned it into a lethal flame thrower with massive tight punchy low end and a cut on the high end that would easily punch thru in band settings..
Same with the jp.(If its possible for you to grab some extra tubes to try) id say try that first before throwing in the towel on either. Obviously not possible if buying site unseen tho.I did this with my mkiii coli's and am so so glad I did and didn't sell them.
Click to expand...
I guess I know what I'm doing tomorrow. I never thought to tube roll the JP since I bought it brand new and it came with fresh Mesa tubes. Are Mesa tubes shitty these days? I've always liked them in all of my rectos and even the MKIV.
 
Little B said:
To the o.p.
Dnt forget about how much a difference makes in a few easy tube rolls too.Theres a guy on another forum who switched out just 1 or pres,but all the power tubes on the vii and it turned it into a lethal flame thrower with massive tight punchy low end and a cut on the high end that would easily punch thru in band settings..
Same with the jp.(If its possible for you to grab some extra tubes to try) id say try that first before throwing in the towel on either. Obviously not possible if buying site unseen tho.I did this with my mkiii coli's and am so so glad I did and didn't sell them.
Click to expand...

got a link to that thread?
 
Last edited:
angelspade said:
I have owned neither, but spent some time with the JP2C....That shred mode was absolutely wicked, I don't think I would want to give that feature up.
Click to expand...

FYI the JP2C's Shred Mode sounds great but it's just a flat input level boost with some low end dipped out. It's not an extra gain stage or anything. Any old pedal boost could probably approximate it.
 
I would think if you have a Mark IV , either one of these is going to disappoint a bit.
the tube rolling can be key, my Mark IV has
Mullard Blackburn V1
JJ High gain V2
RFT V3
Amperex Bugle Boy V4
SovTek LPS PI (V5)
my R3 has almost as much gain as my Lead channel now and my lead channel rips
I would IMO go for something of a different flavor , a Badlander 50 perhaps or a Tremoverb
I go back and forth between my Mark IV and my Splawn and I love how different they from each other
but both do 'what they do" so well. :)
I run mine similar to the OP full power/ Harmonics/simul class/Pentode if I need to go quieter I go tweed /class A
Rolling the gain and drive down to 7 with the wide variety of OD pedals in the FX8 I can get some really interesting tones
 
RedB4Black said:
got a link to that thread?
Click to expand...
I would have to do a search for it,but I believe it was either on the boogie board or a fb boogie page..I do recall the guy had all the colors of the power tube sets,red,yellows,greys,greens,etc..he settled on a certain color that was better than stock ones,changed only a few preamp tubes and he said it definitely made a difference. Wish I had more info.
 
kmanick said:
I would think if you have a Mark IV , either one of these is going to disappoint a bit.
the tube rolling can be key, my Mark IV has
Mullard Blackburn V1
JJ High gain V2
RFT V3
Amperex Bugle Boy V4
SovTek LPS PI (V5)
my R3 has almost as much gain as my Lead channel now and my lead channel rips
I would IMO go for something of a different flavor , a Badlander 50 perhaps or a Tremoverb
I go back and forth between my Mark IV and my Splawn and I love how different they from each other
but both do 'what they do" so well. :)
I run mine similar to the OP full power/ Harmonics/simul class/Pentode if I need to go quieter I go tweed /class A
Rolling the gain and drive down to 7 with the wide variety of OD pedals in the FX8 I can get some really interesting tones
Click to expand...
I'm not unhappy with the IV, it sounds excellent actually, best amp i've ever owned. I guess I actually just want to justify buying a brand new amplifier and the Mark series is it for me, as much as I hate Mesa as a company. I'll probably never own a IIC+ either as I cannot justify the price tag when I find a Mark IV sounds just as good if not better for the style of music I play, plus if I ever get in another band the IV has the benefit of cutting thru a mix really well. IIC+'s have trouble cutting thru without dialing in the honk... i hear about that with nearly everyone who's owned one. I think the trick to getting a IIC+ to cut well is to use the M shape on the graphic like Hetfield used to do in the early 90's. Like a regular V shape but with the 80hz and 6600hz down a little and the 240hz and 2200hz up near the top.

If you simply use the upper mids dial (2200hz) on a IIC+ III, IV and crank that you'll get a harsh unbalanced tone, but if you bring the 240hz up with it, near the same height it balances out and sounds good. I have yet to try this with a band though, buit you get a more in your face kinda tone with lots of definition.

Maybe i'll try some tube rolling just for the hell of it, but I feel it sounds great as is with Mesa tubes in it.
 
anomaly said:
I'm not unhappy with the IV, it sounds excellent actually, best amp i've ever owned. I guess I actually just want to justify buying a brand new amplifier and the Mark series is it for me, as much as I hate Mesa as a company. I'll probably never own a IIC+ either as I cannot justify the price tag when I find a Mark IV sounds just as good if not better for the style of music I play, plus if I ever get in another band the IV has the benefit of cutting thru a mix really well. IIC+'s have trouble cutting thru without dialing in the honk... i hear about that with nearly everyone who's owned one. I think the trick to getting a IIC+ to cut well is to use the M shape on the graphic like Hetfield used to do in the early 90's. Like a regular V shape but with the 80hz and 6600hz down a little and the 240hz and 2200hz up near the top.

If you simply use the upper mids dial (2200hz) on a IIC+ III, IV and crank that you'll get a harsh unbalanced tone, but if you bring the 240hz up with it, near the same height it balances out and sounds good. I have yet to try this with a band though, buit you get a more in your face kinda tone with lots of definition.

Maybe i'll try some tube rolling just for the hell of it, but I feel it sounds great as is with Mesa tubes in it.
Click to expand...
I used my IV at rehearsal the other night for the first time and I found all I had to do is bring up the 750 slider a little bit from where I had it at home and it cut through just fine. The Other guitarist goes through a Suhr PT15-IR and they actually blended together pretty well. I use my Splawn for this band but wanted to give it a try and it worked great.
 
anomaly said:
Fuck it, i'm not gonna bother with either I think? Too many people have said i'll probably be dissapointed because of having a Mark IV. I think it really is a hard amp to beat for a tight metal tone, and a rich lead tone. Cleans are great too.
Click to expand...
For what it's worth, I've had 4 C+s, 4 2Bs and 2 IIIs....I've played JP at a store, for quite a while actually. They also had a IV and the IV was the better amp overall, in just the tonal aspect. The JP was a good sounding amp but the IV had some special sauce and really sounded killer. Not as great as a C+ but if I were looking for another Mark, the IV would be my choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top