Boogie Mark IIB Coliseum Settings To Mark V Head?

[Charvel1975]

So I'm putting the excerpt from the Guitar World link on Brad Gillis from Night Ranger below to try on the Mesa Mark V 90-Watt Head:

AMP: Mesa/Boogie Mark IIB Coliseum (Lead channel) (Volume: 8/Pull Bright, Treble: 10/Pull Shift, Bass: 4, Middle: 6, Master 1: 6/Pull Gain Boost, Lead Drive: 3.5/Pull Lead, Lead Master: 8/Pull Bright, Presence: 10, graphic EQ 80Hz: +3dB, 240Hz: +9dB, 750Hz: +5dB, 2200Hz: +1dB, 6600Hz: -3dB, EQ: In, Full Power) with ARC 2x12 cabinet with 1965 Celestion G12M speakers.

I'm going to experiment and I'm trying to figure out how his settings would translate over to the Mark V 90-Watt Head?

Mark V (Lead channel: Mark IIC+ Mode, 90 w, EQ ON) Volume: 8, Treble: 10, Bass: 4, Middle: 6, Presence: 10, Master: 6, Gain: 3.5, Output: 9 o clock. Graphic EQ: This is where I don't know about the + or - dB's?? (80Hz: +3dB, 240Hz: +9dB, 750Hz: +5dB, 2200Hz: +1dB, 6600Hz: -3dB)

https://www.guitarworld.com/feature...guitar-tone-on-night-rangers-sister-christian

 

[skoora]

I don’t see it happening myself, but only you can find it with the amp you have in hand and experimenting. I had a V 90 head for 12 years or so and never felt I got a sound that’s like an older Mark, especially a IIB. CH3 has decent sounds but once I got a Quad Pre it was abundantly clear the V is not getting similar sounds or response to the 80’s amps. Like I said, not necessarily a bad thing, as it still sounded really good. If you were chasing authentic, vintage MK tones though I could see it being a letdown. I learned just to dig the kick ass rock amp it was on it’s own.

Not saying it’s not true but I find it hard to believe he was using 1965 Celestions. A IIB Coli would melt a 4x12 of them, let alone a 2x12. Whatever speakers he used that will be a big part of the sound.

 

[Racerxrated]

I don’t see it happening myself, but only you can find it with the amp you have in hand and experimenting. I had a V 90 head for 12 years or so and never felt I got a sound that’s like an older Mark, especially a IIB. CH3 has decent sounds but once I got a Quad Pre it was abundantly clear the V is not getting similar sounds or response to the 80’s amps. Like I said, not necessarily a bad thing, as it still sounded really good. If you were chasing authentic, vintage MK tones though I could see it being a letdown. I learned just to dig the kick ass rock amp it was on it’s own.

Not saying it’s not true but I find it hard to believe he was using 1965 Celestions. A IIB Coli would melt a 4x12 of them, let alone a 2x12. Whatever speakers he used that will be a big part of the sound.

The first Greenback M20 was 1966 afaik...65 would still be the Alnico blue/silver which would melt even faster than the M20. Since Nightranger were all Mesa endorsers my guess is they were the halfback cabs with EVs, MS12s...not sure when the C90s came out.

 

[midnightlaundry]

I don’t see it happening myself, but only you can find it with the amp you have in hand and experimenting. I had a V 90 head for 12 years or so and never felt I got a sound that’s like an older Mark, especially a IIB. CH3 has decent sounds but once I got a Quad Pre it was abundantly clear the V is not getting similar sounds or response to the 80’s amps. Like I said, not necessarily a bad thing, as it still sounded really good. If you were chasing authentic, vintage MK tones though I could see it being a letdown. I learned just to dig the kick ass rock amp it was on it’s own.

Not saying it’s not true but I find it hard to believe he was using 1965 Celestions. A IIB Coli would melt a 4x12 of them, let alone a 2x12. Whatever speakers he used that will be a big part of the sound.

Really??
I had a TriAxis/2:90 for a long time and thought the V was better so I sold them.
To hear you say a Quad was better than a dedicated Amp is a Bold Statement..

I like the IV Mode on that Amp, but I never owned a 2,3 or 4..

 

[Techdeth]

I still think mark v could do this . But the punch won’t be there .

 

[skoora]

Really??
I had a TriAxis/2:90 for a long time and thought the V was better so I sold them.
To hear you say a Quad was better than a dedicated Amp is a Bold Statement..

I like the IV Mode on that Amp, but I never owned a 2,3 or 4..



View attachment 336981

I will say though that the V made an awesome poweramp for the Quad. Different channel choices affected the poweramp amp response in the V. Extreme was huge for a preamp because I think it was reducing or eliminating negative feedback. Kind of like Modern red on a recto. But you had three power levels to play with, a tube rectifier, triode and Presence controls that were all different depending on the channel. I always thought a dedicated poweramp with all the features that the V had would be amazing.

 

[skoora]

I still think mark v could do this . But the punch won’t be there .

Even though it’s not Coli power the V (90 head) is one of the punchiest/percussive amps I’ve played. It was one of the things I really liked about it.

 

[Techdeth]

Even though it’s not Coli power the V (90 head) is one of the punchiest/percussive amps I’ve played. It was one of the things I really liked about it.

It’s a great amp but it does not punch like wizards or even my old mark 3++green
. I did test this . But it’s a great amp . Not many amps could punch like wizards and shit so it’s not a big deal .

 

[Racerxrated]

It’s a great amp but it does not punch like wizards or even my old mark 3++green
. I did test this . But it’s a great amp . Not many amps could punch like wizards and shit so it’s not a big deal .

This is a common theme it seems with newer Mesa amps. For whatever reason, the vintage versions have way more punch; not sure if its the filtering or newer transformers. Kinda like the EVH amps; they get loud but don't 'hit' you in the chest like a Wizard, SLO, vintage Marshall or vintage Mesa.