Here's the REAL difference between the Mark IIC+ and all the other OG Mark amps..

  • Thread starter Thread starter GJgo
  • Start date Start date
JackBootedThug said:
to me, order of preference-III+, IIb, IIc+, then !Vb....the III was the loudest for some reason. IIC+ sounded kinda muffled. Thanks for posting this...and can we come over and play?
Click to expand...
One thing I'm learning is that relative volume really depends on your speakers. I mixed everything on my Adam Audo studio monitors and got it as clsoe as I could after tweaking it for days. Then I went & listened on some other normal & cheap speakers, also headphones, and there were differences. No way to balance it for everything so I have to go with the studio monitors in the end.

If you're ever passing through Western CO hit me up!
 
GJgo said:
In this example the IV is set to Harmonics mode with Pull Fat & Pull Bright engaged, and Presence pushed.

In a prior test while I was working it out I tried everything pushed in mid gain mode but I didn't care for it as much in this context.
Click to expand...
I was just playing my IV set just like that and it was REALLY thick sounding, I wonder why it sounds kinda thin in this comparison? I mean it sounds good, but definitely a bit on the thin side. Maybe it has a tube issue like someone else has mentioned?? Did you use the same mic position for each amp?

Also I notice the IV is the only amp with the bass at 0, all the others have it at 1 which could account for some of the lack of low end. I have mine up to 2 most of the time, it really does help a bit to add a little pre-amp bass or it gets almost too tight sounding.
 
Last edited:
It's because the others are pure beasts!!!

"In the room" the IV is HELLA thick. However, same as with Rectos, at least for me, it just doesn't transfer to a close mic situation. It's almost like they "focus" the sound out somewhere past the mic.

Tubes are all good, I test everything. What you're hearing are the fundamental differences when you peel all the superfluous things back.

My cab & mic setup has been 100% stationary for a couple months now in isolation boxes as I've recorded a number of reamp things.
 
So how does the VII stack up to all of those? I know you made that other thread earlier. I want to know what you're thinking now.
 
GJgo said:
It's because the others are pure beasts!!!

"In the room" the IV is HELLA thick. However, same as with Rectos, at least for me, it just doesn't transfer to a close mic situation. It's almost like they "focus" the sound out somewhere past the mic.

Tubes are all good, I test everything. What you're hearing are the fundamental differences when you peel all the superfluous things back.

My cab & mic setup has been 100% stationary for a couple months now in isolation boxes as I've recorded a number of reamp things.
Click to expand...
Well I've recorded IV's before and I was always able to get a much thicker tone than that.
 
Thru my laptop speakers also going with the III+
In a few instances I thought the IIC+ sounded the worst, other times the IV.

What makes a III a III+?
I modded mine so it has the volume knob on the back for the rhythm channel.
Is that it?
 
Last edited:
Here's a clip of my IVb from way back, notice that it's not thin sounding, lol. Not the greatest tone (little nasally) but you get the idea:

 
Dale B said:
So how does the VII stack up to all of those? I know you made that other thread earlier. I want to know what you're thinking now.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I haven't been able to get one yet. However I did spend a good amount of time with one in a GC one day so I got a pretty good idea. Hard to say without a real A/B test like this, but as a guy who tends to prefer the more raw, organic amps its possible I'd prefer it to the OG IV.
 
Donnie B said:
Thru my laptop speakers also going with the III+
In a few instances I thought the IIC+ sounded the worst, other times the IV.

What makes a III a III+?
I modded mine so it has the master volume on the back for the rhythm channel.
Is that it?
Click to expand...
Mike B's III+ mod makes the IIIs slightly less aggressive, smoother and more C+ ish. I have no idea what the mod entails.
 
anomaly said:
Here's a clip of my IVb from way back, notice that it's not thin sounding, lol. Not the greatest tone (little nasally) but you get the idea:

Click to expand...

Yours is also set up dark as fuck, and that’ll make any amp sound thicker.
Yours is thicker, but his has more aggression and cut.
 
anomaly said:
Well I've recorded IV's before and I was always able to get a much thicker tone than that.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, and thiccc tone wasn't my goal here. The goal was to set up a tone in the spirit of the song, and equalize everything possible so the actual differences in the amps show through.

That said here are notes on my thought process. I tend to keep my 80 slider right in the middle for the live band mix because cuts better that way, and it gets muddy and walks on the bass player when I bring it up. I also do the same when I'm triple track recording as I did here because too much bottom causes weird artifacts in the final mix that you can't really LPF out.

For single track recording and bedroom playing, I'll def bring the 80 up to thicken it.

For what it's worth, at band practice my drummer did comment that the IV sounded thin compared to the IIs I usually use.
 
Beyond Black said:
Yours is also set up dark as fuck, and that’ll make any amp sound thicker.
Yours is thicker, but his has more aggression and cut.
Click to expand...
That's literally the first clip I made of the amp 7 or so years ago, and I didn't even take any time with the mic positioning or dial in so that's why it's dark sounding. Still, i've recorded alot since then and it always turns out pretty thick sounding, especially with that pull fat out and in simulclass pentode, thicker than my old Mark III red stripe ever sounded by quite a bit.
 
anomaly said:
Well I've recorded IV's before and I was always able to get a much thicker tone than that.
Click to expand...
I spent some time messing with this tonight, I think adding those extra mids like I did to suit the song have it the feeling of being "less thick". IOW, less mids makes it seem thicker even when there's no more bottom.

At any rate since we have knobs & sliders for setting the sound up pretty much however we want here's a version of the MkIV track where I bumped 80 a bit & dropped 750 a bit. Better?

https://on.soundcloud.com/6Z2Mn
 
Surprisingly I liked the IIB more than the IIC+. I agree with the others I also like the III the most and the IV the least.

I feel like a IIB+ or IIB++ would be a beast to contend with.
 
My loop modded IIB's gain level sits somewhere between a C+ and a C++. It's an animal!

This particular III+ is the best III I've owned or played, and I've had a lot of them..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top