The right Wizard model for me.

  • Thread starter Thread starter turtlefingers
  • Start date Start date
Greazygeo said:
Over the years Ive probably had at least 30 different old Marshalls, 68-79 mostly. My first was a 72 50 watt that blew up all the time. Back then there really were not many amps to even choose.
Playing them at 4 hour gigs were tough, the last set and a half they were always just a mud fest. Also the ghost notes were terrible and to run any FX took a ton of gear. But for that middle set and a half they sounded great. Some nites would be awesome tone, some so/so and some terrible.
Still have a 68, two 69’s, a 1959RR and a 74 Hiwatt DR103. I play them at home for recording from time to time but the Wizard goes to every gig. With the Wizard everytime I turn it on, it sounds the same. Rarely ever even have to adjust a knob from room to room. There are other amps I like alot too, but perfectly content with this Wizard.
But no amp is for everyone. And at $5200, man that is just too much for any amp. But in my mind an early Marshall is still a $350.00 amp.
Click to expand...
Very good points! I don't have those kinda experiences, but I'm not at all surprised to hear the Wizard easily winning in consistent performance. I'm admittedly not at all a practical guy and really just judge by what I hear when I think the amps are sounding their best, but makes sense that Marshall's and other older amps can have those issues. The old Vox's have some of the worst ghosting of what I've tried, but it doesn't bother me much and I really only use it for cleans to low gain before the ghosting happens. I hope some of my other favorite amps could also run consistently in long gigs like the Wizards (Naylor, Alessandro, Gjika, Schroeder)
 
Last edited:
Racerxrated said:
Yep. This is the main problem with clips…most of the time they just don’t translate well. The biggest attribute of any Wizard is the monster power section, and the clarity. Not many, if any amp out there sounds as big save for a vintage Superlead or HiWatt.
Clips will not show how huge these amps sound. Or the clarity, most clips don’t show that either. A CCV is a different amp altogether and imo a Wizard would be a nice contrast.
I’ve had a MTL and an MCI….my vote would be MCI/II as you can scoop the mids to mimic a MTL (plus a contour that helps) while the MTL is mostly low mid centered and the upper mids are lacking by comparison.
Click to expand...
I agree here. The mtl is going to be lowmid heavy. Most cameron stuff i hear is low mid heavy. Getting something brighter like the MC or W800 is going to contrast better.
 
Greazygeo said:
Fizzy and dry are not words I would ever use in context of a Wizard. They need some volume to open up, not a bedroom amp.

Big open fat sounding Marshall is what you get with a Wizard MC2. Nothing like any Cameron Ive heard
Click to expand...
My MTL2 is bright as needed and I’m accused of being too bright . I never have fuzz problems either . I lo
turtlefingers said:
This is the exactly what I feel when I listen to the MC2.
I am assuming the MC 2 is not the right amp to me.
I am going to focus and listen the MTL more carefully.

Thank you guys!
Click to expand...
the MTL2 does it all it . I e like one amp more . But MTL2 is right there
 
Wizards from what I’ve heard excel at ac/dc kind of mid gainish tones, higher gain stuff though I can’t say I’ve heard anything that has really wow’d me :dunno: I’ve heard the term “weird mids” used and that fits
 
Lots of “hearing this and that”.....until you’re standing in front of it and playing it, turning knobs to where you want it, you won’t get it, no matter how many hundreds of amps you’ve owned or whatever.
 
* velcro-fly * said:
Lots of “hearing this and that”.....until you’re standing in front of it and playing it, turning knobs to where you want it, you won’t get it, no matter how many hundreds of amps you’ve owned or whatever.
Click to expand...
You're exactly right. I have yet to play a Wizard but from what I've "heard", there is nothing like them in the room.
 
RaceU4her said:
Wizards from what I’ve heard excel at ac/dc kind of mid gainish tones, higher gain stuff though I can’t say I’ve heard anything that has really wow’d me :dunno: I’ve heard the term “weird mids” used and that fits
Click to expand...
I made a clip long ago of both my MTL and MC1. The gain is super clear and ‘open’ if that makes sense. Doesn’t seem very saturated while playing but on hearing the clip back, WAY more thick and saturated on the recording. Easily a heavy amp that can do far more than classic rock. The MC was boostable too…the MTL was picky about boosts.
Gotta play one sometime to really get it. But, they are hard to come by.
 
Agree, there is no other amp that sounds the same. There is huge pumping low end, very detailed top end with lot of cut and amazing clarity and definition. Similar amps are VHT UL and Deliverance but still Wizard (MC2 in my case) has like better definition if You compare it beside another amp, full HD amp :) One of the things why pro's use them is consistency. There is less fatique than with other amps, they sound same from first song to last song.
Of course there are some cons beside price....need some volume, it isn't the best lead amp and doesn't hide my shitty playing :) I can (cant' ? :) ) hear that ''hollow'' mids Braintheory mentioned few times, there isn't ''that'' musical Marshall mids which plexis/JMP have.
 
* velcro-fly * said:
Lots of “hearing this and that”.....until you’re standing in front of it and playing it, turning knobs to where you want it, you won’t get it, no matter how many hundreds of amps you’ve owned or whatever.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It surprises me that some guys on here will make such strong about opinions on the sound of an amp they never actually played, only heard clips of. I have very strong, unapologetic opinions on many things, but that’s only when I’ve actually played it and also AB’ed with other stuff (just playing it without comparing to a reference point isn’t enough for me). I can respect any opinion if the guy actually did their homework, but seems many do not
 
RaceU4her said:
maybe, but i hear what turtle is saying about lacking sharp mids, theres a smoothness to the top end in most clips that is just too polite sounding for me.
Click to expand...

What's funny is I've read some people say they get "ear fatigue" playing Wizards because the mids/high-end are too sharp/aggressive. lol

The amp has a lot of range. Can I make it smooth? yeah. The bright control (and sweep on the MTL) will do that. Personally, every Wizard I own (7 of them) has the bright up at 3:00 or more, because that's what gives it the aggressive, grinding tone I go for.

I don't have the interest in arguing on forums about what makes Wizards great. I don't care if people like them or not. I love them and nothing I've owned (including 2 CCVs - OG and Production) or played has come close, with the exception of a Larry.
 
braintheory said:
Very good points! I don't have those kinda experiences, but I'm not at all surprised to hear the Wizard easily winning in consistent performance. I'm admittedly not at all a practical guy and really just judge by what I hear when I think the amps are sounding their best, but makes sense that Marshall's and other older amps can have those issues. The old Vox's have some of the worst ghosting of what I've tried, but it doesn't bother me much and I really only use it for cleans to low gain before the ghosting happens. I hope some of my other favorite could also run consistently in long gigs like the Wizards (Naylor, Alessandro, Gjika, Schroeder)
Click to expand...
I am just old…grew up in a pretty cool time for gigging, but not alot of gear. The Boogie stuff was boutique and unobtainable for most of us back then.

I think alot of newer amps aren’t as succeptible to changing tone thru the longer gigs. My 5150 was always pretty consistent. Now my UL took about a set to get warmed up, then it was fine. So I would just leave it on awhile before we started to minimize some of that.
Those old Marshall transformers just were not that robust. But a good old Marshall sure sounds good before they get hot.
As for the ghosting, my Hiwatt doesn’t, bout the only one that hasn’t really. My Wizard was pretty bad about it too surprisingly. Crazy.
 
I think a lot of people are going to have similar opinions on Wizard's in the mix, in the band setting live/practice, and in the room, period. EVERYONE that has owned a Wizard, or played a Wizard in person knows what I am talking about. It is not some mystical creature or catching a glimpse of the rare sasquatch, but in fact really is a special room filling sound-from an amp-experience unlike no other.

With that being said, I think I get what people are saying referring to Wizard's not having "sharp" highs.
If I compare the roundness / sharpness of my JP2C vs MC II, the Mesa has that mark series sharper highs at the expense of broad spectrum huge room filling sound. So while it is sharper, seemingly more aggressive, it also lacks everything else in comparison to the MCII. The MC II has a bigger, more balanced mid range, feels great, fills all the frequencies, punches, tight, and YES, it will sound like it has more gain than it feels like.. which is that open uncompressed tight tracking feel to your picking, which makes it super dynamic and rewards you when you gel with it.
 
Man, I just asked to try to understand the wizards core from their models, not to bash the amps.
Don't take it personal.
I live in a complicated country and I can't miss the bullet.
I missed on a Aiken, AFD Special Edition, Silver Jubilee...
I almost pulled the trigger on a Bogner XTC 20th once I am glad I didn't because I couldn't bond with the blanket in front of the speaker which I couldn't get rid os it.
As I said, I have a CCV and If you say the CCV sounds like shit, I don't care and don't take it personal.
I Just asked in a good way.
 
bubucci said:
Agree, there is no other amp that sounds the same. There is huge pumping low end, very detailed top end with lot of cut and amazing clarity and definition. Similar amps are VHT UL and Deliverance but still Wizard (MC2 in my case) has like better definition if You compare it beside another amp, full HD amp :) One of the things why pro's use them is consistency. There is less fatique than with other amps, they sound same from first song to last song.
Of course there are some cons beside price....need some volume, it isn't the best lead amp and doesn't hide my shitty playing :) I can (cant' ? :) ) hear that ''hollow'' mids Braintheory mentioned few times, there isn't ''that'' musical Marshall mids which plexis/JMP have.
Click to expand...
One thing I will say. When I play my Wizard, it sounds Metal. But @nzsteve played it and it sounded just like the marshalls i love... So I think it depends on what you are playing also. I don't play vintage stuff as much. So before I heard him play my amp, I would have been inclined to agree the mids are in a different place.
 
mhenson42 said:
What's funny is I've read some people say they get "ear fatigue" playing Wizards because the mids/high-end are too sharp/aggressive. lol

The amp has a lot of range. Can I make it smooth? yeah. The bright control (and sweep on the MTL) will do that. Personally, every Wizard I own (7 of them) has the bright up at 3:00 or more, because that's what gives it the aggressive, grinding tone I go for.

I don't have the interest in arguing on forums about what makes Wizards great. I don't care if people like them or not. I love them and nothing I've owned (including 2 CCVs - OG and Production) or played has come close, with the exception of a Larry.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Also, you've had my girl Larry before me, and there's no one I'd rather be Eskimo brothers with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top