The right Wizard model for me.

  • Thread starter Thread starter turtlefingers
  • Start date Start date
T

turtlefingers

Active member
I have a CCV and I am looking for another amp.
I would like to buy a Wizard because they are open and not compressed.
Some friends said my next step would be a MC2, but all videos I have heard of it are a fizzy and dry.
I can hear the open and massive sound going on, but It is not polite and sharp as the MTL or the CCV are.
Since I live in Brazil, get this amp here is a pain in the ass, so I do not want to miss the shot, despite I like Hard Rock/rock bands, I think the MTL is more suitable to me.
Did I have lost some detail on the MC2?
 
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
 
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...
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.
 
Fizzy is not a Wizard thing. I can understand why someone might say dry but to me it’s more of a clear , less compressed tone compared to more wet sounding amps.

I haven’t owned a CCV but I tried one at an amp fest. Also heard one more than once in person. Anyways I think if you want something different and plan on keeping both then a Wizard is a good choice.

I think the question is do you want the more aggressive , low mid voiced amp then go MTL. If you want more upper mid , smoother and rounder go MCII. The MCII is still plenty aggressive just not as much as the MTL. MCII not a polite amp I dont want to give the wrong impression.
 
Last edited:
Fizzy??.... Wizard amp is most organic and its volume need to open up to a sweet spot... It's a pretty bright aggressive amp .. but many will say tune with ya ears not ya eyes...
 
Don't you get me wrong about fizzy, but the mids are not sharp like a boosted Marshall, José, Stilleto, etc.
It remind me a Silver Jubilee I had heard once, but more open and full, but the mids are too tangle up like this videos. The CCV, MTL, Mesa Mark even my CAA PT 100 are more straigh foward mids.
PS: the Jubille and my AFD SE were the most disappointment amps I have ever had.
 
Sometimes the words we all use to describe tone can trip us up. "Sharp mids" I guess you mean the very prominent up front mids that Marshalls have , like a JCM800. Wizards are different, they are more full frequency range. Most clips dont do them justice , ya gotta hear one in the room. You said Hard Rock is mostly what you like I would probably go for a MCII. The MTL is well more metal, not 80s metal its more aggressive than that stuff.
 
The CCV is it's own thing and uses clippers for its distortion. Yes A Wizard uses LED's but not in the same manner the CCV does for distortion. Diode clipping has a specific feel and tone that I hear and feel in the CCV when I owned mine. The Wizard does not have the same feel or gain structure. Personally I do not like amps that rely on heavy clipping. The CCV was cool for a little but diode clipping gets old fast for me. Others prefer that. Everyone is different. Wizard all day for me over a CCV.
 
turtlefingers said:
Don't you get me wrong about fizzy, but the mids are not sharp like a boosted Marshall, José, Stilleto, etc.
It remind me a Silver Jubilee I had heard once, but more open and full, but the mids are too tangle up like this videos. The CCV, MTL, Mesa Mark even my CAA PT 100 are more straigh foward mids.
PS: the Jubille and my AFD SE were the most disappointment amps I have ever had.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, for the record. I had a MC2 and a MTL Mk2 for several months last year.

Maybe I wouldn't use the word fizzy (people use that word with Rectos), but words mean different things to different people and sound is hard to describe. I thought the MC2 sounded "abrasive" on the high end for sure. Reminded me of a fine-grain sandpaper. And it is very dry. It sounded like this:



I wasn't a fan of the timbre of the amp. Yeah, it "punched" hard (because of the massive transformers), but the actual character of the amp I didn't like. Marshalls sounded much more pleasing to my ear, so I sold it. Mine had the new V transformer, which apparently sounds different than the older C transformer, which sounds like this:



That amp has a much more pleasing timbre to my ear and it's similar to a good Marshall. That's an old Modern Classic I.

If we're talking about the MTL series, I did not like the amp at all (shocking, I know). The circuit is drenched in negative feedback, so it sounds more "polite" and smooth than the MC2 while increasing the amount of low end available. I have a KSR Colossus at the moment that reminds me of the MTL Mk2 in that it also sounds really smooth and dark. I would also put the Revv 120 Gen 3 I tested out in this camp. In my opinion, too much NFB makes amps sound "dead". I feel disconnected from them when playing and they don't offer the touch sensitivity, raw sound or uncompressed feel that amps like a JCM 800 provide.

Anyway, if you want to try a Wizard, definitely try to buy one used for a good price so you don't lose money on the resale value. They are simply not worth the new prices ($5200+) as far as guitar amps go. I'll go even farther and say they are probably the most over-hyped amps on the internet.
 
The Wizards I’ve had are some of the least fizzy amps I’ve tried. They only sounded fizzy to me at low volume, but once it’s opened up not at all. I do find them dry though (MTL maybe a little more) and both have that round, smoother quality to the mids (Hiwatt’s and Fryette’s sorta have a similar thing too). I interpret it as a more hollow sound, while Marshall’s will have more growl and personality in that frequency range (jubilee not as much like you said. I don’t like them as much either). Like others already said, they are very open, clear and punch hard. This makes them very impressive in the room. Any Wizard you get will be a very big contrast to a ccv (I have one too). I enjoy my CCV and MTL similarly well. Apples and Oranges for me
 
Last edited:
I literally shared a mic'd clip of my MC II, check it out and see if it sounds like what your ears prefer.

It is true you wont get that fullness 100% translated into recording, as you need to be in the same room to appreciate the full sound.
 
turtlefingers said:
Don't you get me wrong about fizzy, but the mids are not sharp like a boosted Marshall, José, Stilleto, etc.
It remind me a Silver Jubilee I had heard once, but more open and full, but the mids are too tangle up like this videos. The CCV, MTL, Mesa Mark even my CAA PT 100 are more straigh foward mids.
PS: the Jubille and my AFD SE were the most disappointment amps I have ever had.
Click to expand...
If you don’t think a Wizard sounds like a boosted Marshall, don’t know what to tell ya. I grew up playing boosted Superleads modded like 2203’s. My Wizard MCI is just like that without all the stuff that sucks about those old Marshalls. But ya have to turn them up..2-3 on up they are awesome. Bedroom amp they are not and captured by a cell phone camera mic, not gonna sound good.

Looking at the list of amps you like, Im gonna say you will hate a Wizard. That Cameron / Jose deal always sounded like shit to me. Never liked that over saturated sound. But people like different things.

I don’t think I would spend $5200 on one though. They have gone up alot since getting mine in ‘05.
 
pipboy90 said:
I agree with you, for the record. I had a MC2 and a MTL Mk2 for several months last year.

Maybe I wouldn't use the word fizzy (people use that word with Rectos), but words mean different things to different people and sound is hard to describe. I thought the MC2 sounded "abrasive" on the high end for sure. Reminded me of a fine-grain sandpaper. And it is very dry. It sounded like this:



I wasn't a fan of the timbre of the amp. Yeah, it "punched" hard (because of the massive transformers), but the actual character of the amp I didn't like. Marshalls sounded much more pleasing to my ear, so I sold it. Mine had the new V transformer, which apparently sounds different than the older C transformer, which sounds like this:



That amp has a much more pleasing timbre to my ear and it's similar to a good Marshall. That's an old Modern Classic I.

If we're talking about the MTL series, I did not like the amp at all (shocking, I know). The circuit is drenched in negative feedback, so it sounds more "polite" and smooth than the MC2 while increasing the amount of low end available. I have a KSR Colossus at the moment that reminds me of the MTL Mk2 in that it also sounds really smooth and dark. I would also put the Revv 120 Gen 3 I tested out in this camp. In my opinion, too much NFB makes amps sound "dead". I feel disconnected from them when playing and they don't offer the touch sensitivity, raw sound or uncompressed feel that amps like a JCM 800 provide.

Anyway, if you want to try a Wizard, definitely try to buy one used for a good price so you don't lose money on the resale value. They are simply not worth the new prices ($5200+) as far as guitar amps go. I'll go even farther and say they are probably the most over-hyped amps on the internet.
Click to expand...

Man that first vid sounds terrible. Second one is better, sounds close micd on the center of the speaker. Alittle different mic placement or speaker would be a whole different tone.
 
There’s another recent thread with an MCii posted in the rig-talk section that sounds way better than the one’s posted in this thread.
I also think mic placement is hurting those other ones. Check out the clip in that other thread, though. It sounds great.
 
Greazygeo said:
If you don’t think a Wizard sounds like a boosted Marshall, don’t know what to tell ya. I grew up playing boosted Superleads modded like 2203’s. My Wizard MCI is just like that without all the stuff that sucks about those old Marshalls. But ya have to turn them up..2-3 on up they are awesome. Bedroom amp they are not and captured by a cell phone camera mic, not gonna sound good.

Looking at the list of amps you like, Im gonna say you will hate a Wizard. That Cameron / Jose deal always sounded like shit to me. Never liked that over saturated sound. But people like different things.

I don’t think I would spend $5200 on one though. They have gone up alot since getting mine in ‘05.
Click to expand...
I’ve got myself a ‘72 SuperLead 100 and ‘79 JMP2203 that I boost, a 2016 MTL and had a 1996 MC. I love the Wizard’s, some of the only non-vintage amps to impress me, but to my ears neither really sounded like my Marshall’s when AB’ed. The mids on them are different: smoother, rounder, less aggressive in that frequency range, somewhat hollow. It’s like others often describe: a mix of the Hiwatt and Marshall sound to me, but not exactly like either. To me nothing really sucks about those old Marshall’s other than them needing volume, but I guess some find them too bright or brash maybe

Seems like many guys either love the Wizards and hate Cameron Jose type stuff or the other way around. I think both are great in their own ways
 
fearhk213 said:
There’s another recent thread with an MCii posted in the rig-talk section that sounds way better than the one’s posted in this thread.
I also think mic placement is hurting those other ones. Check out the clip in that other thread, though. It sounds great.
Click to expand...
Hey, that's MY clip, no? LOL I tried telling him already... nobody listens :( I don't have "rig talk" clout cred yet..
 
pipboy90 said:
I agree with you, for the record. I had a MC2 and a MTL Mk2 for several months last year.

Maybe I wouldn't use the word fizzy (people use that word with Rectos), but words mean different things to different people and sound is hard to describe. I thought the MC2 sounded "abrasive" on the high end for sure. Reminded me of a fine-grain sandpaper. And it is very dry. It sounded like this:



I wasn't a fan of the timbre of the amp. Yeah, it "punched" hard (because of the massive transformers), but the actual character of the amp I didn't like. Marshalls sounded much more pleasing to my ear, so I sold it. Mine had the new V transformer, which apparently sounds different than the older C transformer, which sounds like this:
Click to expand...
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!
 
braintheory said:
I’ve got myself a ‘72 SuperLead 100 and ‘79 JMP2203 that I boost, a 2016 MTL and had a 1996 MC. I love the Wizard’s, some of the only non-vintage amps to impress me, but to my ears neither really sounded like my Marshall’s when AB’ed. The mids on them are different: smoother, rounder, less aggressive in that frequency range, somewhat hollow. It’s like others often describe: a mix of the Hiwatt and Marshall sound to me, but not exactly like either. To me nothing really sucks about those old Marshall’s other than them needing volume, but I guess some find them too bright or brash maybe

Seems like many guys either love the Wizards and hate Cameron Jose type stuff or the other way around. I think both are great in their own ways
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top