mark ii vs. jcm800

[newholland]

i know- wholly different beasts.

BUT.

WHY is it, if you turn off the graphic eq on a mark ii, and push the mids way up, and wind up the lead channel, the magic of a just blowing up jcm800 happens?

i know its not the same- but the massive low end and just rounded off mids, the general splork and slop and magic singing feedback happens in both. yeah, the midrange is kinda different, but like i said- keep the eq off, turn the mids knob up to like 7.. i hear an sg, a 50 watt jcm melting down a greenback 1960, and alotta volume.

am i totally on crack for hearing ANY similarity?

 

[EOengineer]

I don’t hear a lot of Marshall in the old boogie stuff. Marshalls usually have an upper midrange kerrang with a bright top end, where the boogies are smooth with more honk in the midrange.

Both very cool amps. These things are always up to the ear of the beholder though.

If anything I think a lot of Marshalls got credit for what were really boogie high gain tones in the mid-late 80s through the 90s.

 

[SonVolt]

i know- wholly different beasts.

BUT.

WHY is it, if you turn off the graphic eq on a mark ii, and push the mids way up, and wind up the lead channel, the magic of a just blowing up jcm800 happens?

i know its not the same- but the massive low end and just rounded off mids, the general splork and slop and magic singing feedback happens in both. yeah, the midrange is kinda different, but like i said- keep the eq off, turn the mids knob up to like 7.. i hear an sg, a 50 watt jcm melting down a greenback 1960, and alotta volume.

am i totally on crack for hearing ANY similarity?

I don't find that happens at all. Turn the GEQ off and it sounds like a nasally mess. There's nowhere near the girth nor punch of a JCM 800. I still love my Marks though.

 

[Desertdweller]

You want the Mark 3. Rhythm 2 is the Marshall mode. Specifically called out in the manual and does not appear on the Mark II. It does sound really good and with a boost has a very marshall type of tone.

 

[RaceU4her]

never even tried my iic+ without the eq, and i use my 5 band eq in the loop of pretty much everything now. next time ill try it without

 

[SonVolt]

You want the Mark 3. Rhythm 2 is the Marshall mode. Specifically called out in the manual and does not appear on the Mark II. It does sound really good and with a boost has a very marshall type of tone.

Interesting. R2 of my Mark IV doesn't sound anything like a Marshall. No amount of boosting or EQ adjustment is gonna make it sound like my 800.

 

[EOengineer]

Interesting. R2 of my Mark IV doesn't sound anything like a Marshall. No amount of boosting or EQ adjustment is gonna make it sound like my 800.

Different beasts. The Mark III R2 is unique to that amp.

 

[KingsXJJ]

I’ve been able to make a Mark V sound similar to a modded JCM on the Mesa crunch channel. But just similar. Like something else is going on with the 800. Might be just me.

 

[mk5]

Had exactly both at the same time. My experience was way different. Boogie was a narrower band vs a wider or brighter band in the 800. Has that bite that is just not there in the IIC+. Both compliment the other well

 

[KingsXJJ]

Had exactly both at the same time. My experience was way different. Boogie was a narrower band vs a wider or brighter band in the 800. Has that bite that is just not there in the IIC+. Both compliment the other well

Great way to put it. The Special K… from the UK.

 

[newholland]

see, thats what i thought as well- naw impossible- but thats where it gets weird to me, and why i even mentioned it.

the point of overlap ONLY seems to be when an 800 is basically dimed out- otherwise, they ARE more or less kerrang city. i think everybodys heard that sound a jillion times, right? maybe not 100% full bore... but close- they kinda round out to my ears

but here the quirk- and its probably NOT how most people run mesas- at least on my iib- if you run the lead channel gain full out with the presence essentially dimed, t/m/b maybe 6-7/6-7/1ish... i'll run v1 around 6-7, still have a clean channel to switch to and i get.. this super un mesa like sound with a telecaster.

most definitely NOT the mesa smooth midhonk and absolutely not a metal tone, which i thought was always there too. thats why i even mentioned it cause i didnt know it DID that until recently!

running a pair of evms.

(hides face at seeming crazy )

 

[newholland]

OH.. meantime- only thing pulled is the lead bright!

 

[laxu]

I'm guessing you are using the same cab? I find that through e.g my Bluetone 4x10 with 10" Greenbacks, everything will sound kinda Marshallish. For example the Vox based Victory amp I had, I was not happy with it through that cab because it took on too much of a Marshall style character. Something my other amps did already. Paired it with a 1x12 Alnico Gold cab and there it was, all that Vox chime etc. Meanwhile Marshall style amps through the Gold cab sounded too bright and harsh.

Here's Euge Valovirta dialing the Mark V:90 to sound pretty close to a Marshall Plexi.


Here he compares it to his "Bad Boy" JCM800, again pretty similar:


This week I was trying a bunch of NAM captures through a Fryette PS-100 and the afore-mentioned 4x10 cab at loud volume, and all sounded awesome but they all sounded similar too, only e.g Mesa Recto and Badlander captures were firmly in the "that's quite different" category for higher gain hard rock/metal tones. And that's without me even dialing them to sound like that subconsciously.

That's put me off from buying e.g a used Mark V, as I'd most likely just have something that sounds a bit different from what I have already. I tend to be the kind of stupid that will dial literally anything to sound lilke a shade of modded Marshall.

I'd need to buy a new cab with different speakers for something truly different, which then takes a good chunk of space.

To my ears the Mark series sound is more focused, whereas Marshalls have more of the sizzle in the background, something you also hear in designs like the SLO for example.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

am i totally on crack for hearing ANY similarity?

A little bit, yes.

 

[newholland]

A little bit, yes.

hahaa... yes!

you're probably right. :lol:

well, suffice to say its way less mesa-ey than idve figured id get, anyhow, and way more in a ballpark id get with other amps, cause like most folks, i kinda associated mark dirt to be that mid vowely sound or more geared towards metal chonkin- particularly with the graphic.

shifting the bulk of the gain to the second channel really does shift the spectral balance away from that honk and fill out top and bottom a bunch though, and makes the damn thing a lot more usable as a two channel amp!

 

[newholland]

I'm guessing you are using the same cab? I find that through e.g my Bluetone 4x10 with 10" Greenbacks, everything will sound kinda Marshallish. For example the Vox based Victory amp I had, I was not happy with it through that cab because it took on too much of a Marshall style character. Something my other amps did already. Paired it with a 1x12 Alnico Gold cab and there it was, all that Vox chime etc. Meanwhile Marshall style amps through the Gold cab sounded too bright and harsh.

Here's Euge Valovirta dialing the Mark V:90 to sound pretty close to a Marshall Plexi.


Here he compares it to his "Bad Boy" JCM800, again pretty similar:


This week I was trying a bunch of NAM captures through a Fryette PS-100 and the afore-mentioned 4x10 cab at loud volume, and all sounded awesome but they all sounded similar too, only e.g Mesa Recto and Badlander captures were firmly in the "that's quite different" category for higher gain hard rock/metal tones. And that's without me even dialing them to sound like that subconsciously.

That's put me off from buying e.g a used Mark V, as I'd most likely just have something that sounds a bit different from what I have already. I tend to be the kind of stupid that will dial literally anything to sound lilke a shade of modded Marshall.

I'd need to buy a new cab with different speakers for something truly different, which then takes a good chunk of space.

To my ears the Mark series sound is more focused, whereas Marshalls have more of the sizzle in the background, something you also hear in designs like the SLO for example.

i totally get dialing in everything to get THAT sound. i think i kinda err that way myself- but marshalls always bug me with all the upper mid info. i like it, but i dont want it for ME.. which is what precipitated me NOT playing them in the early 90s.. so found my way into laney aors and mesas which seem to shift the mids down an octave.

maybe the iib's a weirdo iteration? cause i never found usable gain tones before in either of the calibers i had, and my buddy's mk iv was seemingly a totally different sounding beast- he just used the kinda conventional v on the graphic. i guess i also dont run across too many folks using marks EXCEPT metal guys or jazzers either- so the variations on the theme are fewer and far between!

 

[GuitarBilly74]

Love them both, but they're very different. I wouldn't bring a Mark when I'm looking for a Marshall and vice-versa.

 

[newholland]

Love them both, but they're very different. I wouldn't bring a Mark when I'm looking for a Marshall and vice-versa.

totally fair, and id think that hardcore marshall guys like yerself would probably balk at the whole idea! what im wondering though- are my ears misremembering or is it more how most folks seem to set mesas up for 'mesa sound' (cause i dunno anybody bypassing the graphic and leaving presence wide open on the lead channel).

i wish i knew more people playing 800s locally cause id love to put the two side by side through the same cabinets! my bandmate has a jmp 212 combo he doesnt haul out much and am gonna have to get him to yank that thing out!

i definitely do know that its ONE sound that overlaps- not all, for sure, cause the onset of gain on a mark is absolutely 100% different, and at most of its settings, its not related at all.

 

[GuitarBilly74]

totally fair, and id think that hardcore marshall guys like yerself would probably balk at the whole idea! what im wondering though- are my ears misremembering or is it more how most folks seem to set mesas up for 'mesa sound' (cause i dunno anybody bypassing the graphic and leaving presence wide open on the lead channel).

i wish i knew more people playing 800s locally cause id love to put the two side by side through the same cabinets! my bandmate has a jmp 212 combo he doesnt haul out much and am gonna have to get him to yank that thing out!

i definitely do know that its ONE sound that overlaps- not all, for sure, cause the onset of gain on a mark is absolutely 100% different, and at most of its settings, its not related at all.

Well I don't balk at the idea of having a Mark series amp at all. In fact, I want one!!

I just think they're different from Marshalls. I think the Mark without the GEQ is like a hot-rodded Bassman. Which is a righteous tone in its own right. In that sense, the Marshalls that would overlap with them a bit would be the JTM45. I can definitely see that. But Super Leads and the 2203/4 live in a different spectrum. Low mids vs high mids etc...

Ideally I want both of them.

 

[EOengineer]

see, thats what i thought as well- naw impossible- but thats where it gets weird to me, and why i even mentioned it.

the point of overlap ONLY seems to be when an 800 is basically dimed out- otherwise, they ARE more or less kerrang city. i think everybodys heard that sound a jillion times, right? maybe not 100% full bore... but close- they kinda round out to my ears

but here the quirk- and its probably NOT how most people run mesas- at least on my iib- if you run the lead channel gain full out with the presence essentially dimed, t/m/b maybe 6-7/6-7/1ish... i'll run v1 around 6-7, still have a clean channel to switch to and i get.. this super un mesa like sound with a telecaster.

most definitely NOT the mesa smooth midhonk and absolutely not a metal tone, which i thought was always there too. thats why i even mentioned it cause i didnt know it DID that until recently!

running a pair of evms.

(hides face at seeming crazy )

Your Mark II is a IIB right? Would you be able to record a clip at some point? It would be helpful to hear what you’re hearing.

I’m just thinking about how bright the IIB mode in the Mark VII is, way brighter than I would expect from a Mark circuit and I’m wondering if maybe we’re all dismissing an anomalous but explainable observation.

The IIB had a number of sub-revisions and can have any one of three (I think?) circuit boards in it. I don’t have enough direct experience with all of them to say there’s not something to this, especially since you mentioned bright being pulled.

Well I don't balk at the idea of having a Mark series amp at all. In fact, I want one!!

I just think they're different from Marshalls. I think the Mark without the GEQ is like a hot-rodded Bassman. Which is a righteous tone in its own right. In that sense, the Marshalls that would overlap with them a bit would be the JTM45. I can definitely see that. But Super Leads and the 2203/4 live in a different spectrum. Low mids vs high mids etc...

Ideally I want both of them.

Have you played a Mark amp at all? I come from the 1959 & 2204 camp as well and the Mark stuff blows me away. Totally different playing experience - as you said - not better just different. Owning both pays off because they cover completely different ground…not that you can’t find some overlap.

Any idea which Mark circuit you’d chase?