TGF Official Amp Mesa Boogie Mark series. Join the fun and get one today!

The global master and solo features are genuinely practical. It makes no sense to me they removed these.

It's kind of an interesting dilemma; the global masters are convenient, however, I have a Lone Star with a global master, solo boost and effects loop.

In the Lone Star, the global master and loop can be switched out of the circuit. I don't remember if the V has that feature, been a while since I had one.

In the case of the Lone Star, the amplifier sounds clearer, more open, and (to me) better with the global master switched out of the circuit completely. Without question. It's right there to hear.

Switching the global master back in obscures things with veil that's definitely audible. For my purposes (music for TV ads), it matters enough that I have kept it switched out since new (9 years ago).

So I completely understand the good sense of removing the global master for clarity of tone. Every circuit that's added veils the sound of an amp a little, which I think is why people value the old hand wired, simple amps.
 
Then the VII came along even more expensive, about as noisy and adding an additional "hey all the good modes are on one channel" thing that my brain just didn't like.
My VII isn't noisy at all. None of the gear in my guitar rig has noise, whether Mesa or PRS.

However, I did work hard over many years to figure out how to minimize noise, so granted, my case might be a bit unusual. Here's how I managed it, if it's at all of interest (I realize not everyone is as obsessed with audio as I am):

To start with I'm very, very careful about isolating signal grounds, because I make my living recording and can't have noise. I also isolate all amp power outlets with a rack device I'll mention below. So there's no hum or noise to amplify.

The first thing I did when putting together both my 'old' studio in the '90s, and the 'new' studio over a decade ago was install an an isolation transformer and balanced AC power to eliminate power line noise, AC ground noise and signal ground noise that would reach the recording gear.

Balanced power eliminates hum and noise the way balanced microphone cables and humbucking pickups do. It's been approved by all electrical codes, by the way, and doesn't harm gear. I have some 30 year old equipment that works like new.

In my old studio. my tech modified an industrial Sola isolation transformer to balanced power, but it was mechanically noisy, and I had to soundproof the HVAC room it was in, which was a PITA. But at the time there wasn't anything commercially available to do the job.

However, it reduced my noise floor by about 8 decibels, according to my studio tech's oscilloscope when it was installed. 8 db is a LOT of noise to eliminate when you think about recording gear.

When I put together the 'new' studio that's mostly 'in the box', I found a product called the Equi=Tech Q, a 2000 volt isolation transformer and balanced power supply that makes zero mechanical noise, and I can have it by my workstation. This is a great product, truly.

For the amps I ponied up for a Furman P-1800 PFR rack mount power supply with fully isolated outlets for all the amps and the pedalboard. This doesn't run as part of the Equi=Tech Q balanced power system (though I did try it) because I found that the P-1800 PFR did the job admirably by itself even though it isn't balanced power.

A nice feature of the P1800 is that it sports a 45 Amp power reservoir that lets the amps draw current as fast as they can gulp it. It's audible.

I figured I'd reserve the power of the Q for the recording gear and studio monitors, and man, you should hear my monitoring system. If the Q made a difference with the amps I'd have gotten a second one, but they cost a pretty penny and I'm glad the Furman did the job.

I use high quality, well-shielded shielded signal cables with low capacitance, and a preamp buffer at the beginning of my pedal chain. The cables are all Sommer LLX and Van Damme XKE. The Sommer is 15.8 pF a foot (Mogami is 48 pF a foot), and the Van Damme is 26 pF per foot. The lower the better. This isn't for noise except the shielding, it's really more of a 'good tone' thing. For reference, Abbey Road was rewired a few years ago with Van Damme. So it's not garbage. The cables don't transmit handling noise the way some guitar cables do (including my previous Mogami). So I can move without crackling.

I use a KHE amp switcher with independent signal and speaker I/O. The switching is by electronic relay. It's completely silent, and doesn't suck tone. It's a Swiss product.

Power cables to important gear are solid-core shielded cables by MusicCord. And yeah I know. Impossible they matter right? But it isn't.

I previously was certain that high end power cables were snake oil, but the differences are audible and measurable. A good feature is that shielded power cables don't induce hum and noise into signal cables that, as we all know, are all over the place when hooking up an amp rig, and can't easily be kept away from power cords.

Just so you know I'm not completely crazy, here's a demo with a guitar amp done in a studio; the difference is clear even with my computer speakers, but much more so with good cans or monitors:



An interview with Dave Pensado, well known major label engineer/producer and audio pathfinder:



Anyway, all of this adds up to a very, very quiet rig. It was also more expensive to do this than I'd have liked, but hey, it's my livelihood so it was worth the trouble.

I hope I'm not cluttering up the thread, I just thought I'd share what I do.

I should add that none of this will eliminate noise from crappy power tubes, and most made these days are junk. All my gear except the new Mark VII has NOS power and preamp tubes that I do not re-use, they stay in my amps. When I need more, I'm willing to buy NOS so they're fresh in a new amp. I haven't had the time or handy cash to retube the Mark VII yet, but I have to say the tubes that came in it are very quiet so far.
 
Last edited:
I just wrapped up an epic Mark VII "redial" session. I ended up keeping my basic channel 1 clean settings with GEQ, but my channel 2 and channel 3 are completely new for me.

My channel 2 (Mk VII mode) with low gain and no GEQ on the 45 watt setting provides a wonderfully thick crunch that pairs exceedingly well with channel 3 in IIB mode at 45 watts with the GEQ active and gain dimed.

There are so many different and satisfying ways to configure the Mark VII. I think swapping the C90 for an EVM12L in my Thiele cab makes this even more true.

:chef
 
I just wrapped up an epic Mark VII "redial" session. I ended up keeping my basic channel 1 clean settings with GEQ, but my channel 2 and channel 3 are completely new for me.

My channel 2 (Mk VII mode) with low gain and no GEQ on the 45 watt setting provides a wonderfully thick crunch that pairs exceedingly well with channel 3 in IIB mode at 45 watts with the GEQ active and gain dimed.

There are so many different and satisfying ways to configure the Mark VII. I think swapping the C90 for an EVM12L in my Thiele cab makes this even more true.

:chef
Just figured out I should be running the III with the EV and the EVH 112 with the C90 in parallel :love
 
Just figured out I should be running the III with the EV and the EVH 112 with the C90 in parallel :love
nuclear explosion GIF
 
You know how you read people's opinions, and most of the time you go "yeah okay, gotcha, that aint what I think, but I can see how you came to that conclusion" ????

This aint one of those amps for me. I genuinely cannot fathom how every single guitarist on the planet isn't jizzing over the Mark crunch and high-gain sounds.

I have a lot of amps, but the Mark V genuinely makes me feel like I should just flog all the others!!!

Obviously I'm not going to, because I know I go through phases, but in the time I've had it, there hasn't been a single time where I was uninspired to play. Which is not true of all of my other amps.
Cuz those guitarists are too dumb to read a manual or figure it out I guess (not that I think there’s a whole lot to figure out here)
 
I was jamming the Extreme mode on my Mark V:25 yesterday. I hadn’t spent much time in that mode for a long while and forgot how much it opens up the amp. With the negative feedback removed it really opens up the amp and makes it sound huge.

The Mark V isn’t available in the short head right? I have the VII on my radar now. I really want a 6L6 Mark - I’ve been looking at Mark IIIs but I’m realizing they not be best for me since I can rarely open my amps up fully. I know the V and VII can be managed a bit better at lower volume. Also the Cab Clone IR would be welcome even though I know they aren’t as well regarded as the Suhr reactive load.
Xtreme mode definitely has a bigger sound, I like it almost as much IV and is the reason I GAS for a 90w MkV and not the MkVII. I really want to have the 90 and my 35 and compare the shit out of them
 
It's kind of an interesting dilemma; the global masters are convenient, however, I have a Lone Star with a global master, solo boost and effects loop.

In the Lone Star, the global master and loop can be switched out of the circuit. I don't remember if the V has that feature, been a while since I had one.

In the case of the Lone Star, the amplifier sounds clearer, more open, and (to me) better with the global master switched out of the circuit completely. Without question. It's right there to hear.

Switching the global master back in obscures things with veil that's definitely audible. For my purposes (music for TV ads), it matters enough that I have kept it switched out since new (9 years ago).

So I completely understand the good sense of removing the global master for clarity of tone. Every circuit that's added veils the sound of an amp a little, which I think is why people value the old hand wired, simple amps.
The V has that too but IMO the difference is negligible if you take the time to set the loop volume right and match levels with a decibel meter for comparison so you can just toggle the loop/output/solo bypass without volume change.

The volume controls are annoyingly touchy without it.
 
The V has that too but IMO the difference is negligible if you take the time to set the loop volume right and match levels with a decibel meter for comparison so you can just toggle the loop/output/solo bypass without volume change.

The volume controls are annoyingly touchy without it.
Been a while since I had one, I'll take your word for it on the V. I like your idea of using a db meter to adjust levels, that's a great idea! Thanks!

I always do level-matching when auditioning mics, preamps and compressors - it didn't occur to me to do it with guitar amps. Doh!
 
Been a while since I had one, I'll take your word for it on the V. I like your idea of using a db meter to adjust levels, that's a great idea! Thanks!

I always do level-matching when auditioning mics, preamps and compressors - it didn't occur to me to do it with guitar amps. Doh!
I think it's very important if you want to compare something. With the V, the loop on can become "slightly less loud" which you then tend to interpret as "sounds worse". I'll admit I did too until I took a bit to truly compare with the volume difference out of the equation.

Now I'm just happily using it with the loop/output/solo turned on. With the V it's nice that it is still bypassable if you want to be a purist about it, rather than omitting it altogether on the VII and having to figure out other solutions if you need a global master volume.
 
I think it's very important if you want to compare something. With the V, the loop on can become "slightly less loud" which you then tend to interpret as "sounds worse". I'll admit I did too until I took a bit to truly compare with the volume difference out of the equation.

Now I'm just happily using it with the loop/output/solo turned on. With the V it's nice that it is still bypassable if you want to be a purist about it, rather than omitting it altogether on the VII and having to figure out other solutions if you need a global master volume.
Makes perfect sense to me - I always do it while mixing. I simply never thought of it for guitar!

The main thing I like about the VII vs the V is the ability to easily dial up variations on my main tones, which aren't really high gain (unless needed, like on the Ford F-150 ads I did a few years back, though those were intended by the client to be kind of weird and over the top - the client's instructions were, "Make it sound like a crazy garage band!" LOL
 
I've been messing around with all the amps since getting the Mark VII. The PRS amps are in a different category because they don't sound anything like the Mesas - or even each other.

The Mesas...well, I find I can get very similar tones to the Fillmore 50 and the Lone Star 100 with the Mark VII, if I dial them in that way - it isn't hard to do. I might even prefer the similar sounds in the Mark.

Thing is, need 'em or not, I like the Fillmore and the Lone Star. Plus they have custom leather coverings and NOS tubes. I'd get absolutely clobbered if I sold them. Yet I still have a case of The Guilties for hanging onto them. I can't help it.

Maybe I can dial each one in so differently that switching between them will somehow make sense in the context of a session. Then I'd feel less weird about the whole business.
 
Back
Top