IIC+ HRG RI (..and DR RI) in the hizzouse!

[Beefeater]

I do know of a particularly good MkV 90w head for sale in a custom color if you're interested. I used to own it, now the Guitar Center by me has it.

That said, the HRG has way better tone & feels. (..but the V is a lot more versatile.)

There's a V 90 head & cab near me in a custom color for a good price. I was suppose to grab it last week, but mother nature had other ideas and I didn't want the cab getting soaked in the back of my truck. Versatility isn't really a top priority. I've got dozens of amps that cover cleans and crunch. Majority of my amps are single channel. Just looking for a tight, punchy high gain tone for riffing around. I'm more of a rythem/riffs player more often than leads. I'll be honest, my DR covers my needs well, I'm just looking for a different tone, and remember hearing a couple of V's live and really liking them. I've just seen so many mixed reviews and videos on the V this last week that these new IIC+ and JP2Cs are starting to look more and more appealing.

 

[GJgo]

Is it the touchiness of the sliders as to why? Cant throw an EQ pedal in the loop to dial out the honk?

IMO & having tried umpteen of them in the band, I just think the OG Mark mids are not in the right frequency for live band work. You can move things around with the right GEQ / PEQ, if you can find one with the right EQ bands.

When recording it's much easier to get them to sit well in the mix, IMO.

So, I am excited that the DR RI (does, verified) and I think also the C+ RI (TBD) have better mids for live work than their OGs.

YMMV of course, can only speak from my perspective.

 

[Kagami]

There's a V 90 head & cab near me in a custom color for a good price. I was suppose to grab it last week, but mother nature had other ideas and I didn't want the cab getting soaked in the back of my truck. Versatility isn't really a top priority. I've got dozens of amps that cover cleans and crunch. Majority of my amps are single channel. Just looking for a tight, punchy high gain tone for riffing around. I'm more of a rythem/riffs player more often than leads. I'll be honest, my DR covers my needs well, I'm just looking for a different tone, and remember hearing a couple of V's live and really liking them. I've just seen so many mixed reviews and videos on the V this last week that these new IIC+ and JP2Cs are starting to look more and more appealing.

I had never played a V 90 until I got mine in june and from messing with it I found out (to me) it sounds like garbage if you have the master below like 1-2 o'clock or so (or hit the bypass switch on the back) it just sounds like a blanket is over it no matter how you set the channel volume when the master is lower than that. If I want to play at a quieter volume I use either my Mark IV or Ultra Lead instead. Also I'm not much of a basshead when it comes to guitar tones, I cut the 240Hz slider on my IV and V quite a lot down to almost where I have the 750Hz slider.

I am pretty interested in trying this HRG amp at some point and it's been years since I've tried a rectifier.

 

[Les Zombie]

Aaaand finally, the JP-2C comparo!

This one deserves some commentary. I've had 2 JPs previously and have always felt like the V and the JP are the best Marks for 7/8 string work due to the extra compression, even though the tone I felt was a bit flat compared to the OGs. I felt the same today, and we really cranked both amps LOUD.

That said, in normal tunings everyone in the room agreed that the HRG had MUCH better clarity and dynamics. It made the JP seem muddy in comparison.

I own a JP and like it alot, but the HRG sounds better to me, im glad you made this clip, i dont care about the features and options on the jp because i dont gig anymore, i care more about the tone and the HRG sounds closer to the OG than the JP does, so at some point i might sell my JP or trade it towards a HRG. A couple of complaints ive had about the JP is that its too compressed, too smooth, it can be kinda dark sounding compared to older marks, and i have things about the mids that i dont like. I really began to notice these things when i compared the jp to my reissue iic++, once the HRG was released i started thinking i might sell or trade my JP towards a HRG, i want more of the classic sounding mark tone than a modern version of it.

 

[glpg80]

Aaaand finally, the JP-2C comparo!

This one deserves some commentary. I've had 2 JPs previously and have always felt like the V and the JP are the best Marks for 7/8 string work due to the extra compression, even though the tone I felt was a bit flat compared to the OGs. I felt the same today, and we really cranked both amps LOUD.

That said, in normal tunings everyone in the room agreed that the HRG had MUCH better clarity and dynamics. It made the JP seem muddy in comparison.

Wow that’s a huge difference and for the better in everything. HRG wipes the floor here no question.

 

[Tone Monster]

JP sounds woolly in the bass response. Less immediate

 

[GJgo]

I own a JP and like it alot, but the HRG sounds better to me, im glad you made this clip, i dont care about the features and options on the jp because i dont gig anymore, i care more about the tone and the HRG sounds closer to the OG than the JP does, so at some point i might sell my JP or trade it towards a HRG. A couple of complaints ive had about the JP is that its too compressed, too smooth, it can be kinda dark sounding compared to older marks, and i have things about the mids that i dont like. I really began to notice these things when i compared the jp to my reissue iic++, once the HRG was released i started thinking i might sell or trade my JP towards a HRG, i want more of the classic sounding mark tone than a modern version of it.

You nailed it, based on what you said I'd definitely recommend the swap.

 

[CDawg]

IMO & having tried umpteen of them in the band, I just think the OG Mark mids are not in the right frequency for live band work. You can move things around with the right GEQ / PEQ, if you can find one with the right EQ bands.

When recording it's much easier to get them to sit well in the mix, IMO.

So, I am excited that the DR RI (does, verified) and I think also the C+ RI (TBD) have better mids for live work than their OGs.

YMMV of course, can only speak from my perspective.

Sounds like JJ tubes to me. Are you using any JJ tubes in those amplifiers?

 

[GJgo]

I've used all the tube brands in my amps over the years and at the moment I have Mesa JJs in everything but the OG C+, which, is the one that sits the worst live.

That being said, when you reamp & level match, I've learned that tubes don't matter to the mic (quantitative). How the affect feels (qualitative) will always be up for debate since you can't measure it.

 

[CDawg]

I've used all the tube brands in my amps over the years and at the moment I have Mesa JJs in everything but the OG C+, which, is the one that sits the worst live.

That being said, when you reamp & level match, I've learned that tubes don't matter to the mic (quantitative). How the affect feels (qualitative) will always be up for debate since you can't measure it.

https://www.radiomuseum.org/l/t_japan.html

There's a small list of 49 tube brands from Japan. Do you have 49 of those? What about the other 75 tube companies from Japan not listed there? What about the rest of the world? Out of 1000 brands you might own 50 and even that's impressive. If your kid comes home with 5% on the report card what can you say? That's how I think about it.

I called it right on the JJs.

Try mixing New Sensor, RFT and Shuguang ONLY since I think you have those. I'd like to hear what happens to the low mids and the feels vs an amp full of JJs. There's probably people out there that have measured those feels.

 

[GJgo]

That statement always gets peoples' hackles up. ..Which is fine, I'm understanding and open to all the differing opinions. I can post a comparo clip & get literally polar opposite opinions on what people think sounds best, beauty is for sure in the eye of the beholder. That's why I at least attempt (admittedly not always succesfully) not to weigh in on my own clips anymore & let people make up their own minds based on their personal experiences & preferences.

We did a test recently at work where we took 3 different turbos & installed them on the same car, and had my tech team all drive each turbo to weigh in on which turbo felt the best, was the most responsive, etc. (qualitative) We also ran them on the dyno (quantitative). Among 6 (experienced) guys we got WILDLY different opinions on which turbo was the "best", much of which did not line up with what the dyno said at all. Same situation, same human bias.

I used to be one of those devoted tube roller guys until I started reamping & level matching. Where my head is now is that any slight differences in sound can be negated by turning the knobs on the amp. Here's one example- an amp that's running 6L6 at 35mA vs the same amp running EL34 at 16mA. Should be massively different, right? If I didn't call out the change I doubt most people could tell where it was. Close your eyes and listen for it.

I've thought about doing another one of these with a bunch of different 6L6 in a Mesa, but haven't prioritized it as I think it'll be more an engine for arguments (probably like this post) than sharing of information.

I do still think there's room for differences in the feels, but to date this has only been subject to opinion. I've even thought about setting up a way to quantify feels by datalogging the speaker with a MAP sensor. I 3D printed a speaker cone that reduces to a vacuum nipple, but never got around to putting the work in. I got tired of arguing about it & decided to just live & let live.

 

[DanTravis62]

That statement always gets peoples' hackles up. ..Which is fine, I'm understanding and open to all the differing opinions. I can post a comparo clip & get literally polar opposite opinions on what people think sounds best, beauty is for sure in the eye of the beholder. That's why I at least attempt (admittedly not always succesfully) not to weigh in on my own clips anymore & let people make up their own minds based on their personal experiences & preferences.

We did a test recently at work where we took 3 different turbos & installed them on the same car, and had my tech team all drive each turbo to weigh in on which turbo felt the best, was the most responsive, etc. (qualitative) We also ran them on the dyno (quantitative). Among 6 (experienced) guys we got WILDLY different opinions on which turbo was the "best", much of which did not line up with what the dyno said at all. Same situation, same human bias.

I used to be one of those devoted tube roller guys until I started reamping & level matching. Where my head is now is that any slight differences in sound can be negated by turning the knobs on the amp. Here's one example- an amp that's running 6L6 at 35mA vs the same amp running EL34 at 16mA. Should be massively different, right? If I didn't call out the change I doubt most people could tell where it was. Close your eyes and listen for it.

I've thought about doing another one of these with a bunch of different 6L6 in a Mesa, but haven't prioritized it as I think it'll be more an engine for arguments (probably like this post) than sharing of information.

I do still think there's room for differences in the feels, but to date this has only been subject to opinion. I've even thought about setting up a way to quantify feels by datalogging the speaker with a MAP sensor. I 3D printed a speaker cone that reduces to a vacuum nipple, but never got around to putting the work in. I got tired of arguing about it & decided to just live & let live.

I'm with you on this. Most of the reason I use old/NOS tubes is because of reliability, not tone.

Thank you doing these comparisons, I'm especially surprised with how much the HRG kicked the JP2c's ass.

 

[TheGreatGreen]

Yeah, I don't know if I subscribe to the idea that tube rolling makes a world of difference either. Changing tubes (as long as they all work properly) is probably the most subtle change you can make to an amp. I agree with @DanTravis62 about selecting tubes for reliability. Maybe I just haven't rolled enough tubes but that's what I've noticed when I've done it.

About the JP2C, the first time I heard that amp compared to the IIC+ RI and IIC+ OG was in Ola's comparison video where he showed that the JP2C has less low end preamp filtering filtering which made everything a bit more bassy. It's especially apparent in the palm mutes. I also think there's something going on with the JP2C's GEQ that gives it a tendency to be more mid-focused than other Marks, too. I've heard the same characteristics in every other JP2C shootout video I've listened to. It's great for getting Dream Theater tones but it doesn't get as tight as most other Marks because of this, at least without a pedal in front.

 

[CDawg]

That statement always gets peoples' hackles up. ..Which is fine, I'm understanding and open to all the differing opinions. I can post a comparo clip & get literally polar opposite opinions on what people think sounds best, beauty is for sure in the eye of the beholder. That's why I at least attempt (admittedly not always succesfully) not to weigh in on my own clips anymore & let people make up their own minds based on their personal experiences & preferences.

We did a test recently at work where we took 3 different turbos & installed them on the same car, and had my tech team all drive each turbo to weigh in on which turbo felt the best, was the most responsive, etc. (qualitative) We also ran them on the dyno (quantitative). Among 6 (experienced) guys we got WILDLY different opinions on which turbo was the "best", much of which did not line up with what the dyno said at all. Same situation, same human bias.

I used to be one of those devoted tube roller guys until I started reamping & level matching. Where my head is now is that any slight differences in sound can be negated by turning the knobs on the amp. Here's one example- an amp that's running 6L6 at 35mA vs the same amp running EL34 at 16mA. Should be massively different, right? If I didn't call out the change I doubt most people could tell where it was. Close your eyes and listen for it.

I've thought about doing another one of these with a bunch of different 6L6 in a Mesa, but haven't prioritized it as I think it'll be more an engine for arguments (probably like this post) than sharing of information.

I do still think there's room for differences in the feels, but to date this has only been subject to opinion. I've even thought about setting up a way to quantify feels by datalogging the speaker with a MAP sensor. I 3D printed a speaker cone that reduces to a vacuum nipple, but never got around to putting the work in. I got tired of arguing about it & decided to just live & let live.

There's no knob to turn for microphonics or noise. What about all the other variables that may or may not apply to you? Can you show me a sound stage knob? You can have all your boosts, compressors, EQ, noise gates, cabling, etc. and I'll just tube roll instead and play guitar to amp.

You expect someone to hear a difference in tubes over a very narrow range of frequencies? You covered like 20% of what a human ear can hear and nothing that we can feel (to no fault of your own). What's the frequency range of your speakers? You actually think that's a fair example of what a tube can do when you've placed limitations because of the equipment you chose and what's being played? I know you're doing it in good faith but it's deeply flawed.

There's lots of people who've measured this stuff decades ago and know what they're talking about. All the tube naysayers don't have a single measurement to back up what they say. Just show me measurements that these tubes are all the same and explain the methods they were done with.

 

[TheGreatGreen]

There's no knob to turn for microphonics or noise. What about all the other variables that may or may not apply to you? Can you show me a sound stage knob? You can have all your boosts, compressors, EQ, noise gates, cabling, etc. and I'll just tube roll instead and play guitar to amp.

You expect someone to hear a difference in tubes over a very narrow range of frequencies? You covered like 20% of what a human ear can hear and nothing that we can feel (to no fault of your own). What's the frequency range of your speakers? You actually think that's a fair example of what a tube can do when you've placed limitations because of the equipment you chose and what's being played? I know you're doing it in good faith but it's deeply flawed.

There's lots of people who've measured this stuff decades ago and know what they're talking about. All the tube naysayers don't have a single measurement to back up what they say. Just show me measurements that these tubes are all the same and explain the methods they were done with.

View attachment 419982View attachment 419983

All that stuff is fine, but show me actual comparisons and sound samples where the difference between tube brands are massive. Because I haven't really seen them.

I mean, you can measure every possible variable and publish as many write-ups as you want about the small differences between tubes with measurements down into the thousandths of a percent, but once you start doing actual real world sound samples and get to where the rubber meets the road, you see that those differences really don't amount to all that much. Some tubes do sound a bit different than others but not really by enough to swear by.

In my experience, changing a set of strings from an old set to a new set has significantly more tonal impact than swapping out one brand of 12AX7 or 6L6 or EL34 for another.

 

[CDawg]

All that stuff is fine, but show me actual comparisons and sound samples where the difference between tube brands are massive. Because I haven't really seen them.

I mean, you can measure every possible variable and publish as many write-ups about the small differences between tubes with measurements down into the thousandths of a percent, but once you start doing actual real world sound samples and get to where the rubber meets the road, you see that all those differences really don't amount to all that much. Some tubes do sound a bit different than others but not really by enough to swear by.

If measurements from professionals don't work for you I hate to see what you think of my cell phone recordings. So what's your goal post?

Is a 366% percent difference of second harmonic content between a Mullard LP and a GE SP not enough for you? Would anyone like a pay increase of 366%? Would anyone like to be 366% healthier? Those are not small differences in the thousands of a percent like you're talking about.

 

[thegame]

All that stuff is fine, but show me actual comparisons and sound samples where the difference between tube brands are massive. Because I haven't really seen them.

I mean, you can measure every possible variable and publish as many write-ups as you want about the small differences between tubes with measurements down into the thousandths of a percent, but once you start doing actual real world sound samples and get to where the rubber meets the road, you see that those differences really don't amount to all that much. Some tubes do sound a bit different than others but not really by enough to swear by.

In my experience, changing a set of strings from an old set to a new set has significantly more tonal impact than swapping out one brand of 12AX7 or 6L6 or EL34 for another.

In some amps yes, in others most definitely no. The rawer the inherent amp’s core tone is, the bigger difference tubes make IMO

 

[TheGreatGreen]

If measurements from professionals don't work for you I hate to see what you think of my cell phone recordings.

Measurements from professionals do work for me, and the graphs you show above seems to make the case that the measured differences between tubes are very, very small.

Excuse me, I didn't mean "tubes" as in "all tubes" I meant "the very specific batch of tubes manufactured at a specific point in time." Because as long as we're counting, let's remember that your graphs don't tell us the manufacturing tolerances of any given brand, nor does it even tell us things like average shift in values of any particular brand over time. As far as I can see, the graph really only shows that "professionals" can take any given batch of tubes and measure some differences in the thousandths of a percent of a few arbitrary variables. So even if you do take for granted that different brands of tubes are wildly different, you still haven't shown they are consistently and reliably different in the same ways.

So what's your goal post?

Like I said, my "goal post" is a well executed sound sample that compares different brands of the same tube type in an otherwise identical signal chain.

Is a 366% percent difference of second harmonic content between a Mullard LP and a GE SP not enough for you? Would anyone like a pay increase of 366%? Would anyone like to be 366% healthier? Those are not small differences in the thousands of a percent like you're talking about.

"366% difference?" Please. That's pretty disingenuous.

Let's say I draw two lines on a piece of paper, exactly 1 foot long each, about a foot apart from each other. Now let's say I erase 0.001% of one line. Next, I erase 0.004% from the other line. That's almost exactly 300% more line erased! What a huge difference, right? Nope. In practical terms, one line is now about 0.6 mm longer than the other. Could you tell with your naked eye which is which? I doubt I could.

Even the most carnival barking audiophile snake oil salesman will tell you than anything under 0.1% distortion becomes very hard to hear.

Again, show me some well-made audio samples of different tube types sounding massively different, consistently over time, and I will happily concede.

 

[TheGreatGreen]

In some amps yes, in others most definitely no. The rawer the inherent amp’s core tone is, the bigger difference tubes make IMO

I'd love to hear some good examples of this. Not trying to be difficult, I would genuinely like to learn about how different circuit types exaggerate the differences in tubes while others seem to minimize them.

I'm saying that so far, what I've seen and heard does not really tell me these differences are anything more than very subtle.

 

[Beefeater]

So, this thread to a weird turn.. Going back to Marks.. @GJgo I ended up watching all your videos with the new MKIIC+ HRG, JP2C, DR RI, MKV, ect.. They all sounded pretty darn good to me, with subtle differences. The DR RI sounded damn good! I've concluded that the desire for the right Mark series amp is becoming obsessive and driving me insane. With that said, I'm going to piss this cash away on a new boost pedal for my DR, a bed cover for my truck and maybe try to find a shop with some Mesas in my travels to play some first hand in case I ever get the itch again.

As far as this tube rolling debacle.. I've ran countless tubes through my old Marshall Super Lead. Changing cabs/speakers had a bigger impact than any tube I've put in it. Not that tubes didn't alter it any, or make it sound sweeter, but it was an endless pursuit. Something that might have sounded great on its own would sound too brash when you put a fuzz in front of it. It went on and on. I couldn't care less what tubes are in my amps now as long as it sounds decent and tests good with my dudes Amplitrex.