Mark 2C+ vs Mark IV

[midnightlaundry]

Which is you favorite, and why.

From what I can tell from playing my MV, the 2C+ mode has more pronounced midrange spread and is less saturated which is good for defined leads, yet it has a slight EL34 like feel because of the inner pair of power tubes in triode. The IV has more gain, saturation EQ and hair, but still comes off as a bit warmer.

 

[AmpliFIRE]

IV for me. I'm sure I'm going to be outnumbered, but I preferred my IV to the 3 real deal IIC+'s I owned. It was a bit bigger/more saturated sounding IMO

 

[droptrd]

IV. The IIC+ has mojo but the IV has some magic too. and the tone is more refined. The elitist thing with the IIC+ turns me off

 

[Heritage Softail]

I have a MKIIC. It is a great amp. Killer cleans and edge of breakup.

Your personal preference is just that.

 

[marvcus]

Had both, IV longer than the IIC+. Sold the IIC+ because I needed the cash.

IIC+:
1. Better clean channel
2. Silkier overdrive, rounder bass, not as compressed as IV.

IVB:
1. Sterile clean and R2 channels (I hate the "hyperclean" lean tone)
2. Overdrive was good but too compressed. Very flexible lead channel, though. I could morph it
to get close to many different tones with the GEQ.
3. Lots of cooler options/bells whistles.

 

[tonefinger]

2C for me with a slight gain tweek from boogie. Has the gain of IV if needed but the tightness and all the good stuff from the 2C.

 

[Mailman1971]

Never heard or played a IIc......had a IV.......and it was kickin some ass!

 

[exhibit-sbt]

I had a mark2C+ and I use a mark IV currently. Hard to really put into words why, but I prefer the mark iv. Just works better for the sound I go for (kind of thrashy metal).

 

[Shark Diver]

I like the CII+ better because I'd rather have one or two great tones than 4 good ones

Both work well, depends on the need. I gigged my IV more, but if I was going into a studio would use the CII+.

 

[thegame]

C++ with 105 transformer and full compliment of Sylvania 6L6 + 6CA7 and Tungsram 12ax7s = tonal eargasm

 

[abrackas]

I've had/played both at one time or another. There must have been something wrong with my IV (purchased new from GC) as it didn't sound anywhere near as good as my IIC+. It would be VERY close if I could have gotten my IV to sound as good as Petrucci does here live with LTE,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCXhOkY-e4Y

 

[midnightlaundry]

I'm diggin' the 2C+ mode. It has a great midrange character and vibrance to it. It must be the even harmonics thing that they talk about in the manual.

Ha! I'm like 25 years late to the party...

 

[EXPcustom]

I think I have said this before here but I will say it again, the only people I know who have had bad or less than stellar tonal experiences with a IIC+ is because they played through either a baseline or IIC upgraded to plus model. EQ and simul class is a must.

I remember reading a Metallica interview from 89 or 90 where James was talking about Mesa amps and he said the simul class was a must, all his C+s that he used had them.

 

[thegame]

I think I have said this before here but I will say it again, the only people I know who have had bad or less than stellar tonal experiences with a IIC+ is because they played through either a baseline or IIC upgraded to plus model. EQ and simul class is a must.

I believe early on when they started upgrading C to C+, they used leftover circuit boards from C+ production. So at one time, an upgraded C literally became a C+. Then when the boards ran out, they just updated the C as best they could, using the existing board and possibly newer parts. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[stephen sawall]

Poll is actually pretty close.

 

[Shark Diver]

Poll is actually pretty close.

Well, as with most polls, how accurate can it really be? I would venture to guess there are more IV users than CII+ merely because of the scarcity of a CII+.

 

[AmpliFIRE]

I like the CII+ better because I'd rather have one or two great tones than 4 good ones

Both work well, depends on the need. I gigged my IV more, but if I was going into a studio would use the CII+.

The IVa's lead tone was as good, if not better to my ears than the legendary IIC+'s I owned

 

[Heritage Softail]

Poll is actually pretty close.

Well, as with most polls, how accurate can it really be? I would venture to guess there are more IV users than CII+ merely because of the scarcity of a CII+.

This is the most significant determining factor.

 

[stephen sawall]

Poll is actually pretty close.

Well, as with most polls, how accurate can it really be? I would venture to guess there are more IV users than CII+ merely because of the scarcity of a CII+.

This is the most significant determining factor.

Considering there is way more than 50,000 Mesa Mark amps built & less than 40 votes on this thread it ~ I would think it has more to do with this forum than a lot of things. CII+ was built for a very short time. IV was built almost 20 years. So you guys are very right about that. I have owned all three & liked the III red strip for lead best and IV for versatility. I have always had a Mark around since 1982 - My IV is collecting dust since last summer when I used it for a few gigs. Original owner / 12th one made.

 

[Heritage Softail]

Poll is actually pretty close.

Well, as with most polls, how accurate can it really be? I would venture to guess there are more IV users than CII+ merely because of the scarcity of a CII+.

This is the most significant determining factor.

Considering there is way more than 50,000 Mesa Mark amps built & less than 40 votes on this thread it ~ I would think it has more to do with this forum than a lot of things. CII+ was built for a very short time. IV was built almost 20 years. So you guys are very right about that. I have owned all three & liked the III red strip for lead best and IV for versatility. I have always had a Mark around since 1982 - My IV is collecting dust since last summer when I used it for a few gigs. Original owner / 12th one made.

You should sell it to me when you get tired of looking at it