Mesa Mark V/IIC+ mode VS actual IIC+

[Knockout]

Anyone tried these two? I know original IIC+ cannot be beat, but how close did they get in Mark V?
I am normally playing on Extreme and sometimes switch to IIC+, very rarely I play Mark IV settings.

 

[steve_k]

Not even close IMO. I owned both at the same time and compared the two. Although, I liked some of the things about the MkV because of its flexibility, don't be looking for IIC+ in it.

 

[marvcus]

Not even close IMO. I owned both at the same time and compared the two. Although, I liked some of the things about the MkV because of its flexibility, don't be looking for IIC+ in it.

Yup - nothing close to the original.

 

[Knockout]

Damn, I thought I was done with my search for IIC+

 

[Knockout]

How about Mark IV? Something tells me they are diffirent also.

 

[sjk]

Never played a IIC+ so take this with a grain of salt. If you love the lead channel on the V and can live without channel 2 get rid of it and get a III or IV. Imo the lead sounds way better on these but channel 2 pretty much sucks on both of them with not much gain and the cleans are not as good as the V. Not that you were even asking about buying a new amp but you can save some money getting these cheaper and there are several IIIs in the classifieds here right now in excellent condition for around $800 dollars. Killer amp, right now my favorite in my collection (uberschall blue, chupacabra, mark V, mark III). Wishin I had never got rid of the mark IV for the V. This stuff is all subjective though. I'm gonna get rid of all the rest soon and keep the mark III, its supposedly close to the IIC+ but who knows.

 

[Knockout]

I thing Marl V is one of the few pieces I got that are here to stay...
I will get IIC+ though!! Doesn't matter what it takes....

 

[Chris6870]

Never played a IIC+ so take this with a grain of salt. If you love the lead channel on the V and can live without channel 2 get rid of it and get a III or IV. Imo the lead sounds way better on these but channel 2 pretty much sucks on both of them with not much gain and the cleans are not as good as the V. Not that you were even asking about buying a new amp but you can save some money getting these cheaper and there are several IIIs in the classifieds here right now in excellent condition for around $800 dollars. Killer amp, right now my favorite in my collection (uberschall blue, chupacabra, mark V, mark III). Wishin I had never got rid of the mark IV for the V. This stuff is all subjective though. I'm gonna get rid of all the rest soon and keep the mark III, its supposedly close to the IIC+ but who knows.

Are you saying the Mark V cleans are better than the IV? I'm tempted by the V but damn I love my Mark IV clean channel.

 

[sjk]

Never played a IIC+ so take this with a grain of salt. If you love the lead channel on the V and can live without channel 2 get rid of it and get a III or IV. Imo the lead sounds way better on these but channel 2 pretty much sucks on both of them with not much gain and the cleans are not as good as the V. Not that you were even asking about buying a new amp but you can save some money getting these cheaper and there are several IIIs in the classifieds here right now in excellent condition for around $800 dollars. Killer amp, right now my favorite in my collection (uberschall blue, chupacabra, mark V, mark III). Wishin I had never got rid of the mark IV for the V. This stuff is all subjective though. I'm gonna get rid of all the rest soon and keep the mark III, its supposedly close to the IIC+ but who knows.

Are you saying the Mark V cleans are better than the IV? I'm tempted by the V but damn I love my Mark IV clean channel.

To me they are but don't put much stock in that as I rarely use the clean channel on any of my amps, just not much into cleans. Some say the clean channel on the V is based on the lonestar clean, I've read this various places but don't know if there is any truth in it.

 

[The Hoff]

I haven't played a IV so I can't comment on the clean channel in a comparative way but I love the clean channel of the mark V. And yeah, unfortunately the IIC+ mode on the V sounds a whole lot different than an original IIC+. Doesn't mean the IIC+ mode on the V doesn't sound good on its own merit.

 

[VoodooChild24]

Not even close IMO. I owned both at the same time and compared the two. Although, I liked some of the things about the MkV because of its flexibility, don't be looking for IIC+ in it.

This man speaks the truth. I have tried both and still held on to my IIC+. At the end of the day, both are great amps and the crowd won't know the difference between the two. Whats important is you gave them a rocking performance.

 

[glassjaw7]

Never played a IIC+ so take this with a grain of salt. If you love the lead channel on the V and can live without channel 2 get rid of it and get a III or IV. Imo the lead sounds way better on these but channel 2 pretty much sucks on both of them with not much gain and the cleans are not as good as the V. Not that you were even asking about buying a new amp but you can save some money getting these cheaper and there are several IIIs in the classifieds here right now in excellent condition for around $800 dollars. Killer amp, right now my favorite in my collection (uberschall blue, chupacabra, mark V, mark III). Wishin I had never got rid of the mark IV for the V. This stuff is all subjective though. I'm gonna get rid of all the rest soon and keep the mark III, its supposedly close to the IIC+ but who knows.

Are you saying the Mark V cleans are better than the IV? I'm tempted by the V but damn I love my Mark IV clean channel.

Yes, the V has a better clean channel.

 

[AmpliFIRE]

I've owned 2 IIc+'s and I actually prefer the IV's lead tone

 

[gibson5413]

I've owned 2 IIc+'s and I actually prefer the IV's lead tone

Hate to say it but I agree with Paige. I really liked the IIC+ I owned but I liked the IV better for my needs. I didn't feel there was enough of a difference between the two amps to warrant the cost associated. In addition, I only felt the clean channel was marginally better on the V. It is definitely more versatile but these amps are known for their lead channel.

I'll say this, Mike Fortin added a clean channel to my Cali mod and it sounds better than any of the clean channels I have had.

 

[Tone Zone]

According to John Petrucci, the MKV slays the IIC+!

But, then again.....I don't exactly buy what he's saying in this video (1:45). While I do not doubt his love for the MKV,....I do believe Mesa wanted him to market it this way, in order to convert others into this way of thinking, with all the controversy surrounding the MKV (IIC+ Mode) vs. IIC+ debate.

 

[glassjaw7]

I've owned 2 IIc+'s and I actually prefer the IV's lead tone

Never played a IIc+ but I can't imagine I'd like it much more than my IV. LOVE this thing's lead channel!

 

[daveg62]

I've owned 2 IIc+'s and I actually prefer the IV's lead tone

Now if we can get about five other people to say that the price of mark IV's will skyrocket

 

[steve_k]

Petrucci is going to say what Mesa wants him to say. Take that with a grain of salt. Remember when the V came out and Mesa made him change over? He kicked and screamed like a baby.

And, I don't think the IIC+ lead tone was/is the legacy tone of the amp--it's the bad ass crunch tone. A Mark III (for a 3rd of the price) will get you there as well, especially an early stripe (red) that has the leftover PT105 transformers in them.

 

[SonicPulverizer]

The Cleans on the Mk.V are stupid good. The Mk.iii I played was extremely mushy and ugly sounding. Perhaps it had issues though?

 

[Ancient Alien]

In MANY side by side comparisons, the Mark 3 red stripe will pretty much nail a 2C+
I also prefer the Mark iv lead tone to the 2C+
No comment on the 5