Sick Michael
Well-known member
Clips man!! We need clips!!
rstites
Well-known member
I've got a Quad that hasn't been fired up in a few years. I started building a stereo system with it. It sounds glorious. I need to get back to work on it so I can experience one of those overbuilt rack systems finally. I dreamed of them back in the day, but they were out of my price range at the time.
Little B
Well-known member
^^^^ love my mkivs,nice amps no doubt. But for me there is more fun factor with the Quad and a killer poweramp.
Markedman
Well-known member
I use the send as the output, much less compressed sound.
I also have found the Boogie 50/50 is the best power amp, beating the simul-stereo 295 and Boogie 400 power amps IMO.
Ultimate Boogie by John Bazzano, on Flickr
9/13/2021 by John Bazzano, on Flickr
I also have found the Boogie 50/50 is the best power amp, beating the simul-stereo 295 and Boogie 400 power amps IMO.
Ultimate Boogie by John Bazzano, on Flickr9/13/2021 by John Bazzano, on Flickr
peterc52
Well-known member
Is your ‘send’ output lower than the actual main output?I use the send as the output, much less compressed sound.
I also have found the Boogie 50/50 is the best power amp, beating the simul-stereo 295 and Boogie 400 power amps IMO.
Fusionbear
Well-known member
It shouldn't be as it's level is controlled by the Channel Volume and Lead Master controls
BABMusic
Well-known member
The Quad is a little closer to the C+ than the Mark Iv. Although, there is a C+ mode in the IV.
Rackman
Well-known member
It'd be interesting to hear the 2:Ninety as well. Seems like it's a classic pairing for Mk sounding pres.
John4021
Well-known member
Has anyone mastered hitting two buttons at the same time on the Quad Footswitch?
I was able to do it but...Didnt seem like it would work quick enough in a live setting
I was able to do it but...Didnt seem like it would work quick enough in a live setting
Little B
Well-known member
Midi on the Quad might let u combine any channel with another, or a midi interface running 1/4" jacks on the quad.Ive tried it,that was decades ago,I can't remember if I liked or not.Back I'm the day I do remember stepping on 2 chls at once on the fu2 pedal and getting both on.
My fav poweramp for the Quad would be the 400,500 or vht 292 & 2150.
My fav poweramp for the Quad would be the 400,500 or vht 292 & 2150.
Last edited:
Uzi Nein Millimetah
Well-known member
I have a Quad/2:90 and MkIVb, among others.
The Quad/2:90 is head and shoulders above the MkIV to me, especially when you use two 4x12s to take full advantage of the 2 x 90 watts stereo output. It's simply another league, especially when you use the right cabs (Mark cabs). The 2:90 is already overkill for most people and sounds MASSIVE, no need to have the bigger 400 or 500 unless Metallica is opening for you at your next gig. I run the 2:90 in Full Power/Modern, turned down fairly low for most studio use but with generous master volume, and even very loud jams don't require cranking it, it has huge reserves of powah....
I love the Quad's R1 (Clean) and Lead 1 (IIC), which is also a great boost platform if you are so inclined, don't really need one for most playing if you have toasty pickups, especially with Treble shift pulled. I love Lead 2 (III) just as much but for thrashy playing, like the MkIII head, this channel really wakes up at high volume. Obviously, you have to understand how the Mark rotary controls interact with each other as well the dual 5-band GEQs to get the best.
The Quad's direct out recording is excellent also.
The Quad/2:90 is head and shoulders above the MkIV to me, especially when you use two 4x12s to take full advantage of the 2 x 90 watts stereo output. It's simply another league, especially when you use the right cabs (Mark cabs). The 2:90 is already overkill for most people and sounds MASSIVE, no need to have the bigger 400 or 500 unless Metallica is opening for you at your next gig. I run the 2:90 in Full Power/Modern, turned down fairly low for most studio use but with generous master volume, and even very loud jams don't require cranking it, it has huge reserves of powah....
I love the Quad's R1 (Clean) and Lead 1 (IIC), which is also a great boost platform if you are so inclined, don't really need one for most playing if you have toasty pickups, especially with Treble shift pulled. I love Lead 2 (III) just as much but for thrashy playing, like the MkIII head, this channel really wakes up at high volume. Obviously, you have to understand how the Mark rotary controls interact with each other as well the dual 5-band GEQs to get the best.
The Quad's direct out recording is excellent also.
Little B
Well-known member
Top o line quad pairing is without a doubt the 400 or 500 - if u can find one & ( if ur staying with mesa power).Over the decades Ive ran many quads thru a mesa 2 90 and strategy 400 and the 400 crushed the 90.It doesn't get any better.Amount of volume has absolutely nothing to do with it at all.
A mesa 2 50,2 90,295,etc all go to loud.
Where the 400 and 500 take the lead is in feel and authority and pure agression in tone. That where the big boy IRON out shines the others.
Back in the late 80s I bought my 1rst of many quads,a 295, and 2 cabs from thoroughbred music. I thought that sounded pretty darn good for a teenagers rig...until I stood in front of strypers Michael Sweet and Oz fox's quads,400s and cabs at a show one night. That was nxt level eye and ear opening for sure.ill never forget that.
That was also lesson #1 for me in how iron makes a big difference.
A mesa 2 50,2 90,295,etc all go to loud.
Where the 400 and 500 take the lead is in feel and authority and pure agression in tone. That where the big boy IRON out shines the others.
Back in the late 80s I bought my 1rst of many quads,a 295, and 2 cabs from thoroughbred music. I thought that sounded pretty darn good for a teenagers rig...until I stood in front of strypers Michael Sweet and Oz fox's quads,400s and cabs at a show one night. That was nxt level eye and ear opening for sure.ill never forget that.
That was also lesson #1 for me in how iron makes a big difference.
T
TooMuchGear
Member
Does it have to do with not being able to fully crank the bigger amps?
A
andrewd
Member
Congrats for procuring a piece of history. That is a killer combo!
Little B
Well-known member
That's a killer mesa setup.Just out of curiosity,I see u dig the 50 more than the 400? I remember owning those. They're very nice poweramps in thier own right.My buddy owns both of those and loves them.I use the send as the output, much less compressed sound.
I also have found the Boogie 50/50 is the best power amp, beating the simul-stereo 295 and Boogie 400 power amps IMO.
As previously asked,volume? I can see how you can get it turned up to decent working level quicker than a 4 or 500.
Anyways,I've always loved the boogie rack gear.Enjoy that quad!
L
LightsOfSorrow86
Member
Hi guys, I owned a Quad 13 years ago, many rectifiers, a Studio preamp, a Triaxis and a Mark IV A but what I miss the most is the IV. I have this setup today. Now, a guys was interested in buying my Quad+Poweramp and I was thinking to a couple of solutions. Selling the Quad only, it has been reburbished completely 2 months ago, all filter caps with F&Ts, all carbon comp resistors with Vishay metal film and 10 Orange drop with Orange drop 716P (one gone, 2 microphonics and the others were leaking). So the Quad it's like new and it's in perfect conditions. For what? A Mark IV and converti it to a rack as I did with my old A. Would you do that or not? Having a IV, keeping the 395 would give me the chance to use the IV as a standalone amp and use other pres with the 395 in stereo, or have a wet-dry-wet setup. Curious to know your opinions
I'm waiting an Intellifex online tomorrow and other stuff.
I'm waiting an Intellifex online tomorrow and other stuff.
ChurchHill
Well-known member
I wouldn't. My Quad does things my Mk IV doesn't and vice versa. To me, the Quad is more raw and the IV is more polished.
With a loop switcher or an AB switch, you could use both the Quad and the IV in a W/D/W setup. Just split the output between the FX input and the IV's effects return for the dry signal.
BTW, the 395 is my favorite Boogie PA and IMO one of if not THE best PA ever made. Those things just crush!
With a loop switcher or an AB switch, you could use both the Quad and the IV in a W/D/W setup. Just split the output between the FX input and the IV's effects return for the dry signal.
BTW, the 395 is my favorite Boogie PA and IMO one of if not THE best PA ever made. Those things just crush!
Uzi Nein Millimetah
Well-known member
The Quad is absolutely rawer and more aggressive than the IV.
L
LightsOfSorrow86
Member
@ChurchHill you are right, it's way more rawer than the IV. I've never had a mesa poweramp before, I owned 3 rectos, the IV, a Quad from '87, the Studio pre, Triaxis but never a poweramp. I don't know how an healthy 395 should sound, this one if used with the Deep extend off and the presence at 0 is pretty thin and bright (and I don' push the treble on the Quad way too much as you can see) So I don't know if it's normal or not. Carbon resistors are of the right value despite the ones that were in the Quad. I'm planning to change the filter caps here as well. At the end they have a great story. A dealer in Sardinia in Italy brought both from the Italian distributor in the 91s (both were produced in 91), for a friend, After few years he bought them back, never used. I traded a guitar for the Quad first and than an amp for the poweramp few months later. So they are tback ogether again.
SFW
Well-known member
The Mesa Quad is the Mark II and Mark III preamps in one housing. Very cool setup. When I owned mine, I treated it as a three channel preamp, as I could never get all four sections to sound good at the same time.
