** OK Diezel VH4 or MESA Mark IIC+ ***

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mrevol
  • Start date Start date
Mrevol

Mrevol

Member
Want to get another amp for the studio that can crush and be versatile. Looking at these two. I have played a Mesa Mark IV which I thought was great and versatile and I also played an older VH4 which I feel the same. But I have never played a newer VH4 or Mark IIC+. So from people who have, what's your opinion.

Thanks guys!
 
Remember the OP wanted to hear from people who have played both. :) ;)

Versatility, i would have to say VH4. Heavy rhythm I'd probably also say the Diezel. Screaming lead tones IIC+ all the way. The Diezel's do have that hi-fi thing going, some like it, some don't. The IIC+ does share EQ control's and the volume 1 knob that controls the clean sound affects the lead channel so there is some compromise and you don't have that issue with the Diezel.

A great example of the IIC+ lead tone is Petrucci on 6 Degress Of Inner Turbulence. It sounded to me like it was more of the amp and less of his refrigerator racks.
 
That would really depend, you played both, which one did you like?? I have a VH4S and a MKV right now, and I couldn't answer that question. It would greatly depend upon what kind of other gear you would be using thru it and what kind of music you will play thru them. Both of these are extremely versatile, and can cover a lot of territory but have diff places.
 
:D
d5a9d7ba1d.jpg
 
I've played a Mark V and compared to the IV I thought it wasn't as warm. The IV had more goooo going on and the V was a little stiffer.

I also played a Herbert and (I know I will get crap for saying this) I preferred the VH4. I do like the saturation and voicing of the Herb but it wasn't as organic as the VH4.

So those two amps are not even in the running.
 
I like Mark amps better than Diezel's, the tone and dynamics work better for me. The IV is a lot more versatile than a II. You may want to look at a III, there are differences but not huge in comparison with a II. I like all of these better than a V. If I was interested in a Diezel I would want a Herbert, Einstein and VH4 in that order. If you want more organic from a Diezel check out a Einstein. The Mark's are more organic than Diezel's. I feel the Diezel's may be better at modern heavy rhythm sounds if the voicing works for you, but I feel the Mark's do everything else better. Everyone I know that have owned both has said the same.
 
chunktone":1ak4j8fn said:
VH4, not even close.
Click to expand...


Just curious, have you played a IIC+ head on a good cab? I borrowed a Herbert for a week and at the time i owned a great sounding IIC+. I liked the Herbert for some things, but there was plenty about the IIC+ that was better, especially for lead playing where the IIC+ won for me. But the Herbert sounded really good on that Boogie 4x12. I didn't like it as much on the Marshall cab.

Captured2006-2-300005.jpg


2 IIC+'s. :rock:
Captured2006-8-2400000.jpg
 
Mrevol":1o0vhy28 said:
Want to get another amp for the studio that can crush and be versatile. Looking at these two. I have played a Mesa Mark IV which I thought was great and versatile and I also played an older VH4 which I feel the same. But I have never played a newer VH4 or Mark IIC+. So from people who have, what's your opinion.

Thanks guys!
Click to expand...

I owned both. The VH4 is versatile. I wouldn't label it a crushing amp. The IIC+ will vaporize the VH4, but wouldn't call it versatile. You can easily pick up as VH4 as they are pretty common. Good luck finding a IIC+ as there aren't many around anymore.

Steve
 
yeah if you want versatility go for the VH4. If you want some balls out aggressive lead tones go for the Mark.
 
Personally I prefer the tone of the iic+, but the VH4 is more versatile.
 
I dunno, I think it should be MKIIC+ or MKV??, or, Diezel VH4 or Einstein?? or something like that. Both amps def have their place, neither one will cover the other or be the same as the other. People ask me all the time why I have a Diezel and a Boogie, and thats easy for me because I know they are actually very diff amps and again, have their own place,,,I think I am no help at all on this(hahaha) and luckily its later in the evening so I will let the "vaporize" line slide by :lol: :LOL: one things for sure, all amps mentioned here will :rock: :rock:
 
Since this is a studio amp the IIC+, to me, is very versatile. What does it matter that the EQ is shared in a studio?

I've owned both, gigged both, and I would much prefer the Mesa in a studio. Live the VH4 is more versatile.

I can't imagine having to be heavier than a IIC+ can get.

As stated, some of it would depend on what else you have, but if I had to choose, the Mesa is way ahead.
 
Mrevol":nz7iu9cg said:
I also played a Herbert and (I know I will get crap for saying this) I preferred the VH4.
Click to expand...

I also preferred the VH4 to the Herbert. I didn't really care for the Herbert too much honestly, that amp is way too compressed and just has entirely too much bass :confused: Plus I just thought the VH4 sounded better overall. IMO obviously....
 
You'll be happy with either,but the Diezel has a modern gain tone,the Mesa doesn't,depends what tone your looking for,however you won't lose money on the IIC+
 
danyeo":3dnr0jys said:
Remember the OP wanted to hear from people who have played both. :) ;)

Versatility, i would have to say VH4. Heavy rhythm I'd probably also say the Diezel. Screaming lead tones IIC+ all the way. The Diezel's do have that hi-fi thing going, some like it, some don't. The IIC+ does share EQ control's and the volume 1 knob that controls the clean sound affects the lead channel so there is some compromise and you don't have that issue with the Diezel.

A great example of the IIC+ lead tone is Petrucci on 6 Degress Of Inner Turbulence. It sounded to me like it was more of the amp and less of his refrigerator racks.
Click to expand...

Ah.. :( I have not played both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top