Mesa Mark V vs Mark Five:35 - Crunch+IV Modes

[Shorts_Mike]

On both the Crunch and IV Mode comparisons, the Mark V and Mark Five:35 have identical EQ settings and the volume on each was adjusted so that they were within the same ballpark of one another. For the phone comparisons, the amps were recorded with my phone resting on a window sill across the room, so I apologize if the sound levels fluctuated a bit as I accidentally walked in and out of the recording path a couple of times. At the time this was recorded, I was attempting to decide which of the two amps to keep and I never intended for it to be used as a thorough or well edited comparison. However, I do think it'll be of use to some people, so I decided to post it. Let me know what you think:

 

[Deadpool_25]

Does seem like the 35 has a tiny bit more gain on the crunch mode but not a huge difference. Thanks for posting this!

 

[Shorts_Mike]

Does seem like the 35 has a tiny bit more gain on the crunch mode but not a huge difference. Thanks for posting this!

For sure the V:35 has a high end fizz in the top end from the EL84s that contributes to this and the power amp section is undoubtedly getting more involved at an equivalent volume level to the V:90. Beyond this, though, I have no idea if theres inherently more gain in the V:35 or not, but it would definitely be relatively subtle. To me, they sound pretty similar and are actually closer than this after post-processing; with the V:90 having more heft, a "cleaner"/less "hairy" gain structure and tighter low end response. That, though, combined with master volume, 3 channels, more modes, more channel switches and preset knobs led me to choose the V:90 over the V:35 at the time. That being said, the V:35 is cheaper, smaller, lighter and has headphone out+cabclone. Both great amps.

 

[MatrixClaw]

The 35 almost sounds darker to me in most of the clips. Maybe it's just the power amp saturation filling in the lows and low mids? The Crunch on the 90 sounds more "Classic" and British voiced, but I like the extra hair on the 35. Think I'm gonna do some more profiling of my extra amps today so I can sell them off and buy the V:25. The more I hear comparisons like this, the more I'm convinced that buying the bigger one doesn't make any sense for me, and the smaller size and price is definitely more appealing. Still kicking myself for not buying one a few months back for $900, but I had just sold my 90 like a year before and had a Mark IV at the time. I think the 25 would get me close enough without much compromise and then I wouldn't have to feel bad for spending a bunch of money on another amp.

 

[Hollowway]

For sure the V:35 has a high end fizz in the top end from the EL84s that contributes to this and the power amp section is undoubtedly getting more involved at an equivalent volume level to the V:90. Beyond this, though, I have no idea if theres inherently more gain in the V:35 or not, but it would definitely be relatively subtle. To me, they sound pretty similar and are actually closer than this after post-processing; with the V:90 having more heft, a "cleaner"/less "hairy" gain structure and tighter low end response. That, though, combined with master volume, 3 channels, more modes, more channel switches and preset knobs led me to choose the V:90 over the V:35 at the time. That being said, the V:35 is cheaper, smaller, lighter and has headphone out+cabclone. Both great amps.

Around here, the 35 is only a couple hundred less than the 90. I like the bigger footpedal and more knobs on the front for that $200 difference. But, I'm interested in hearing about these differences between the tones in each.

 

[MatrixClaw]

Around here, the 35 is only a couple hundred less than the 90. I like the bigger footpedal and more knobs on the front for that $200 difference. But, I'm interested in hearing about these differences between the tones in each.

Yeah, that's why the 25 appeals to me. There's enough of a price difference to make sense. At the price of the 35, it makes more sense to get the extra channel for a little more money.

The 35 is kind of a weird product. People said the 25 isn't loud enough so they doubled the power amp and added a boost. They should've just given it to big bottle tubes, then there'd be more delineation in the line:

- 25W 2-channel
- 50w 2-channel
- 90W 3-channel

The problem there probably being that they were afraid a 50w would cut into the sales of the 90w too much, considering the lower wattage amps had more features, just one less channel.

 

[Shorts_Mike]

Around here, the 35 is only a couple hundred less than the 90. I like the bigger footpedal and more knobs on the front for that $200 difference. But, I'm interested in hearing about these differences between the tones in each.

I have no clue what pricing is like now, but about 1.5-2 years ago I bought my Mark V:90 for $2300CAD and sold my V:35 for $1900CAD. Crazy how close they are in price.

The tonal difference, in my opinion, just comes down to 100 watts and 6l6 tubes vs 35 watts and el84 tubes. The tonal foundation is the same, but the 35 sounds slightly thinner and less defined in the low end and slightly fizzier/messier in the top end. This was a common theme with the lower wattage amps that I owned in the past (Fender Superchamp XD, Orange TH30 and Mark Five:35) and became more apparent after I purchased a couple of full-sized amps (Mark V and Dual Rectifier Multi-Watt). The full-sized amps just have more bass definition, "cleaner"/less colored gain structures and feel heavier/heftier in the room and in recordings (though the 2 amps will sound even closer after post-processing). Also, I'll say that I was very hesitant to buy a 100 watt amp, as I'm pretty much just a basement hobbyist guitar player and don't require alot of volume. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised at how good and gradual the modern master volumes were on these larger amps in comparison to their smaller counterparts (I felt like the 35 went from 0-100 by 9 o'clock on the volume dial) and how manageable they were.

Anyway, hopefully my recordings captured some of these differences. To me, I definitely hear them on my phone/computer through these links, but its even more apparent directly through reaper on my Beyerdynamic headphones and in person. Regardless, though, they're both great amps and I hope you enjoy your new Mark V. You can't go wrong with either.

Note - Here's a good youtube video demonstrating the similarity between the V and a V:25 in a mix:

 

[Shorts_Mike]

One thing I did forget to note in favor of the smaller Mark Fives is that they're cheaper to retube than the V:90. If I remember correctly, it was almost $100CAD cheaper, but I also felt like I was changing tubes more frequently than I've had to on the V:90.

 

[Shorts_Mike]

Kyle Bull released a nice thrash demo of the Mark V today if anyone's interested:

 

[Shorts_Mike]

Its worth noting that the attached comparison clips are with the Mark V in Triode mode on Channel 3 vs Pentode. I may do another addition at some point with the Mark V's channel 3 in Pentode mode.