Neural DSP Mesa Boogie Mark IIC+ Suite vs. REAL Mesa Boogie Mark IV

Here's my comparison video between the new Neural DSP Mesa Boogie Mark IIC+ Suite-plugin and real Mesa Boogie Mark IV (A) tube amp.

Guitars are doubletracked, no post EQ or other studio magic. Both are using same IR-file.

Gear used:
- Ibanez RG3120F (Dimarzio Steve's Special/Air Norton)
- Mesa Boogie Mark IV (A)
- Two Notes Torpedo Live
- Fractal Audio Axe-Fx II (Fx only for Mesa)

Neural is recorded straight to DAW (Cubase 10), soundcard is UAD Apollo Twin.

My 2+ Cents:
Plugin is good value, but it doesn't quite capture the essential and familiar Mark-series tone. EQ is at same ballpark, but the playing feel is not.

I really struggled with this one. I honestly think there are couple better Mark-plugins out there by now.

What do you think?

[DisccoRecords]

mesa boogies are extremely difficult to model. there's a three dimensionality to them, you can definitely hear it in the room. On recordings it's a bit more tricky, yet i think thats why they cannot be very accurately recreated.

[Tiger.]

Interesting that the IV still had better attack and dynamics. Because the IV has relatively more compression and smoothness than a real IIC+ and also the Two Notes Captor contributes to some mushiness on palm mutes and decreases attack compared to the Suhr Reactive load or using a real cab as a load (based on my personal tests and this is also a common comment out there). Still the plugin is lacking the attack and punch. Do you feel the Axe Fx II, with its now relatively outdated model compared to the III does a better job than the Neural plugin?

[LandonQizilbash]

I feel like I can feel the real amp. The ndsp sounds like you put a blanket atop the amp. Sounds great though, definitely buying when the sale comes around