visualrocker69
Well-known member
Thanks for the replies, but I've already decided not to buy ANYTHING until I get a Mark IIC+. Then I'll see where to go from there.
Russ said:Assessing your choices for your 4 amp rig you haven't been playing too long and your lack of knowledge of amps shows.
The R2 on the III may be somewhat of a controversy, so I'll leave it at that. The R1 though, is imo on par with most fenders. Actually I've never heard of anyone complaining about the clean on a III.visualrocker69 said:An example... the Mesa advertized the Mark III's RI as a Fender-ish clean and R2 as a more Marshall-eque sound. But I've read from people on this very board that it falls short.
trem said:The R1 though, is imo on par with most fenders. Actually I've never heard of anyone complaining about the clean on a III.
trem said:Mark III has a so-so reverb and shared controls. Mark IV has a better clean channel...
visualrocker69 said:Yup =) It's just I've read and heard enough about the IIC+ as well as clips from a member of this board and its appearence on DT records. I have the money, so why not? Besides, if it turns out I'm looking for something else, I can always resell it *shrugs*
I can see some merit in this and for what it is worth go for it if you have $ you can tie up in experimentation.
Russ said:Assessing your choices for your 4 amp rig you haven't been playing too long and your lack of knowledge of amps shows.
Righto, I haven't been playing nearly long enough to make knowledgable decisions, so thank god for this board I've been playing just over seven years, and only on Marshalls this whole time. I'm currently using a 2x12 valvestate combo. Gotten rather sick of the "Marshall sound", I have.
Having played Marshalls since the 80's, I can tell you that you never fully experienced what Marshall has to offer until youhave played one of their real tube amps. The Valvestate you have is far from the real Marshall sound.
The reason I put listed those particular amps is that each maker really does have its unique sound. No matter how they might try, no company can nail the completely nail the tones that another is famous for. An example... the Mesa advertized the Mark III's RI as a Fender-ish clean and R2 as a more Marshall-eque sound. But I've read from people on this very board that it falls short.
The way I see it is if you want an approximation then you can have it with Mesa. If you want the real thing go get it.
Anyway, it was just an idea, but rather than sticking to one company like most people end up doing, why not diversify? Just a notion I was toying with... no need to verbally crucify me
visualrocker69 said:Right, well it's only been about a month since I realized a Mark series amp is what I want rather than a Dual Rectifier, so clearly I've got a lotttt to learn.
Obviously a Mark IIC+'s very limited on its own outside of the studio, so I'll need a Mark IV to complement it. Thing is, a IV I get get whenever the hell I feel like it (provided I have the funds). A IIC+ on the other hand, well, that requires a great deal of luck and patience. Might as well wait it out while I still have the $$$ for one, lest I regret making any alternate decision.
trem said:Actually I've never heard of anyone complaining about the clean on a III.
RussB said:I don't like the "clean" of my MKIII at all...maybe I'm just so used to my Twin Reverb, but the Mesa sounds very bland and flat.
visualrocker69 said:Right, well it's only been about a month since I realized a Mark series amp is what I want rather than a Dual Rectifier, so clearly I've got a lotttt to learn.
Obviously a Mark IIC+'s very limited on its own outside of the studio, so I'll need a Mark IV to complement it. Thing is, a IV I get get whenever the hell I feel like it (provided I have the funds). A IIC+ on the other hand, well, that requires a great deal of luck and patience. Might as well wait it out while I still have the $$$ for one, lest I regret making any alternate decision.
Enter your email address to join: