Anyone prefer the Mark IV to the Mark V... Why?

[Fronzil]

I made a dedicated trip to the local mesa dealer here in Iceland to convince myself to sell the IV and get a V. It kinda flipped on me, after hours of playing and tweaking I decided to keep the lV. The V is by all means a very good amp but to my ears it's not good enough to sell the IV and fork up the extra dough for a V. Maby someday I'll have 'em both but until such time arrives I'm GASLESS :mrgreen:

I'm so happy with the IV that I'm selling the ENGL.

well done sir

 

[bchulse]

I've got a V head and a IV Combo. I got the Mark IV because I really
loved the MarkIV modes on the V ch3, so I figured that the IV must be
similar & more flexible. However, I'm having a very difficult time dialing in
any lead tones on the IV that I'm happy with. I've tried a PRS 24, 305 & 513,
a couple strat's and a Reverend (2-HB's) and the lead tone is very
fizzy and kazoo like, no matter what settings I use. I'm still a newbie on
the IV, but pretty experienced with Mark amps in general. Guess I better spend
some time with the IV manual.
Still, the V sounds much better to my ears so far. The IV has JJ tubes.
Maybe I'll try standard Mesa tubes and see what happens.
The IV cleans however are very nice with all the guitars I tried..

 

[TimeSignature]

I've found that the IV takes a LOOOOONG time to dial in. Be patient.

Although on a side note - I messed with my IV for a long time last night and thought I had a great tone dialed in. I unplugged, and immediately plugged into my DC 10 and it totally blew away the Mark IV! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[CudBucket]

I finally got a chance last night to play the Mark IV I just bought. It's the 3rd I've owned and for some reason, I found it way easier to play than the first 2. Stock as the day it came out of Petaluma. I played it through my Bogner OS 2x12 and then through my Port City OS 1x12.

Channel 2 sounded much better to me this time because, I wasn't expecting a high gain channel. It's really just a pushed channel that goes into mid-gain territory. With an OD, a BB preamp in this case, it gets into the same ball park as Channel 2 on the Mark V.

I think the cleans on the IV are darker or warmer than the V. Both great. But Channel 3 on the IV is where it's at. I'll take it over Channel 3 on the V for sure.

But now, I want to go back and play a V again. I think the "thing" with Channel 3 on the V is just that you have to use different settings than the IV. They don't map over setting for setting.

Anyway, I'm really happy to have a Mesa again and even happier that it's a IV. This one will stay a while.

 

[MusicManJP6]

Anyway, I'm really happy to have a Mesa again and even happier that it's a IV. This one will stay a while.

Welcome back to Mesa! I guess 3rd time's the charm. Enjoy your 3rd honeymoon.

 

[Scary]

Ive played a mark V recently, and a mark IV a long time ago. I own a Mark III. The 5-band eq on the V is no where near as sensitive as the III or IV was, so i think thats a big negative. The mark V can do basically any tone, but god **** it its got 1000 little switches and whistles. The IV is a little more simple, and the III is extremely simple, but tougher to dial in. i prefer the III to both, but they are all incredible amps.

I own both a Mark IV and a V and disagree on a couple of things. First off, the switches on the FIVE are pretty simple. The IV has similar power options, but they are labeled a little less clearly. For example, 10 watt on the FIVE vs. the IV's Class A/triode switches on the back of the amp. I'm still not sure after owning the amp for 15 years exactly how much wattage that is..(not that I care) Setting how you want the EQ to behave isn't really rocket science either on the FIVE. It's either ON / OFF / or footswitchable. I'm pretty sure your average 12 y/o can figure this thing out.

I'll also argue about the EQ, while at first it seemed less sensitive on the FIVE to me as well... over time i've noticed that it's just easier to get the tone from the EQ out of the FIVE because it's "less sensitive". I used to have to try and breathe on the IV's EQ to move it just enough to get it in the sweet spot without going to far. The sliders on the FIVE also take less force to move which makes it feel wimpy compared to the IV, but I can still get the sounds i'm looking for out of it.

Also, there is no cross channel controls or push pull buttons than can easily get pressed in. I'd rather flick a switch than deal with a push pull knob. I also appreciate how all the controls on the FIVE for a channel are contained in it's own little rectagular area. Both amps are harder than average to run, but we're not splitting atoms here. The real test is showing restraint and knowing how to tap the gain / preamp structure.

Back to the original posts question. I've owned the FIVE for 6 months and so far I prefer the IV's lead mode to channel 3 on the FIVE. That could be because I havn't spent much time with it due to Ch. 1 + 2 comletely kicking *** to the point where I want to learn different styles of music that's tailored to their tones. I've hardly gotten to channel 3. As far as a practice amp I prefer the FIVE no doubt, but in a band situation I can't say.

 

[bradg]

I'm on my second V. :lol:

When I got my first one, I thought channel 3 on the IV was MUCH better and channel 3 on the V was just okay so I sold the V.

Then I thought I didn't give the V a fair shake so I bought another one. IMO channel 3 on the V can sound every bit as good as the IV. You just can't dial in the V like the IV. It sounds okay but you are definitely missing out on all that the V can do. My advice is to forget what you know about dialing in tones on the II, III, and V when you play the V and just use your ears. My only complaint with the V is the lack of both a gain and drive knob like on the IV. A real nice OD in front solves that problem real quick though. I love the V now and don't miss the IV one bit. 8)