Can the Mark III users tell me about the amp?

[NR2112]

I own a Mark V, my first mesa, and I love it. I am lookign to get another. The mark III seems to suit me becasue I can find them in a decent price range.

Does the III switch channels seemlessly? Does it have a nice clean tone? and can do mid gain stuff?

Looking at some settings , and it seems like it would sound good, but how is it having three channels use the same EQ? Does this amp have a good effects loop?

Whats the ease of use and reliability?

I dont use TOO many pedals, a few overdrives compressor, delay...

I see videos and hear clips, but just wanna know how it "feels" playing in a band that goes from clean stuff to high gain rythm and solos...

thx yall!

 

[>Photi G<]

IMO, the V can do so much more so much better than the III can. Yes, it switches channels well, yes, it has good tones, but the shared EQ is limiting. The independent EQ is the best thing about the V, and if you go to any other Mark, it will feel limited. Don't waste your money when you already have something much better.

 

[NR2112]

Oh the Mark V is a keeper for sure. Im just looking for another amp to jam with some friends with. And perhaps as a backup just in case.

 

[Skyless7620]

IMO, the V can do so much more so much better than the III can. Yes, it switches channels well, yes, it has good tones, but the shared EQ is limiting. The independent EQ is the best thing about the V, and if you go to any other Mark, it will feel limited. Don't waste your money when you already have something much better.

I'll take a Mark III over a Mark V any day of the week. It always depends on the sounds you are going for. A Mark V can do so much more, yes. Whether it can do it so much better is debatable.

OP, like Photi_G said, the problem with the mark is that it's very hard to simultaneously get a great lead tone and a great clean tone due to the shared EQ, and usually involves a compromise between either or both. That said, they are still amazing for the price they fetch nowadays.

 

[Neptical]

I'll take a Mark III over a Mark V any day of the week. It always depends on the sounds you are going for. A Mark V can do so much more, yes. Whether it can do it so much better is debatable.

+1000 on taking the Mark III over the V any day of the week. Totally 2 different amps all together.

OP, like Photi_G said, the problem with the mark is that it's very hard to simultaneously get a great lead tone and a great clean tone due to the shared EQ, and usually involves a compromise between either or both. That said, they are still amazing for the price they fetch nowadays.

Agree on the situation of the shared EQ. Easiest solution for me to take care of that was to buy another and run them together. But as said above, you can't go wrong with the price you can grab them for now a days. Always good to have a beast as a backup amp. 8)

~Nep~

 

[Facelift]

you mention of having a good clean and a mid gain at the same time. I think these guys are saying that if you want the lead channel cranked, it will compromise your clean channel as the eq section is shared. Rolling back the volume knob on your guitar helps even things out, but since you mention using mid gain settings, you will have no problem matching your distortion and clean together.

Ive thought several times about getting a V but took the III instead. My playing isnt anywhere near as versatile to need such an amp with so many options. Considering that the V is just a souped up IV and going by many different reviews, the III still is the more aggressive organic tone, where the IV lost the organic liquidness and got sterile. I myself havent compared the two side by side by seeing many people here post this type of review, it seems the III is the more desirable mark oer the IIC+. I guess its all subjective though. Ill never get rid of my III.

 

[boogiemon]

Careful, once you plug into a M3 your M5 might seem a little over-priced.

:^)

 

[boogiemon]

i've noticed that the preamp tubes that mesa has switched to & is presumably using in the M5 are *awful* sounding: lifeless, flat, etc. i'd be interested to know if anyone is using different tubes & still thinks the M5 sounds "sterile".

you mention of having a good clean and a mid gain at the same time. I think these guys are saying that if you want the lead channel cranked, it will compromise your clean channel as the eq section is shared. Rolling back the volume knob on your guitar helps even things out, but since you mention using mid gain settings, you will have no problem matching your distortion and clean together.

Ive thought several times about getting a V but took the III instead. My playing isnt anywhere near as versatile to need such an amp with so many options. Considering that the V is just a souped up IV and going by many different reviews, the III still is the more aggressive organic tone, where the IV lost the organic liquidness and got sterile. I myself havent compared the two side by side by seeing many people here post this type of review, it seems the III is the more desirable mark oer the IIC+. I guess its all subjective though. Ill never get rid of my III.

 

[ltd2recto]

You can only switch between all 3 chanells if you have 2 footswitches.

The clean is amazing. I like the recitifer gain better but I havent got the chance to crank my Mark III yet. The mark is a little fizzy in the hi gain department. There are mods you can do if you want it closer to the Mark IIc+ sound.

You probably cant get both to sound good at the same time due to shared EQ.

The loop is great.

Very easy to use. You may have to do some maintenance to it as it would be a relatively old amp. I had to clean all the pots in mine and re-tube it.

If you get one the GEQ is a must IMO.

I paid $690 for my red stripe combo that is fully loaded & in rough condition. Oh and the reverb doesn't work.

 

[fishyfishfish]

Get one. You will like the III just as much or more than the 5. I went to from a Recto to a III and wonder why I never had one in the 25 years I have been playing. Great cleans, R2, Well is R2, and the lead channel can be whatever you want. Good 'verb, GEC is good to have for tone tweaks and you will not need any distortion pedals. My road rig is a Mark III, a TU2 and a TC in the loop for delay< and if it is a out door gig I throw in a Mesa 1X12 underneath for more loudness.

 

[Facelift]

i've noticed that the preamp tubes that mesa has switched to & is presumably using in the M5 are *awful* sounding: lifeless, flat, etc. i'd be interested to know if anyone is using different tubes & still thinks the M5 sounds "sterile".

you mention of having a good clean and a mid gain at the same time. I think these guys are saying that if you want the lead channel cranked, it will compromise your clean channel as the eq section is shared. Rolling back the volume knob on your guitar helps even things out, but since you mention using mid gain settings, you will have no problem matching your distortion and clean together.

Ive thought several times about getting a V but took the III instead. My playing isnt anywhere near as versatile to need such an amp with so many options. Considering that the V is just a souped up IV and going by many different reviews, the III still is the more aggressive organic tone, where the IV lost the organic liquidness and got sterile. I myself havent compared the two side by side by seeing many people here post this type of review, it seems the III is the more desirable mark oer the IIC+. I guess its all subjective though. Ill never get rid of my III.

A buddy of mine just bought a V and he loves it. Says it came with Mesa labeled tubes. He says it sounds great with the stock tubes. Maybe he should swap them out to something else to see what hes missing. Myself am still looking for a good RFT for my III.

 

[Neptical]

I like the recitifer gain better but I havent got the chance to crank my Mark III yet. The mark is a little fizzy in the hi gain department.

Although tone is very subjective, the fact of *this* matter is the Mark series is completely non-fizz vs. the Rectifier series. This is completely backwards. You might want to crank your Mark III and repost this one!

~Nep~

 

[droptrd]

You probably cant get both to sound good at the same time due to shared EQ

Depends on what you are looking for.
For me the hardest part is getting the clean clean enuff without sucking gain out of the lead ch. I have compromised on my clean ch but it is a very small compromise

 

[MrMarkIII]

I've played a Mark III for twenty years in all kinds of live situations, loud clubs to quiet weddings. When I stumbled upon this forum a couple years ago, it was first time I'd heard of any "problem" with shared EQ.
R2 not having a its own Master can be an issue, but I think it goes away at Master settings of "3" and above.

 

[Anonymous]

Post removed.

 

[ltd2recto]

I like the recitifer gain better but I havent got the chance to crank my Mark III yet. The mark is a little fizzy in the hi gain department.

Although tone is very subjective, the fact of *this* matter is the Mark series is completely non-fizz vs. the Rectifier series. This is completely backwards. You might want to crank your Mark III and repost this one!

~Nep~

I agree the recto can be fizzy (mostly low volume) but is easily corrected. Maybe fizzy isn't the best word for the Mark. Just seems like there's a harshness to the top end that I couldn't dial out.

That being said I finally got around to doing the C27, C30 & C516 mods on the mark and it made a huge improvement to the top end. More rounded off/smoother. Not sure if there's more to the III+ mod but it sounds closer to a IIc+, which is a good thing IMO. A RFT in v1 didn't hurt either!

I was so inspired by the new sound I played for hours. Even recorded a scratch track for my drummer.

 

[ltd2recto]

You probably cant get both to sound good at the same time due to shared EQ

Depends on what you are looking for.
For me the hardest part is getting the clean clean enuff without sucking gain out of the lead ch. I have compromised on my clean ch but it is a very small compromise

True

I probably should have said you cant both to sound great at the same time.

I run the gain full blast & pull deep pushed for heavy stuff. Clean I like lower vol1 setting & pull deep pulled. There's no way for me to make those adjustments while playing. But I dont play it live anyways. Just a helluva practice amp.