Deal breaker?

[MrMarkIII]

OK, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
It seems to me, from reading the manual, that when switching between the "modes" within a given channel, the gain and tone controls must be tweaked to optimize the tone of that particular mode.
Doesn't this just put us back to the much-fabled square one of "shared controls", so often cited as the reason earlier Marks sucked?
IOW, if my fave sounds are the "IIC+" and "Extreme" in channel three,
I'm SOL. Not only that, they're not even foot switchable.
Of course, I'm picking nits, but what are forums for? :lol:

No, you are completely missing the point. The idea is that the modes are different enough that you'll need to change the tone controls if you switch between say, "Edge" and "Mark I". That is, the same settings won't work well for those two modes.

I don't know why everyone complains about not being able to switch between modes. The Rectifier amps have only been set up like this for 15+ years and I never hear anybody complaining about being unable to switch between "Vintage" and "Modern" on Ch2, for instance.

No, I think I do get the point. I totally understand that the modes' structure is different enough to require knob-tweaking. And it won't stop me from getting a Mark V.
My point was/is, this is exactly the same "problem" folks originally dumped on, and continue to dump on, the earlier Marks, especially the Mark III.
It all depends on which end of the ox-goring you are.

 

[Rufuss Sewell]

Yeah, it's funny that someone would actually buy a Mark series amp for a crappy version of a Marshall tone.

For the record I agree with you. If I could order a custom V it would look like this:

channel 2: IIC+, IV, MK1
channel 3: IIC+, IV, Extreme

Not as marketable since it's not "9 modes" but I'd rather have two sets of IIC+ and IV with separate settings to choose from than edge and crunch. I'm just happy there's something useful on ch2 at all... mk1.

 

[Silverwulf]

How about a channel cloning option like on the 2 Channel Rectos so you could clone your IIC+ mode over to Channel 2?

 

[Gizzorge]

Geez this thread has me spinning with frustration... :shock:

Me thinks 7 strings and dropped tunings have stunted some brain cells. I never knew Mesa was "metal and metal only" but so many seem to think so....

 

[phyrexia]

OK, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
It seems to me, from reading the manual, that when switching between the "modes" within a given channel, the gain and tone controls must be tweaked to optimize the tone of that particular mode.
Doesn't this just put us back to the much-fabled square one of "shared controls", so often cited as the reason earlier Marks sucked?
IOW, if my fave sounds are the "IIC+" and "Extreme" in channel three,
I'm SOL. Not only that, they're not even foot switchable.
Of course, I'm picking nits, but what are forums for? :lol:

No, you are completely missing the point. The idea is that the modes are different enough that you'll need to change the tone controls if you switch between say, "Edge" and "Mark I". That is, the same settings won't work well for those two modes.

I don't know why everyone complains about not being able to switch between modes. The Rectifier amps have only been set up like this for 15+ years and I never hear anybody complaining about being unable to switch between "Vintage" and "Modern" on Ch2, for instance.

No, I think I do get the point. I totally understand that the modes' structure is different enough to require knob-tweaking. And it won't stop me from getting a Mark V.
My point was/is, this is exactly the same "problem" folks originally dumped on, and continue to dump on, the earlier Marks, especially the Mark III.
It all depends on which end of the ox-goring you are.

I just think you're wrong. It's not the same problem. On a Mark IIC+, the problem is that you have One set of controls for Two footswitchable channels. On a Mark III, the problem is that you have One set of controls for Three footswitchable channels. On a Mark IV, the problem is that you have Two and a Half sets of controls for Three Footswitchable Channels. On the Mark V, the solution is that you have Three sets of controls for Three Footswitchable Channels.

Where is the disconnect here?

 

[phyrexia]

And what if you wanted a singing lead with a little mid hump AND a scooped metal tone?

dan, I'm surprised you don't know how to use the GEQ to get this from one channel. It's pretty easy IMO.

 

[JOEY B.]

Me thinks 7 strings and dropped tunings have stunted some brain cells.

I am **** sure of it.

I never knew Mesa was "metal and metal only" but so many seem to think so....

I do not get that MESA "metal only" mentality either. :?

 

[Gizzorge]

yeah, I like metal as well, but there is a narrow minded view of things amongst some here. Randall and the crew must giggle or get annoyed if they pop on here.

 

[primal]

Wow,

I read this yesterday when it was just the first two posts and laughed because I thought it was pretty much a thread sort of intended as a joke by the OP (I still believe this).

Four pages later....

Not that I don't understand what some of the complaints are, I do. But let's put it in perspective.

I tried a JCM 800 the other day. The first time I had one all to myself in the "soundproof" room at GC where I could let her rip.

I thought it kicked ***!

No, it couldn't hang with my Mark IV for my taste, but it was a beast to say the least.

I see why it is one of the most popular amps of all time.

But it is only 1 channel, a total 1 trick pony.

It is mind boggling the things that the Mark V can do.

I think the Mark 2C+ and Mark IV were placed on the same channel because Mesa figured they are close enough that a player would simply choose 1 or the other and was not likely to switch between the two.

I think there is a high probability that a number of people would have been upset id modes were replicated on diffirent channels because they may have thought it was a waste.

Regardless of what Mesa did, someone was going to have a different opinion.

The only assigning the effects loop to one channel bugs me (or would bug me if I owned one), but I think the rest would more then make up for it.

Just my 2 cents.

And with the whole Mesa amps only for Metal, check out this Mark IV youtube clip. This is absolutely one of the best Mark series clips I have ever seen on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9Cgem1m94k

I realize he is playing real simple stuff, but man it makes me want to go out and by a Strat!

And Man can a boogie do more then metal!

 

[MrMarkIII]

I just think you're wrong. It's not the same problem. On a Mark IIC+, the problem is that you have One set of controls for Two footswitchable channels. On a Mark III, the problem is that you have One set of controls for Three footswitchable channels. On a Mark IV, the problem is that you have Two and a Half sets of controls for Three Footswitchable Channels. On the Mark V, the solution is that you have Three sets of controls for Three Footswitchable Channels.

Where is the disconnect here?

I say the "modes" are the same thing as "different channels".
Nine modes, three control sets. Missing: six control sets so I don't have to tweak when switching like I do with a (horror of horrors!) Mark III. :lol:
I'm just playing devil's advocate here. :wink:

 

[rispsira]

Wow,

I read this yesterday when it was just the first two posts and laughed because I thought it was pretty much a thread sort of intended as a joke by the OP (I still believe this).

Four pages later....

Not that I don't understand what some of the complaints are, I do. But let's put it in perspective.

I tried a JCM 800 the other day. The first time I had one all to myself in the "soundproof" room at GC where I could let her rip.

I thought it kicked ***!

No, it couldn't hang with my Mark IV for my taste, but it was a beast to say the least.

I see why it is one of the most popular amps of all time.

But it is only 1 channel, a total 1 trick pony.

It is mind boggling the things that the Mark V can do.

I think the Mark 2C+ and Mark IV were placed on the same channel because Mesa figured they are close enough that a player would simply choose 1 or the other and was not likely to switch between the two.

I think there is a high probability that a number of people would have been upset id modes were replicated on diffirent channels because they may have thought it was a waste.

Regardless of what Mesa did, someone was going to have a different opinion.

The only assigning the effects loop to one channel bugs me (or would bug me if I owned one), but I think the rest would more then make up for it.

Just my 2 cents.

And with the whole Mesa amps only for Metal, check out this Mark IV youtube clip. This is absolutely one of the best Mark series clips I have ever seen on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9Cgem1m94k

I realize he is playing real simple stuff, but man it makes me want to go out and by a Strat!

And Man can a boogie do more then metal!

Honestly to me - even though as i said before its far from a deal braker- i would like just an added jackswitch for people to switch between the modes. Look i am not making a big deal out of this at all!!! (personnaly i dont need it because i ordered two heads) the amp is so versatile but i get annoyed because it seems like such a simple mod that i ask myself y not??? If it was complicated then i wouldnt even think about it i am more than satisfied, but it being a simple mod y not add it?
Which is why i have the feeling they might add it later. but who knows.

Also i disagree with the idea that this switch wouldnt be useful since they share the same settings. Because to me the same settings work with the 2C+ and IV its just the personnality that changes. besides there are so many options if you need minor adjustments like the addition of an OD ehich provides some type of eq or colouration (colouration not being a bad thing its ALL about the colouration. Just one that you would like)

Of course thats just my opinion.. and i dont think not having the switch is really a big deal at all for it to even be close to a deal braker.

As to the amp being for metal only i am pretty sure you guys have misunderstood or misread what someone else might have said somwhere. beacuse i have been reading all the posts and i dont remember hearing something as misinformed as this should only be for metal.
There were a lot of posts of people concerned with this style of music because thats what they play, but none ever said that "the rest of you shouldnt get the amp, its just for us metalheads" haha.

Anyway sorry about all the blablaying!

 

[danyeo1]

And what if you wanted a singing lead with a little mid hump AND a scooped metal tone?

dan, I'm surprised you don't know how to use the GEQ to get this from one channel. It's pretty easy IMO.

It's not so easy if you want the tones to be different.


Anyway, our heads should all be here soon. Let's just be thankful the wait it almost over and we shall see for ourselves what this amp can really do. If it gets close to the IIC+ tones I've always loved, then everything else really won't matter anyway.

 

[Mark Fore]

I've been solely on the IIC+ mode all morning and it is perfect through a Recto 4x12. I'm bypassing the F/X loop and no pedals out front. The tone is in... sane.

 

[danyeo1]

I've been solely on the IIC+ mode all morning and it is perfect through a Recto 4x12. I'm bypassing the F/X loop and no pedals out front. The tone is in... sane.

Good to hear. I can't wait to hear it on the Bogner OS 2x12 i have waiting for it. The old metal grill 4x12 Boogies with 12l's were just to much of a back breaker.

 

[UltraGary]

The Rectifier amps have only been set up like this for 15+ years and I never hear anybody complaining about being unable to switch between "Vintage" and "Modern" on Ch2, for instance.[/quote]


A week doesn't go by where I don't wish my Trem-O-Verb could foot-switch between those modes. That 1 feature would literally double the flexibility of my amp from 2 options to 4.