Do I want a Mark III?

[Whoopysnorp]

My introduction to the Mesa/Boogie world was the purchase of a Studio Preamp in 2006, which I later paired with a Simul 395 power amp and Roadready 4x12 for an awesome all-Boogie rig. I love the rig--the cleans are wonderful, though they do lack some of the hugeness and 'bloom' of my Rivera M100's cleans, and it's great how versatile the lead mode is. My ideal amp basically has a great crystal clean and a hard rock lead. However, there are certainly times when it might be fun to have an in-between crunch mode to play with, and I'm having a hard time disabusing myself of the notion that I need a Mark III. At the same time, I'm worried that the lead and clean tones would either be so similar to my rack setup that they wouldn't justify the purchase, or even be worse than what I'm already getting. I'm on the lookout for one locally (Chicago) in a store that I can try out, but Mark III owners, what do you think? Especially looking to hear from people familiar with both pieces, if possible.

 

[gomeshome]

Before adding to your amp collection, you may want to experiment with different tubes. You may end up getting the tone/overdrive range you are looking for without adding to your hardware collection.

If you do opt for a Mark III, you should do a bit of research to narrow down the tonal characteristics you are looking for.

There is a huge variation of Mark III tones, depending on the particular hardware config and tubes. I ended up getting a Red Stripe, and it indeed comes close to the crunch you hear from a Mark IIc+, plus it also can deliver a buttery-smooth overdrive and clean black-face tones. I have so much fun with this amp, that I rarely use my rack-mount preamp, or my little Studio 22 anymore.

 

[gomeshome]

Before adding to your amp collection, you may want to experiment with different tubes. You may end up getting the tone/overdrive range you are looking for without adding to your hardware collection.

If you do opt for a Mark III, you should do a bit of research to narrow down the tonal characteristics you are looking for.

There is a huge variation of Mark III tones, depending on the particular hardware config and tubes. I ended up getting a Red Stripe, and it indeed comes close to the crunch you hear from a Mark IIc+, plus it also can deliver a buttery-smooth overdrive and clean black-face tones. I have so much fun with this amp, that I rarely use my rack-mount preamp, or my little Studio 22 anymore.

 

[Bobby Marshall]

My introduction to the Mesa/Boogie world was the purchase of a Studio Preamp in 2006, which I later paired with a Simul 395 power amp and Roadready 4x12 for an awesome all-Boogie rig. I love the rig--the cleans are wonderful, though they do lack some of the hugeness and 'bloom' of my Rivera M100's cleans, and it's great how versatile the lead mode is. My ideal amp basically has a great crystal clean and a hard rock lead. However, there are certainly times when it might be fun to have an in-between crunch mode to play with, and I'm having a hard time disabusing myself of the notion that I need a Mark III. At the same time, I'm worried that the lead and clean tones would either be so similar to my rack setup that they wouldn't justify the purchase, or even be worse than what I'm already getting. I'm on the lookout for one locally (Chicago) in a store that I can try out, but Mark III owners, what do you think? Especially looking to hear from people familiar with both pieces, if possible.

I don't have a Mark III but I use the same preamp/poweramp you do and I suggest getting one or two decent boost/overdrive pedals. Just one will give you two new sounds, one to dirty up the clean and one to really saturate the dirty. Lots of posts about using a BB preamp and/or Tube Screamer to make the Mark IV Rhythm 2 mode "usable" (whatever that means). Also pedals are cheaper and lighter than a Mark head. Plus carrying an old Mesa poweramp and a Mark head could kill your back. The poweramp almost kills mine by itself.

But then again, can anyone on here really say they don't want a "new/old" classic Mesa amp, even if they already have several??? :twisted:

Good luck.

Bobby

 

[AustinK]

the mark III is a great amp and is worth a shot. If you don't like it they are easy to flip and you might make a profit.

While there are tonal differences between mark IIIs it is not that drastic. All mark IIIs sound like Mark IIIs the differences between the stripes is barely worth choosing one over the other. Most people here agree that it would be near impossible to identify a stripe by ear.


I bought a mark III without ever playing one and i couldn't be happier.

Depending what sound you are going for the mark III might be the trick.
While most people are going for the metallica style crunch i find that the lead channel can do so much more.


As for rythem 2 it is good, but i don't know if buying a new amp for one of three channels is a good idea. Try pedals/tubes first and if is not happening give the III a shot.

 

[Whoopysnorp]

Also pedals are cheaper and lighter than a Mark head. Plus carrying an old Mesa poweramp and a Mark head could kill your back. The poweramp almost kills mine by itself.

Well, counterpoint to that, though--if I got a Mark III and liked the sound of my Studio Pre into the power section, I would consider selling my 395 and using the III instead. I mean, the 395 has two separate OTs in it, and I don't even use one of them (I use it mono). One thing that makes me nervous about that though is that I use the track-switching on the 395 to run my cleans in simulclass and my leads in class A.

I dunno, overall it doesn't seem like it'd be a great use of my money. Especially when I haven't tried using an overdrive with this rig at all yet, and I also kind of want a DC-5.

 

[GIG4FUN]

I had the R2 Volume mod done and I really think it made lots more sense to the three channels. If you get one, get that mod and FULLY use the three channels. My Mark III is a quieter than my Marshall's. My Marshalls are noisy beasts. The Mark III is the beast with a quality that shines between the songs too.

 

[Alivefor5]

But then again, can anyone on here really say they don't want a "new/old" classic Mesa amp, even if they already have several???

Wouldn't hurt to have a MKIII and a DC5 around the house.

 

[carlosasi]

The Mark III replaced the C+ need I say more.

 

[herrball]

While having a MK III head for 20yrs and now a DC-5 head, you can't go wrong with either choice. The question I have is, how much are you gigging or moving your gear? The 395 is an incredible PWR Amp and with what you describe as looking for, I'd seek out a quad preamp if moving a rack setup isn't a problem. you could also keep the 395 in a seperate rack from the pre's and effects for versatility. Also, that let's you take just the pre's to a gig if you can get a pwr amp onsite another way.
Here's another wrinkle: while I love having heads to mix/match with cabs, I'm now searching for a DC-5 combo shell to mount the head/spkr. I'd like fewer things to carry to small club dates.
Just some food for thought.
Good luck.

 

[CoG]

I know I'm in a minority on this but I'm not thrilled with MkIII cleans. They're not bad, but I have a history with Roland JC's and I like my cleans, y'know, clean.

On simul-class I find it pretty much impossible to get cleans that aren't awfully gritty at rehearsal volumes (admittedly we play pretty loud) if I am also dialed in for a good crunch and heavy riffing tone.

I can get great sparkling cleans if I use 4 6L6s and dial in for it but then the leads really suffer.

Just saying if you want to improve your cleans, the III may not be your beast.

 

[Whoopysnorp]

Yeah, I don't think there's much room to improve on my current rig's cleans without going to another model or even make of amp, to be honest. I am sure the Lonestar would be another world but as far as Mark-type cleans go, I'm convinced I'm getting pretty much the best of what's on offer.

 

[dmt]

Yes.