I have a Mark IV, do I want a Mark III?

[ochrisl]

I have a mark IV. Been thinking of picking up a Mark III (blue), do I want one or do I already have that ground covered?

 

[themisfit138]

I like the III better than the IV, but I like the classic 80's thrash tones. If you want a more modern tone I would just stick with the Mark IV. Also, the IV can not cover the tone of the III blue. The IV is to compressed to my ears.

 

[Markedman]

I had both marks at the same time. I sold my lV combo for $1250 on eBay and bought a second lll blue stripe simul-class, EQ, reverb head for $500 that had languished for months on CL, plus sold the 416s that came with it for $100. To each their own, but I find that the lead tone on the lll is the best Boogie tone for my style. I grew up Marshall and occasionally still use one, but I'm lost without my lll. It also has the most useable gain of any Mark, by that I mean it doesn't oversaturate or over compress the signal. The proper tube in V1 and V3 makes all the difference. They do not make for good bedroom volume practice. The master should be at 2 or higher, "loud enough to drowned out a chainsaw." Unfortunately I'm playing a lot of Rock and Blues these days, not my preferred metal where these amps really shine. I can get a great metal rhythm sound with a stomp box like a Boss Metal Zone or my favorite, an old Rocktron Rampage in channel 1. They're head turners with right tubes (that's right, it's the tubes, I can't stress that enough)! Getting a great clean and a great lead tone is possible if you compromise one a little. I don't need pristine clean anyway.

 

[V-Type]

The Mark III purple stripe I have really is quite open sounding. It maintains punch and clarity and provides so much useable gain at all levels..
The reverb can ad squish for a more compressed effect/ feel moreso than as a pristine verb unit..
Actually the Mark III is quite a versatile amp capable of the whole pallet or Mark magic and beyond imo.
Other than the shared controls and push pull tone shaping complexity issues some have most would agree the Mark III is great sounding and quite versatile and did we mention astoundingly loud.

 

[fretout]

I currently own both, and I STILL own both because I think they're both great amps and have strengths the other does not.

For the Mark III, it's a brighter more aggressive amp. It definitely sounds more natural, and I think that anyone coming from the "Marshall World", this would be the best amp to start with, but please understand that the controls aren't used the same way as a Marshall.

For the Mark IV, it's definitely more compressed and sounds a lot darker than the Mark III, but it still has a killer rhythm tone WHILE Channel 1 has pristine cleans, and the lead tone is so smooth and rich, it's almost violin-like. Definitely a great amp for someone that is coming from the Rectifier world. It can still get a nice, grinding, high gain tone, but it doesn't sound as brash and angry as the Mark III.

 

[Mossman]

I have a Mark IV, an early "B", as well as a blue stripe III. I spent a lot of time with them both to see which, if either, I wanted to sell. When the difference in speakers was accounted for (my IV has an EV and the III has a C90, so I tried the different combinations), I honestly didn't find that the III has any advantages over the IV, whereas the IV has more independence in its channel arrangements and more versatility generally. But if you have both (and if you have a IVB and not the A), try hooking them up in stereo using the stereo loop on the IV going into the FX return on the III. That's what I'm doing, and it sounds outrageously good.

 

[megavoice]

Well I already said this here a several times.
About ten years ago, I had an extaordinary guitar player in my band setup then who played a Mark IV, exclusively.
We had an extremely versatile vintage coversongs repertoire and his amp came GREAT along with all that.
Playing loudly I couldn`t observe big differences to my first red.
One day I let him play mine and immediately he maintained the red would "attack" much faster than his obviously because of the less wirings, and mine he said would sound warmer.
Anyway, for life gigging the IV is undoubtable more handy.

 

[musicmysavior]

I had both marks at the same time. I sold my lV combo for $1250 on eBay and bought a second lll blue stripe simul-class, EQ, reverb head for $500 that had languished for months on CL, plus sold the 416s that came with it for $100. To each their own, but I find that the lead tone on the lll is the best Boogie tone for my style. I grew up Marshall and occasionally still use one, but I'm lost without my lll. It also has the most useable gain of any Mark, by that I mean it doesn't oversaturate or over compress the signal. The proper tube in V1 and V3 makes all the difference. They do not make for good bedroom volume practice. The master should be at 2 or higher, "loud enough to drowned out a chainsaw." Unfortunately I'm playing a lot of Rock and Blues these days, not my preferred metal where these amps really shine. I can get a great metal rhythm sound with a stomp box like a Boss Metal Zone or my favorite, an old Rocktron Rampage in channel 1. They're head turners with right tubes (that's right, it's the tubes, I can't stress that enough)! Getting a great clean and a great lead tone is possible if you compromise one a little. I don't need pristine clean anyway.

What are you using in your V1 and V3 for Pre's??? Somewhat new to the Mesa Mark camp and have a Purple Stripe simul, geq MKIII.. Currently have a tungol in V1... a chinese gen in V3... and an Sovtek LPS in PI....I have a bunch of ruby hg's lying around I could use as well as some other chinese gens. Thanks

 

[MkIII Renegade]

I have both, and I'm glad I have both.

The MkIII lead channel is my favorite of all Boogie lead tones (also my favorite crunch tone when dialed back slightly). But the MkIV lead channel has a smoother flavor that is also lustworthy, if not as likely to raise the hairs on the back of my neck. As such, almost all of my Boogie tones for recording are the MkIII.

The MkIV scores big for versatility with channel separation and a crystal clean channel, which the MkIII does not possess when you have the EQ set for maximum carnage elsewhere. I actually spend most of my time on R2 for the MkIV, which is extremely nice with moderate output pickups as you can flirt with the edge of overdrive very nicely. I know without a doubt that my playing ability expanded after getting the MkIV because I started experimenting more with R2 and the guitar's volume knob rolled back slightly for more subtle things (always in Class A with Harmonics on).

The MkIII is more like a Gatlin gun to me and inspires me to rip into things at high volume. R2 is actually quite nice, but with more of an old school rock sound (I like doing Hendrixy things on R2). And again, the clean channel can be quite beautiful on it's own, but the ultimate clean settings will hurt your R2/Lead settings considerably. So a compromise is req'd.

I'm in no particular hurry to get a Mark V, although I will eventually. It's more likely I'll pick up of IIB with some kind of cream finish or something non-standard first, perhaps hardwood with a wicker grill.