Mark III vs IV

[Shep]

I shep. me too I got 6L6 str 420, EL34 442 and JJ ECC83 12AX7 preamp.
Here my setting on my III it a very smooth setting IMO, keep the presence at 0 and reverb at 8 anyway here it is:

Thanks alot dude.. i will try them out..

 

[Shep]

I shep. me too I got 6L6 str 420, EL34 442 and JJ ECC83 12AX7 preamp.
Here my setting on my III it a very smooth setting IMO, keep the presence at 0 and reverb at 8 anyway here it is:

Thanks alot dude.. i will try them out..

It works! sounds great..thanks

 

[user 2126]

My pleasure Shep.

 

[Shep]

i think the key is to have the presense on 0 which i already did and the Eq the way you have it..thats the thing that makes it so sweet..

 

[Shep]

the way it ended up setting's.. was

vol-7pulled
treb-8pulled
bass-2
middle-4
master-2pulled
LDR-8
LDmaster-3
pres-0
Eq the same as you..but with alittle less 80 and alittle more 750 and 6600

and i found taking out the El34's and putting some JJ 6L6's made it even more smooth..only thing was it was more bassy so thats why there is the little changes..

 

[user 2126]

i found taking out the El34's and putting some JJ 6L6's made it even more smooth..only thing was it was more bassy so thats why there is the little changes..

Humm 6L6's in the El 34 slot, no bias problem?

 

[Schmoog]

you can do that. and because of the higher bias, they'll run about where they should....

 

[user 2126]

Thank guys I am going to try this.

 

[JacksonUSA]

btw, is there a lot of guitar on James' solo album ?

 

[user 2126]

Yes more heavy less pop/prog than what he use to do with his Mullmuzzler project and the mix of this cd sound powerfull it's simply a great cd with a lot of great riff, guitar and keyboard solos.

 

[Tuna141]

Hey guys,

I figured I'd add my opinion too. I've owned my Mark IIC (not +) for almost 20 years, my Mark IV for about 5 years, and bought a Mark III Blue Stripe last night ( ). I've also owned my Triaxis for about 10 years. All of my Marks are combos with an EV.

Mark IIC - this amp kills just about everything for rock and mellower. It's not great for metal, and is also a little too tight for nice chugging rhythm (ala Marshall). But, the clean channel is excellent - nice and Fendery, bright and lively. The Lead channel is the best I've ever played for solos. It's aggressive and notes cut through the mix very well. It's also hamronically rich and sustains perfectly. I will never sell this amp, nor get the + upgrade. It's perfect as is.

Mark IV - very versital and a great live amp -awesome footswitching. The clean doesn't really do it for me - kind of bland and not chimey enough for my taste, especially when compared to my MarkC. Channel 2 is my favorite - nice vintage Marshally type of crunck. Sounds great for calssic rock and even better with a nice distortion pedal. The lead channel is good and sustains well, but I find it a little dark and a little bland too. It can get heavy, so it can work well for metal, but as you can probably tell, I'm not really into that style. The lead on the C has less gain than the lead on the IV, but is more hrmonically rich. The lead on my C is much better IMO.

Mark III blue stripe - as I mentioned, I just picked it up last night (deal I couldn't pass on). Although I only plyed it for an hour, I'm impressed with this amp. The clean is very good - similar to my Mark IIC. The crunch channel is pretty good too as is the Lead channel. The amp seems to be a tonality cross between the II and IV, which makes sense. I did not find the amp thin or buzzy at all. The only time I found it to get buzzy was when the presence is turned up high. I was usrprised, because a while back, I played in a band with a guy that had a Mark III and he had a buzzy and thin tone - so maybe it was a different "stripe" model. He also could have had the presence cranked, or it could also have been his guitar. The only negative I have right now is the shared volume control for the rhythm2 & Lead channels.I don't think it'll be that big of a deal, though.

To sum up, I think all the amps are very nice. Each sound similar (classic Mesa Mark mid-rangy tone & good sustain), but each one has a slightly different flavor of tone. For overall tone, I think the IIC and III win over the IV. But for versatility and features, the IV wins.

You really can't go wrong with any of them. :lol:

 

[boogiemon]

i've had a couple IV's and am using III's now.

The IV's were great, but i'm a simple guy & didn't like dealing w/all the switches. The III is hard to compare because of the stripe versions. The later stripes have more of that buzz/fizz that nobody but the head-bangers like & the black-purple stripes have a little more of that vintage/marshall-esq vibe (w/more gain of course). Also, re-R2 on the III's, MB told me that in some versions (the later ones i think, definitely on the blue stripe) the treble shift is active by default, adding more gain & more upper mids to CH2 than the black/no-stripes have. Another thing to consider is that the IV has the triode/pentode switch which fundamentally affects the character of the amp. All of the SC III's except for the green stripe are triode wired.

So, if you want versatility go IV, if you want simplicity, go III. They both rock, but i prefer the III.

my $.02