Mark IV ?
- Thread starter mesamark
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
phantomlord2oo
Well-known member
Sondwise, no difference. It's pure cosmetics. I got the Short Head. Get that if you plan on rackmounting it in the future with the rackmount kit. The medium can't be rackmounted. The Medium head looks better on top of a cab but no one really give a crap about that. My Short Head looks just as good and sounds amazing!
+Mike+
+Mike+
phantomlord2oo
Well-known member
I don't know about the Marshall 1960 cab, but I do own a Marshall 1960AV cab with Vintage 30 speakers and it sounds AMAZING! Sounds better than running through my Mesa cab.
+Mike+
+Mike+
JAMz
Well-known member
You can do anything you like with the MkIV. Recently I dumped my Stilleto Series I and went back to the mark IV. The amount of gain is perfect for old school metal. Flotsam & Jetsam and Lamb Of God are just two of he bands I can recall from the top of my head that have used the MkIV for recording. I know that F&J even used a 1960 Marshall cabinet.
I currently use mine with a either a RK 2X12 cab or Recto 4X12 Standard. But I used to use it witha 1960 and it rocked! If it is metal your thing, I think you won't be disapointed.
God Bless!
JAMz
I currently use mine with a either a RK 2X12 cab or Recto 4X12 Standard. But I used to use it witha 1960 and it rocked! If it is metal your thing, I think you won't be disapointed.
God Bless!
JAMz
The 2 buttons in front of the amp, just on the rigth of the eq is the Medium Head Version, the Short Head Version has got these 2 buttons on the back of the amp.
Even if the medium or short head are the same, i have choosen the short version because it is more good looking, and look better on top of a cab imho!
Even if the medium or short head are the same, i have choosen the short version because it is more good looking, and look better on top of a cab imho!
What about a Mark IV Medium Head from 1995 ? there is difference between one of 1995 and a new one from 2006 ?
The one from 1995 is sell for 1900$ and was imported from Canada.
It's a good placement or no ? it's a lot of money and i m asking myself about to buy or not this amp.
:roll:
The one from 1995 is sell for 1900$ and was imported from Canada.
It's a good placement or no ? it's a lot of money and i m asking myself about to buy or not this amp.
:roll:
The only differences in MarkIV are the A version and the B version, the A version are the first ones produced.
Soundwise they are very similar and the difference is little (thanks BoogieBabies for this information)
to know which version you have, the A version got 2 FX loop, one normal and one switchable, the B version have only one switchable FX loop and a Sattelite send options instead of the 2 FX loop !
Search the forum a thread cover this subject !
Soundwise they are very similar and the difference is little (thanks BoogieBabies for this information)
to know which version you have, the A version got 2 FX loop, one normal and one switchable, the B version have only one switchable FX loop and a Sattelite send options instead of the 2 FX loop !
Search the forum a thread cover this subject !
phantomlord2oo
Well-known member
Hey, regarding the 2 FX loops of the A, does this mean that I can have both loops going at the same time, the normal loop on all the time and the switchable being enabled only on the channels I want it to be on? If so, that's AWSOME!
+Mike+
+Mike+
Shep
Well-known member
no...there is a switch on the back next to them that a/b's the two of them...if you go and get your mk iv modded so this switch became a foot switch, you could swicth which loop you used and then that would work...
Aart
Well-known member
1995 is a B version, 2006 will be a C version(correct?).
The 2006 version will have slightly more gain, but the difference is really small.
Soundwise they will sound almost the same.
The 2006 version will have slightly more gain, but the difference is really small.
Soundwise they will sound almost the same.
Well...
I've owned all versions of the Mark IV at one point intime or another in the past 15+ years....
and while the tone is generally the same, there are subtle differences between the different versions..things like the tranny (which has changed several time) affects the tone in some way.
To, my ears, the Mark IVs with the permanently attached power cable sounds better (especially in the cleans), they seem to have more presence on stage.
I owned a 2005 version that I just had to return because I could not get it to sound anywhere close to my 1992 version (owned two at one time).
I remember my bass player telling me during a gig...."dude, what the hell is going on...the amp sounds like @##$%! It's not cutting through....."
And as a guitar player, you know and feel when an amp is not cutting it. Now, if I never had played an older Mark IV and only owned the 2005 version, I wouldn't have the same perspective.
If I had to buy a Mark IV again (from my past experiences), I would forgo a new one and look for a well cared for older Mark IV.
Althogh there isn't officially a C version Mark IV, I think we can say the Mark IV with the detachable power cord is a "C" version
So you have Version "A" (dual effects loopo and has the Mark IIC+'s preamp circuit)
Version "B" with the Satellite Send and single effects loop.
Version "C" with the detachable power cord.
I've owned all versions of the Mark IV at one point intime or another in the past 15+ years....
and while the tone is generally the same, there are subtle differences between the different versions..things like the tranny (which has changed several time) affects the tone in some way.
To, my ears, the Mark IVs with the permanently attached power cable sounds better (especially in the cleans), they seem to have more presence on stage.
I owned a 2005 version that I just had to return because I could not get it to sound anywhere close to my 1992 version (owned two at one time).
I remember my bass player telling me during a gig...."dude, what the hell is going on...the amp sounds like @##$%! It's not cutting through....."
And as a guitar player, you know and feel when an amp is not cutting it. Now, if I never had played an older Mark IV and only owned the 2005 version, I wouldn't have the same perspective.
If I had to buy a Mark IV again (from my past experiences), I would forgo a new one and look for a well cared for older Mark IV.
Althogh there isn't officially a C version Mark IV, I think we can say the Mark IV with the detachable power cord is a "C" version
So you have Version "A" (dual effects loopo and has the Mark IIC+'s preamp circuit)
Version "B" with the Satellite Send and single effects loop.
Version "C" with the detachable power cord.
Boogiebabies
Well-known member
I think everyone is headed in the right direction, but I would not call the addition of an IEC power cord a revision. On a schematic it would look no different than a hard wired plug. Understanding that no two amps will sound identical, even off the production line. Component drift, variances, tube varieties and transformer variances will have their way.
I will say that they are very consistent and after recently playing a 94,00 and a 2005 I could not really tell the difference. They all seem to dial in the same to me.
I will say that they are very consistent and after recently playing a 94,00 and a 2005 I could not really tell the difference. They all seem to dial in the same to me.
Shep
Well-known member
Boogiebabies said:
isn't it the A had the hard wire were the B had the removable..so he is basicly saying his A work's better than the B he just returned...? yes ,, but i do agree about the no amp sounds the same..
Boogiebabies
Well-known member
Mine is a B with the hard wired cord. It's in the 6800-6900 range.
I have no idea when they went to the IEC.
I have no idea when they went to the IEC.
