Mesa Mark III vs. Mark IV

[xT00BZRG00Dx]

Hey, I have a Marshall 1960A cab and an Ibanez RG2EX1 with EMG 81 and 85's, and I was wondering which amp would be better. I found a Mark III Red Stripe head on Craigslist for 675$ USD, and was wondering if I should get it over a Mark IV. I play Progressive Metal, and want kind of a John Petrucci tone, and a dark Jazzy clean tone. I know the Mark IV is better, but how is it better??? Are the channels the same but just the Mark III sharing an EQ??? I dont care about crunch, all I need is clean and distortion. Can I get a good clean tone and a good lead tone at the same time???? And would it be possible to find a Mark IV under 800???? Is it worth the extra money???? Thanks in advanced

 

[tony777]

If you need two sounds the Mark IV will absolutely give that to you.
I wouldn't say the IV is better than a III, but it's hell of a lot more versatile, and you can get way more sounds out of it.

If you look for a bright fat distortion at the same time a dark clean, you will have a problem to dial that in a MKIII.
A trick I do at my guitars is that I wire the tone knob off at the pickup selector in the humbucker positions (1 and 5), so I am able to dial out the highs when I switch to clean.
This gives me the dark clean, and I am able to run the treble on the amp at 10.
Which to me is necessary on a MKIII or earlier marks.

Good luck
Tony

 

[Tuna141]

My advise would be to check out the Mark III.

As Tony mentioned in his post, all 3 channels use the same tone controls, so you sort of have to compromise a little when dialing-in your channels. However, if you can live with a slightly darker distortion tone, then you can dial-in a dark clean tone no problem. I have to add that I have a blue stripe, so I don't know exactly how that compares to the red stripe tonewise, though.

The III is a great amp and has killer tone. I also own a IV and it is super versatile, but like the tone of the III better. The III is more aggressive and in your face, whereas the IV is more smooth/rounder. I think the III is one of the best "bang for the buck amps" out there. The IV will give you more control and features, but is it worth the price difference to you? You really have to compare them yourself to know for sure....I say, give the III a test drive - you may be surprised

 

[kmanick]

I have a Red stripe III and a buddy of mine has a IV and if you only need a clean and a lead go for the III.
My III is a bit more "open" sounding than my friends IV too, although that may be a plus or minus to you depending on what you like.
I also use an MXR 10 band EQ in the loop of mine so I can shape the clean channel completely seperately from the gED on the lead channel.
It works great.
I scored mine for under $700.00 and I don't hear a $700.00 difference between the two :?: .
the R2 on the IV has a lot more gain to it but besides that, I'm good with my III.

 

[Tuna141]

the R2 on the IV has a lot more gain to it

From my experience, I don't agree with this. I think it's actually the other way around. If you crank the Ch1 gain/volume you can get Ch2 to have almost as much gain as Ch3 on the Mark III Blue Stripe. The only negative is that your clean (Ch1) gets distorted too, so you can't really get a super clean Ch1 and heavily distorted Ch2 on the Mark III. The Iv is more flexible with that respect.

 

[kmanick]

the R2 on the IV has a lot more gain to it

From my experience, I don't agree with this. I think it's actually the other way around. If you crank the Ch1 gain/volume you can get Ch2 to have almost as much gain as Ch3 on the Mark III Blue Stripe. The only negative is that your clean (Ch1) gets distorted too, so you can't really get a super clean Ch1 and heavily distorted Ch2 on the Mark III. The Iv is more flexible with that respect.

that's correct I agree with that, but you can get a lot more gain out of the R2 on the IV while keeping the clean ....well clean.
I should 've been clearer with my statement.

 

[kiff]

My M3's lead channel has a LOT less gain/crunch than my m4's. It seems like it has one less gain stage than the m4. I'm not sure what a stock bluestripe's gain is like, since I bought mine with the c+ mod, and I've heard that reduces the gain. I've tried a TS (in fornt) and a tube preamp into it (efx return), but I can't seem to get a usable high gain sound. Mark4, easy as cake...

I agree that the M3's tone is a lot more open and aggressive. I really love it for rhythm, but for leads it doesn't work out for me.

 

[kmanick]

If I can score a IV(B) head for cheap (after the V's come out and take over ) I will definitely grab one.
the lead tone on the IV is smoother than the III.
I'd like to have one of each please.................

 

[xT00BZRG00Dx]

Ok, I got a Mark III Red-Stripe. Can I have some Petrucci settings???

 

[xT00BZRG00Dx]

Go read this thread for general MK III settings.

http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=29738

It has a pic of the orginal settings sheet that came with the MK III's

I arleady have those. Can I have a tight metal tone, or a Petrucci tone please????

 

[Tuna141]

Congratulations on your purchase.

I don't know any Petrucci settings (not my style), but I do have a few general tips for you:

1. make sure that the reverb mod and R2 mod has been done. The R2 mod will give you a separate volume control for ch2. This is a great mod to have on the amp even if you won't use ch2 much. Do a forum search for more info/instructions regarding these mods.

2. keep the Presence set low - the MarkIII can get pretty fizzy when the Presense is set above the mid-point. I keep mine set around 2.

3. keep the Bass set low - I keep mine set around 3 and with the knob "pulled". I also pull the Treble knob - usually set that around 8.

 

[JeffMN]

I don't have extensive experience with anything Mesa, really. But, I will say this - a few weeks ago, I went to a friend's gig and he was playing a Mk IV. INSTANTLY I was taken by his tone. I started doing homework and looking around regarding the Mark series.

I originally wanted a IV, because that was what I heard. I played one in person too at a store, and thought it sounded pretty good. I was in 'fund-raising' mode when I came a cross a mint condition red stripe Mk III Simul-class combo on craigslist with EQ and reverb. I played it for awhile at the guy's house, and I knew right there that I had to have it. It was a little more than I was expecting to spend ($875) but I tell you - this thing is a tone monster.

I don't understand why the III series seems to be the 'least desirable' in the Mark history - at least that's the impression I get looking around on the net. I cannot believe how wonderful this amp sounds. Yes, it shares tone controls throughout the three channels, but if your expectations are more about great tone than superior flexibility - this amp is a winner. The guy I bought it from was the second owner - he bought it from the original owner in 1988! I have all the paperwork for it too. Crazy.

Anyway, I love what I have with the III. It's a great amp!!

 

[ursinus]

I've owned both a MKIVa and a MKIVb, but IMO the my MKIII green stripe sounds so much more open and aggressive in both the R2 and lead modes than either MKIV's. The clean channel also sounds richer than the MKIV's. The draw back of the MKIII is certainly the fact that the tone stack is shared. For that reason one might consider buying two MKIII's and a A/B switcher to get the best of both worlds. It's still cheaper than buying a MKIV or MKV

 

[danyeo1]

My M3's lead channel has a LOT less gain/crunch than my m4's. It seems like it has one less gain stage than the m4. I'm not sure what a stock bluestripe's gain is like, since I bought mine with the c+ mod, and I've heard that reduces the gain. I've tried a TS (in fornt) and a tube preamp into it (efx return), but I can't seem to get a usable high gain sound. Mark4, easy as cake...

I agree that the M3's tone is a lot more open and aggressive. I really love it for rhythm, but for leads it doesn't work out for me.

I've owned III's and IV's and most every III I had had a more gain than any IV or IIC+ I've owned. The only III that wasn't that gainy was a black dot. I think that IIC+ mod really tames the gain of the III. I wouldn't bother with that mod.

 

[kiff]

My M3's lead channel has a LOT less gain/crunch than my m4's. It seems like it has one less gain stage than the m4. I'm not sure what a stock bluestripe's gain is like, since I bought mine with the c+ mod, and I've heard that reduces the gain. I've tried a TS (in fornt) and a tube preamp into it (efx return), but I can't seem to get a usable high gain sound. Mark4, easy as cake...

I agree that the M3's tone is a lot more open and aggressive. I really love it for rhythm, but for leads it doesn't work out for me.

I've owned III's and IV's and most every III I had had a more gain than any IV or IIC+ I've owned. The only III that wasn't that gainy was a black dot. I think that IIC+ mod really tames the gain of the III. I wouldn't bother with that mod.

holy necro bump danyeo! :lol: but yea, could've been the 2c+ mod. sold the amp a long time ago

 

[megavoice]

Had an extraordinary guitarist in my band about 7 years ago with a IV. He A/Bed his with my red and said the red would sound for him warmer and faster because of the less wirings. In that year of working intensively with him I dind't observe great differences. But the IV is, of course, much better for performing.