mk III distortion.

[dylan7620]

are these all that different from the IVs tones? i like the IV but with my 7 string it tends to get kinda farty on the low end. being with a guitar tuned down to B its naturally a bit more difficult to find an amp that suits my needs for gain. as we all know JP has used several marks while getting some badass tones from them while using seven strings. ive never gotten to mess with a mark III so im trying to compare it to the IV. is it as much of a tweaker's amp like the IV is? i like my nomad but have wanted a mark for a long time... i mean come on, why not? so if u III owners could chime in any comments whatsoever thatd be awesome... thanx!

 

[MkIII Renegade]

The MkIII is excellent for a very wide range of rock/metal/blues and especially excels for loud metal rhythm and leads. I think it sounds rawer and more agressive than the the MKIV.

The only problem with the MkIII is finding a good compromise to get all 3 channels to sound good at the same time. The R2 channel is very bassy compared to the lead channel and you have to compromise the ultimate lead tone slightly if you want a very clean sound on R1 (clean channel). I definitely don't think the MKIV has anything tonewise on the MkIII (to the contrary) but the MKIV has the separate EQs and therefore the ability to produce all the great sounds at once. I have resorted to using the MkIII as mostly a 2 channel amp, clean (R1) and lead only. It does have the ability to clean up amazingly well on the lead channel with the guitar volume knob for live playing.

 

[axwielding1]

I use my mark III for a wide variety of tones, from clean jazzy tone, growling blues, purring plexi, overdriven lead, and full out metal...
I like the rawness of the mark III, and on any given channel, would choose the mark III everyday and twice on sunday...over the mark IV.
Now most of the stuff I play does not require channel switching, I have a TS9, to push the cleans if needed for a boost, and use a volume pedal in the loop, plus guitar volume. I also can use the EQ footswitch to boost frequencies for leads, or cut frequencies for rhythm work. So, once you get the hang of it, you can really employ all tones well, and use guitar volume to your advantage as well. I don't use effects much, just a crybaby and TS9, both modded, and that's enough....
The mark IV has a more refined tone, I think, and maybe a little more processed sounding. Not like a digital tone by any means, just more refined....I like the mark IV, and the ability to separate tone stacks between R1 and R2/lead, but I prefer the tone of the mark III......
If you use alot of effects, and channel switch alot, the mark IV may be the critter for you, if you plug and play, the III will be great....
ax. :twisted:

 

[vcamargo99]

Well put axwielding1. I have a BLue Stripe Mark III. I use ALL channels using knob tweaking until I find the right settings/compromises for all channels. The only real issue I have with it is the drop in volume drop when switching from clean to Rhythm crunch. I've grown to know this quirk and am prepared for it, so to me it's a minor problem. The RHYTHM II & LEAD channels are simply awesome. The Mark IV does have a "smoother/tighter" distortion. It's truly beautiful. However, I prefer the III's "open/rawer" tone. For me, I'm able to dial in the"classic" sounds with the rhythm II settngs, and solo with the LEAD channel's more compressed sound with huge sustain and clarity. Everyone has their own opinion on these 2 amps. For *ME* I would LOVE to have a Mark IV, but not if it meant giving up my Mark III.

 

[axwielding1]

Mine has an R2 volume knob, so I can balance all 3 channels...I forgot to mention that...
ax. :twisted:

 

[Kgry]

I sometimes play my Mark III with a guitar I have tuned to C. It doesn't sound all that great, mostly because I play in E and have the amp setup for that. You really need to take out a lot of bass and make sure you're mids are up when playing that low.

 

[dylan7620]

lol, ur preaching to the choir. the only scooping i do is in my lows. i dont use any effect besides a little reverb here and there. someone on the HC reviews says is has more gain than a dual rec... but thats HC and i know just about anyone can say whatever they want on there. as for cleans... this is probably where id comprimise... just as long as they arent lifeless. i think my nomads cleans are decent (nothing compared to my old blue angel) but they more than get the job done well.

 

[axwielding1]

I just did a local blues festival, and used my mark III. We had 3 guitars, so I used the strat to pop more in the mix... I dimed the vol 1 of my clean channel, ran it simulclass, and kept the tone stacks around 12:00. I got alot of compliments on my tone which was clean until I dup in, then it gritted up.... I didn't use the EQ at all, and got a hell of a quack fron the mid/bridge setting on a funky riff we did....
I even got a compliment from Jim Weider... That says alot....
ax. :twisted:

 

[RussB]

All this talk of flatulent bass...

Speakers, man, speakers!

 

[dylan7620]

then what do u insist on for tight bass response?

 

[axwielding1]

OEM EV12L 200 watts of bonecrushing bass responce...
Put that in a thiele cab, excellent...
ax. :twisted: