MK IV 1993 "B" version
- Thread starter glip22
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
That is cool. I would love to know which one made it is. It sounds excellent and for reference I have a Wizard MC and a Cornford MK50H. I am about to do a cap job on it. Replacing the two 220uf cans will be easy, but lifting the main board looks like a tough job. I may only do the two caps as that only requires desoldering one lead from the switch to gain access. I have some ghost noting and i was told the 220uf caps are usually the culprits. Have you had your done?
Just got an email reply from Mike Taylor at Mesa
Hello there,
Thanks for your email.
Well, to my knowledge, the version "B" didn't start until 1995 @ around serial # 7600... BUT- I just did a serial # search on your amp (#6227) & it shipped from the factory on 4/22/1993!
so, now I am thoroughly confused. Usually, we don't even have a very accurate data base for serial #'s. most as old as yours don't even show up. but yours did, & it goes against what we have down in our MARK IV history... so I don't really know what to say. HA!
Hope this helps.
thanks for your interest in MESA!
Hello there,
Thanks for your email.
Well, to my knowledge, the version "B" didn't start until 1995 @ around serial # 7600... BUT- I just did a serial # search on your amp (#6227) & it shipped from the factory on 4/22/1993!
so, now I am thoroughly confused. Usually, we don't even have a very accurate data base for serial #'s. most as old as yours don't even show up. but yours did, & it goes against what we have down in our MARK IV history... so I don't really know what to say. HA!
Hope this helps.
thanks for your interest in MESA!
I have a "non A/non B" version, S/N around 6100 and built in 1993. It's probably one of the first ones and yours, too. Mike Bendinelli says that "early B" (or "non A/non B") are the best sounding "B".
Mesa story is not totally wrong; that guy just missed the word "full". He told you that the (full) B version started at S/N around 7600 and in 1995.
It makes sense to me. I was told that around 1500 of those amps were made.
Regards
Daniel
Mesa story is not totally wrong; that guy just missed the word "full". He told you that the (full) B version started at S/N around 7600 and in 1995.
It makes sense to me. I was told that around 1500 of those amps were made.
Regards
Daniel
Boogiebabies
Well-known member
I have a full B # 689X from 12/93. The hang tag says week 49 and it has all the components a typical B should have
other than the attached power cord.
other than the attached power cord.
rtcook
Well-known member
I recently purchased a Mark IVB Combo. SN 6038 dated 2/1/93 and signed. Mesa verified as well. Any earlier? The sticky for the Mark IV thread should be updated. 93 should be the crossover year, not 94.
Roger
Roger
jimsneighbor
Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2009
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
Mine's a '93 widebody head with attached power cord...s/n 6088.
I doubt the attachment of the A/C cable has much to do with determining "A" or "B" versions. I had a "B" wIth attached A/C cable.
I believe the effects loop configuration is the big factor.
But I could be wrong - I was once before :lol:
I believe the effects loop configuration is the big factor.
But I could be wrong - I was once before :lol:
I guess the discussion here is not what it is an A or B version. As you say, the effects loop configuration makes the difference.
The main question here seems to be the year in which the change was made. It happened in 1993, although some people at Mesa were saying it happened in 1995.
The secondary question here is when Mesa made the transition between the "early" B and the "full" B (as Boogiebabies called it).
That s/n 6038 is an early B (Feb 93), as well as mine (according to Mike B.)
Boogiebabies asked me some time ago some specific questions about the components or the preamp tubes on my amp and, as I can read here below, he has concluded that his s/n 689x (Dec 93) is a full B but with the power cord attached.
Thus, both transitions (A to early B, and early B to full B) happened in 1993.
I am interested in what some people call the transition between "early A" to "late A". Is there any difference or is it just fiction?
Some people call the "early B" as a "no A/ no B", so it could be an indication that there were only 3 "different stripes" in the Mark IV development.
Regards
The main question here seems to be the year in which the change was made. It happened in 1993, although some people at Mesa were saying it happened in 1995.
The secondary question here is when Mesa made the transition between the "early" B and the "full" B (as Boogiebabies called it).
That s/n 6038 is an early B (Feb 93), as well as mine (according to Mike B.)
Boogiebabies asked me some time ago some specific questions about the components or the preamp tubes on my amp and, as I can read here below, he has concluded that his s/n 689x (Dec 93) is a full B but with the power cord attached.
Thus, both transitions (A to early B, and early B to full B) happened in 1993.
I am interested in what some people call the transition between "early A" to "late A". Is there any difference or is it just fiction?
Some people call the "early B" as a "no A/ no B", so it could be an indication that there were only 3 "different stripes" in the Mark IV development.
Regards
I have just seen a Mark IV A s/n 58xx in eBay, built in 1992.
Here above, there is a Mark IV early B s/n 6038 dated Feb 1993 and a full B s/n 689X from Dec 1993.
Again, I am interested in what some people call the transition between "early A" to "late A". Is there any difference in the components or is it just fiction?
Some people call the "early B" as a "no A/ no B", so it could be an indication that there were only 3 "different stripes" in the Mark IV development.
Regards
Here above, there is a Mark IV early B s/n 6038 dated Feb 1993 and a full B s/n 689X from Dec 1993.
Again, I am interested in what some people call the transition between "early A" to "late A". Is there any difference in the components or is it just fiction?
Some people call the "early B" as a "no A/ no B", so it could be an indication that there were only 3 "different stripes" in the Mark IV development.
Regards
