Post removed.

[Anonymous]

Post removed.

 

[Restless Rocks]

I've never understood why some couldn't understand it!!!

 

[ev1ltwin]

I've never had a problem with R2. It's fun to play with the gain dimed; I like the harmonics in the distortion that this sound produces. R2 doesn't cut as well as the clean channel or lead channel in my experience, but I never really played around with it too much.

I think most if the hate for R2 is a result of groupthink.

 

[screamingdaisy]

I really liked R2 on my Mk III. The problem was trying to get it to jive with R1 and LD. EQ'd on it's own it was great, but I could never manage to balance all 3 channels.

Channel 2 on the Mk V is awesome. Probably the most versitile out of the 3 and crunch mode is my "Rock the f*ck out" mode. Personally, I think it does a better heavy rhythm than channel 3, which is great because it frees up channel 3 for use as a lead channel.

 

[Scary]

I never have, it's always sounded pretty decent with my guitars. Always my go to channel for STP stuff.

 

[Neptical]

No problem with R2 here! Throw both my IIIs together and I create a big mf'ing monster. :lol:

~Nep~

 

[topcat0399]

I don't shun - I embrace! Live! Love! R2 on my MkIV is exactly what I need for a crunch channel.

My wife will be selling my Mark IV after I die....

 

[mrd]

R2 is a great channel.

Haven't done this in a while, but I used to have a great time diming that channel and the master output... sounded like hell on earth! :twisted:

 

[Fronzil]

I've never had a problem with R2. It's fun to play with the gain dimed; I like the harmonics in the distortion that this sound produces. R2 doesn't cut as well as the clean channel or lead channel in my experience, but I never really played around with it too much.

I think most if the hate for R2 is a result of groupthink.

i agree, doesn't cut as well at all with the presence pushed in..but pull the presence (and adjust the channel volume because of the volume loss when pulling the presence knob) and the voicing of the channel changes..so much more upper mids, very open and raw..cuts through so well. (that being said, as a single live guitar tone, not through pro tools or monitors etc..i dig the tone pushed in more..just starting to think about pulling it for my band purposes)

 

[CudBucket]

Most people see it as another gain channel but it isn't. So they end up frustrated by it. It's a low-gain channel and in that light, is very good. Why do you think the 2nd Channel of the Mark V has so much gain?

An OD in front of R2 gets you a very nice lead channel BTW.

 

[swbo101]

I generally use it as a low gain...especially if I'm playing some blues. Sounds really nice with a ES-335, or if I just want a really soft clip. I don't always pull the gain for a fat sound, just keep the gain around 6 - 7.

 

[Bleak]

R2 on my Mark III is killer. I love the tone of it, I just have to get some footswitches so I can use it more often!

 

[>Photi G<]

Lately, I have neglected the R2 channel on my III. But when I first got it, I was instantly in love. It really blends nicely volume-wise with the other channels, despite the lack of R2 Vol mod on my amp, and it's by far the most versatile of the three channels. Using the neck pickup of my Les Paul, and the Volume 1 set around 6.5, and the guitar volume rolled back, I can go anywhere from an alternate clean tone, to a Vox-ish crunch. On the bridge pickup with the same amp settings, and dimed guitar volume, it sounds like a good old Tube Screamer pedal. And with brighter settings and same guitar settings, I can get a very nice Marshall tone out of it. Crank the Volume 1 to about 8, and you get a high gain tone similar to that of the lead channel, but a little darker.

But lately, I've been tweaking in the Lead channel only, contemplating the C30 mod, to get more of a IIC+ tone.

 

[phyrexia]

R2 does not play well with others. That was my only problem with it.

 

[BMcNibbnles]

My only problem with the Mark III is this channel. Not the tone of it because the tone is awesome, but just the fact that it's not LOUD enough, compared to the other channels. Mesa really dropped the ball with that one. It's such a killer amp and they did such a magnificent job with all the tones you can get, but they neglect one of the most important things ever? The VOLUME?

Actually, one more thing irritates me about the Mark III: the foot switching. The layout is so stupid and sloppy. I'd still take the III over all the other ones (except maybe a IIC+, but only because I haven't played one, so I might like it more than a III).

 

[dodger916]

I love R2 on my Mark IV, and get some great mid-gain shimmering solo sounds without the compression of the Lead Channel. A Strat still sounds like a Strat!