Quad pre, or Mark IV?

[The Magic Hoof]

I think I've decided to go with either a Quad pre or a Mark IV. I'm thinking that out of everything that I've looked at, the Quad wins in the preamp department, and the Mark IV wins in the head department. Let me know if I'm wrong on that though =)

What do you think the overall better deal would be? For a Quad pre I'd have to get a separate power amp, so the Mark IV wins in that area.

The Mark IV would be more suitable because of not having to have a separate power amp, but I'm thinking that a Quad pre would have its advantages as well...

I'm using this mainly for home recording, so I'm thinking the Quad pre would give me more options and give more versatile recording options. On the other hand, going with a Mark IV would be more compact and cheaper.


What would you do in my situation?

 

[ytse_jam]

that has to be the question I asked in my very first post here 8)
if you're interested in the answer I got here's the link:

http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?t=4056

 

[zenabI]

You simply have to buy both (I'm not kidding) :lol:

 

[ak47]

yep... sticky question... I have a Quad and I LOVE it... it sounds great and is very unique. Tonnes of options, 2 EQ's and a big tube reverb tank too... very very hard to beat as far as pre-amps go and I use it all the time for all sorts of music..

....BUT having said that, I would also love to have a Mk IV because they are so **** good.... a combo with the lot or a head and cab...nice regular gigging amps that will give you what you need and a little more with good reliability too!! ...and then some...

Actually, I would ideally like to run a Mk IV head dry into a centre cabinet like I used to do with my old Mk III and then run its slave out into my effects whose returns I ran into my stereo power amp and then into a pair of left/right cabs.... monsterously serious tones!

 

[myqqy]

I would seriously get both. And then a rectifier recording preamp and keep going...

 

[The Magic Hoof]

Actually guys, I'm thinking of getting multiple, seriously..

But for right now, what would you get, taking the following into consideration.

I mostly need an AMAZING lead tone that's to just die for.
It's going to be for home recording (mostly), and, of course, practicing.
I don't need to absolutely blast it.
This is about getting the best tone possible for recording.
It'd be nice to have a few extra recording options (I think the Quad pre has more).
Price. If a Quad pre+power amp is cheaper, I might go with it.


I'm not sure what to do. I'm seriously going 50/50 here between a Mark IV and a Quad pre. The thing is that it'd be really, really nice to start building my own rack of gear, and I've never had a pre/power amp before. It'd be nice to start that, but then again.... if the Mark IV would be better overall in terms of quality and price, I might go for it.


What do you guys think?

 

[The Magic Hoof]

I need amazingly crisp and tight lead tone. Lead tone that is to just due for. I'm talking about tone like below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqOomFjGfGg (I believe he's using a studio pre on this)

That guy, along with Petrucci ala images and words, and also some really thick tone like older michael romeo thrown in for good mix. As far as cleans, once again, petrucci's cleans on images and words. Rhythm now... that can be a work around. I'd need something that can pull off a very tight and 'middy' tone.

If I wanted to get into something heavier in the rhythm dept, I'd just buy an Engl . I'm not opposed to having a distortion powerful enough for death metal either, but that's the least of my concern at the moment because I've got Engl for that, and the Boogie is for leads and cleans =)

 

[The Magic Hoof]

Holy wow you guys are right.. I'm seriously thinking of getting both. HOWEVER...


Considering everything that I've posted so far... what do you think would be the logical way to go? I've never had rack gear, and it'd be nice to start with a Quad, especially since I could record direct with it. On the other hand, a Mark IV is just fine as well.

:x

I'm actually thinking of just going with a Quad... I don't think a Mark IV would like, blow it out of the water or anything. Who knows, maybe the Quad is even better than a Mark IV.


With a Quad, it's certain to get really high gain for metal riffage, and I'm thinking that the lead tone on that sucker would be phenomenal as well. If this is so, I'm thinking of starting my first rack with a Quad, finally.

 

[MetalMatt]

When I was first looking to get a Mark series amp to compliment my Road King. I was looking at a Mark III and IV. After playing through them I was leaning for the Mark III because I liked R2 and it's overall voicing more than the IV. Then I thought why not get a preamp. So I did some research on the Studio and Quad preamps. Then I played the Quad... and it was a no brainier. It has clean, crunch, smooth leads, and aggressive rhythms. I'm currently looking for a power amp for it. If it works out I will have a Quad Pre + Power amp for around $800-900, not bad.

Not much help, am I?

 

[straitouttahell]

I think I've decided to go with either a Quad pre or a Mark IV. I'm thinking that out of everything that I've looked at, the Quad wins in the preamp department, and the Mark IV wins in the head department. Let me know if I'm wrong on that though =)

Well, it all depends to tastes and needs I'd say.
At the end of the day the Quad and the MkIV are not that much different beasts each other, tonewise, yet they hold their ups and downs.

The Quad sounds a tad more *vintageish* than the Mark, and it's got one channel more. On the other hand, with a MarkIV you get all the heritage Boogie tones *and* a Simul-Class poweramp in one box.

I owned a Quad Preamp which I sold to buy a MkIV combo because I was fed up with touring a 4x12 cab and a 30 Kg heavy 6 units rack, I don't miss the Quad but this doesn't mean the MkIV is any better. Hope you get what I mean.

Having said that, I'd suggest you to really focus on what you will do with your amp. If home recording is the main application, they are almost equivalent, as both of them can provide you good bedroom-level tones and both of them suck on the direct out dept. If you have to gig them, it's all up to you. The MkIV is a bit more comfortable to transport, but the Quad gives you all the benefits of a rackmount unit, in terms of system configuration and connections.

Price could also make the difference, as prices for Quads are relatively stable, while it's swinging alot for the MkIV since it's been discontinued.

 

[The Magic Hoof]

Guys, I'm just going to say screw it and get a Quad

Here's what I'm thinking.

Quad+50/50+a cab.

The cab... I'm thinking a Rectifier or Stiletto 4X12 cab. I'm not sure of the difference of the two, but they both seem close. The good thing about a 4X12 cab is that I'd have the option of running either stereo or mono to one 4X12 cab.


Do you guys think that a Quad+50/50+4X2 rec cab is a nice setup?

 

[Tubes Rock!]

Do you guys think that a Quad+50/50+4X2 rec cab is a nice setup?

I do, I do..

What about your Line 6 4x12 cab? I saw in a pic of your gear. What kind of speakers are in there?

 

[The Magic Hoof]

The Spider II cab most likely isn't that great. I'll be selling it in the future to recoup from the cash I'm spending on this setup. It says that there are two custom 12" celestion speakers in it.


I'm not quite sure on how to use the 4X12 cab with a 50/50. On the back of the 50/50, there's channel A and B, and two 4 ohm outputs for each channel. I was thinking that the config I could run is just using channel A with both 4ohm jacks to the amp, or using just one 4ohm jack from both channels A+B to the cab.

I'm not sure what the difference would be and which would be the most logical/sound better.

 

[The Magic Hoof]

Hmm... The two left sides on the back of the cab, connected to.. the two on the bottom left (two 4ohm jacks under channel A), or one on channel A and one on channel B (both middle jacks).

What's the deal?

 

[trem]

The recto cab can be split into two in stereo operation, with 4 ohms each side. In mono operation it's 8 ohms. The two 4 ohms ouput on 50/50 on either side are hard wired in parallel. I'll give you some examples.

If you want stereo capabilities with that one cab ONLY, connect each 4 ohms jack on the cab to 4 ohms jack on both A & B side of the 50/50.

If you want mono, connect 8 ohms on the cab to the 8 ohms jack on either side (A OR B) on the 50/50.

If you want to run multiple cab, but still mono, connect 8 ohms jack from both cab to the two 4 ohms jack on ONE side of the 50/50 (either A or B).

I hope that's clear.

About the two scenarios in your question, the first one would be okay to do, but redundant. You'll be using one side only of the amp. I'd just run one speaker cable from the 8 ohms jack on the cab to the 8 ohms jack on either side of the 50/50.

The second scenario would mean you're using both side of the 50/50, which is again okay to do.

 

[JT_Marshmallow]

I haven't used my poweramp or cabinet in months. Currently I run my Studio Pre direct through a Behringer DI Box w/ a built-in cabinet simulator, and then into a little mic preamp that came with my sound card. I listen to it through my studio monitors, and it sounds AMAZING. That way I can get the full sound of both channels at any volume, even with headphones.

So if you're planning on using the Quad for studio work, try running it direct in a similar way and you'll have amazing results.