Seriously now, personal preference, mark III, mark iv ??

[lessarti]

STRICTLY talking lead channels on both amps.. having nothing to do with versatility / clean/ crunch channels r2etc im talking specifically lead channel wise for rhythm/leads which mark series amp do you prefer and why?

I'm having a HELL of a time deciding depending on my ears in the day im playing...
lately it has been the IV in preference until i plugged into the iii and was thinking "**** this thing sounds so good too".

Why does it flip flop?? :?:

 

[SonicProvocateur]

I've only played a IV once, and it didn't suit me at all, but I didn't get to play it in a band setting

If my bandmate had one or the other it might be a different story...The recorded sounds of the IV seem to be supreme on every album/recording...even on netmusicians!

To me the IV sounded "boxier" and way more midrangey, but yet again, I found out Vic (phyrexia) had it accidentally hooked up in the 4ohm slot versus 8, and I was totally shredding my brains out; about 15 minuts later, it blew one of the outer EL34s. Secondly, we had it waaay loud and it was loaded with all Groove tubes; not my preference, I like russian tubes (EH/Mesa 440s, etc)...could have explain the bland tone and difficulty dialing in "my tone".

Lately my Mark III has started having that "boxy" tone as my crappy Ruby tubes have started trying to give out and I end up having to drive my lead master higher for more saturation in the band mix; it's also losing gain. I need a new solid v2 and power tubes. My R2 sounds hissy...so...

In short (lol rather in long)...it's a topic that gets discussed alot...the choice is really yours, but I've personally been itching for a new Mark for recording with. The III sounds amazing live, but as i've discovered takes some "massaging" to sound more like one or the other on record. Mainly on the cabinet or microphone end, as there are very fine nuances you will get bothered by saying "I didn't hear that before" or "Those frequencies weren't there earlier!". Otherwise the Mark III dominates on the lead channel.

Theres my $0.04

(edit: oh and apparently the Mark IV is supposed to be sensitive than the III but i didn't notice any more sensitivity to the dynamics of my pick attacks or articulation. Both are equally badass; not to exclude that a) I blew up the one Mark IV i've tested in under an hour, but b) i've used all sorts of amazing tubes in my III and had it as perfectly close to a IIC+ as I think I can get it tone wise without switching to the 105PT, imho)....many are sure to argue here.

 

[Facelift]

Ive never played a IV but I can attest that my III is so aggressive and badass sounding, I would never even think about selling it to a get a IV.

 

[Geiri]

I have a IV my friend had a III. We got together to compare amps. To be totally honest I loved 'em both. The only reason for me to own a IV over a III is versatility. It's got nothing to do with tone.

These are two brilliant amps and if two channels is enough for you the get your self a III.

 

[lessarti]

Interesting replies thus far, thanks for replying guys as im noticing many readers but not even close to the same ratio in replies.. what gives ?? ( to those that aren't replying). Why would you not reply and voice your opinion?? That is what i WANT to read and see, i love the idea of a gathering of preferences / ideas / creation inspiration etc.

Anyhow, to clarify i have a mark iv and iii (red stripe, graph eq no verb) and i flip flop back and forth as to which one i like better, i posted a comparison vid on youtube just search for metalmaniactimable for user search to view/listen. TOO close a sound to really say in a way which is my fav..

 

[stephen sawall]

I
Anyhow, to clarify i have a mark iv and iii (red stripe, graph eq no verb)

I have owned both these amps and have used both for many years .... I like the IV better. Why would it make any difference what I like better ..... have your own taste.

 

[droptrd]

both pretty close. Ive had both. But Im currently balls deep in my Mark III at the moment soo... :lol:

 

[Tuna141]

I have a III blue and a IVa. I'd give the III the edge tonewise, but the IV has the III beat in versatility/options. Both are great amps.

Since the OP wanted a comparison based on the The Lead channel, I'd have to say my preference is the III due to it's fatness and balls - the IV tone is too smooth/round for my taste.

 

[swbo101]

I've only played a III once and that was many years ago when I was deciding on either a III or a IV and went with the IV primarily b/c of versitility and having separate settings for each channel. Both are great amps.

 

[swbo101]

Forgot you were asking about the Lead channel only.....Since it was 20 years ago..lol I can't remember specifically , but at the time I did have a personal perference to the IV over the III's lead channel..it just sounded right to my ears. It was the sound that I was looking for at the time. Again, if I had the cash I'd buy a III in a heartbeat as well, to go along with my IV.

 

[edgecrusher]

There was a Mark IV combo for $1100 at a local guitar shop, so I brought it my Mark III red stripe to compare it to. I had the cash in pocket and had the intention of trading in my Mark III for it mainly to get the extra bit of versatility, but I did not like it at all.

I tested them both out through a Marshall cab to be fair (the combo's C90 sounded pretty terrible to me) and the III just killed it. I was mainly comparing the lead channel since that's what mattered to me the most. Maybe the IV had old tubes or something, I had it on Pentode and dialed in similar settings, but I couldn't get it to sound good. It was also stupid loud; it went from nothing to too loud for the guitar shop at about .5 on the master volume. My III was much easier to tame.

The III has that tight aggressive crunch that I love with smooth singing sustain, and the IV just wasn't doing it for me. I don't remember exactly what else I didn't like about that IV, I just remember being very disappointed in it.

 

[SonicProvocateur]

For the lead channel, to me, I think it boils down to recordable tones. With "your" tubes in it, and post-EQ compression maybe the Mark IV's tone isn't as "round" as me and edgecrusher seems to hear it in the room. I hear that too...so I know what you're talking about, but my Mark III sounds awesome in the room with the standard V EQ but comes out brighter than a IIC+ on record I end up having to use the "Petrucci EQ" to get the right tone...

Maybe i'll be able to give another Mark IV a go at it. That one was an a-revision, and the IIC+ settings did make it better, but the pull shift was just way too much (I think that's what made the tube blow...that and having it wired wrong lol) :roll:

 

[swbo101]

There was a Mark IV combo for $1100 at a local guitar shop, so I brought it my Mark III red stripe to compare it to. I had the cash in pocket and had the intention of trading in my Mark III for it mainly to get the extra bit of versatility, but I did not like it at all.

I tested them both out through a Marshall cab to be fair (the combo's C90 sounded pretty terrible to me) and the III just killed it. I was mainly comparing the lead channel since that's what mattered to me the most. Maybe the IV had old tubes or something, I had it on Pentode and dialed in similar settings, but I couldn't get it to sound good. It was also stupid loud; it went from nothing to too loud for the guitar shop at about .5 on the master volume. My III was much easier to tame.

The III has that tight aggressive crunch that I love with smooth singing sustain, and the IV just wasn't doing it for me. I don't remember exactly what else I didn't like about that IV, I just remember being very disappointed in it.

Sounds like something was wrong with that amp. Just hearing about the volume issue alone tells me that amp was abused.

 

[kdorsey]

It's been a while since I spent any serious time with a IV, but there was never a time where I loved it enough to trump my III. Versatility and flexibility certainly describe the IV and there are things that it can do that the III can only dream about (try 3 balanced channels). But the unmistakable mojo of my III keeps me with a chubby every time. Even when aged tubes poke their ugly head up in the middle of a gig or totally change tonally between the last practice and a gig (OK, that made me want to kick it), I still kiss and make up. Dial in a little modded TS-9 with my PRS and the honeymoon is ON baby!!

Even if someone offered me a new MkV stack in trade, I'd not give up my III. It's as much a blind love affair as it is subjective tone. Even the sound guys go "goddam man, that amp sounds good!"

 

[Neptical]

The IV is an awesome amp and even more awesome with the right tubes in it. There is a certain vibe from the III that is unbeatable for me and thus why I chose to have 2 of them. Grant it,the IV has the seperate channels, it still wasn't enough for me to choose over the III. I have the tone of a lifetime right now, and it's a move I should of made years ago when I first wanted one to begin with. Later down the road I plan on incorporating a IV or possibly a Roadster into my rig but that's a whole 'nother story. :wink:

~Nep~