to which channel of a dual is a mark III or IV more close?

[Sir Punk]

I've had a tremoverb for a month or so. I really like some of the sounds especially from the two high gain channels.
but I am still curious about how a mark sounds in person. I was gonna buy one but then found an amazing deal on a tremoverb but I still have some thirst for a mark.

does the dual cover mark territory, does it get close or it's just completely different sounds?

 

[MusicManJP6]

I've had a tremoverb for a month or so. I really like some of the sounds especially from the two high gain channels.
but I am still curious about how a mark sounds in person. I was gonna buy one but then found an amazing deal on a tremoverb but I still have some thirst for a mark.

does the dual cover mark territory, does it get close or it's just completely different sounds?

A Recto and a Mark are on opposite ends of the Mesa spectrum. They are two completely different animals! The Recto is big and boomy with a loose bottom end and fizzy top end. The Marks are much tighter and articulate as a whole. The Mark IV seems to be the tightest from what I've read and heard.

The closest you'll get to a Mark with a Recto is using Vintage mode with fairly low gain and bass settings with an OD in front and an EQ in the loop. Even then you are still way in Rectoville!

 

[primal]

A Recto and a Mark are on opposite ends of the Mesa spectrum...

+1

The two just don't sound even close.

I have run my Road King in stereo with my Mark IV (Fun, but sounds better in recordings then live).

Hearing them side by side, you will never confuse the two. The Recto is to low end what the Mark IV is to midrange.

The closest I have ever had the two sounding was, exactly as MusicManJP6 said, in Vintage, with the gain way down (around 9:00), a fulltone OCD in front with the HP setting, and a boss GE7 EQ in the loop.

In the end I think that is why I play my Mark IV more often then my Road King. It seems I was trying to get the Road King to sound like a Mark IV.

A Recto can't do the Mark sound, atleast no matter how hard I tried. But a Mark can't do the Recto chugga chugga either.

Both freaking rock. Just a matter of preference.

 

[Sir Punk]

well, I am just wondering if I should keep the ToV or get a mark III or IV. I don't like too much the modern high gain, the blues ch is ok, I only use vintage and clean. that's why I was asking.

 

[zebpedersen]

well, I am just wondering if I should keep the ToV or get a mark III or IV. I don't like too much the modern high gain, the blues ch is ok, I only use vintage and clean. that's why I was asking.

If you prefer vintage and clean tones on that amp, get a Mark. Possibly the IV would be the least far removed in terms of a modern feature set (not to mention only having one footswitch rather than 3) but would still give you the vintage stuff you're after.

 

[screamingdaisy]

well, I am just wondering if I should keep the ToV or get a mark III or IV. I don't like too much the modern high gain, the blues ch is ok, I only use vintage and clean. that's why I was asking.

I suggest you try a Mark before you sell the ToV.

To put it into perspective, although evolved, a Mark is at it's foundation a high gain Fender amp, but with way more midrange than your typical Fender.

The Dual Rectifier on the other hand is at it's foundation a modified Soldano SLO preamp strapped to a tweaked out power amp (particularily tweaked in Modern mode).

The Mark is smooth. Even the roughest of the Marks (the Mark III) is smoother than a Rectifier. They are very solid sounding amps, with lots of midrange and a tight response that doesn't fart out unless you make it.

The Rectifier is rougher, with a more aggressive bite and a bigger, looser voice. Where (in my opinion) the Mark is the very voice of refinement in high gain, the Rectifier is meant to be that nearly out of control guitar sound. Where the Mark opts for tight response, the Recto opts for big response.

So yeah... both are the Mesa sound, yet are nearly total opposites in terms of how they achieve it. Just because you prefer the Recto's vintage high gain to modern high gain doesn't mean you'll like a Mark's high gain as they really don't sound anything like each other, so I wouldn't ditch one amp until you're sure you'll prefer the other.

 

[Sir Punk]

screamingdaisy, that was a great description. Thursday I might go and try a Mark IV and see how that sounds. I know it's rather complex so I'll try to get as much time as I can. I know 1 hour will not be enough. So I can have some reference to compare with. Unfortunately listening to clips doesn't really work, maybe just for a rough reference. Also the early Marshalls are modeled after Fenders with more gain, and I already own a JMP.

I didn't know the recto was modeled after a SLO.

 

[zebpedersen]

What guitar and style do you want to play in and perhaps we could suggest some tone ideas to give you a rough guide? (That amp takes a good year or so to dial in, I don't care what anyone else says)

 

[Sir Punk]

I use a MIJ Epi Elite Les Paul. I do mainly rhythm, a few solos or opening riffs. but mainly R. Genre is punk-rock, post-punk, alt. rock.

for example I know that I don't dig much turning up the bass. I am not sure how people use V as an EQ. I am not into metal guitars with a lot of bass. I like more mids and a good amount of gain but not like where buzz comes in. I like palm muting a lot. what I noticed with this amp is that it's more sensitive than my marshall JMP. I have to play really clean otherwise every single mistake can be heard.

 

[zebpedersen]

I use a MIJ Epi Elite Les Paul. I do mainly rhythm, a few solos or opening riffs. but mainly R. Genre is punk-rock, post-punk, alt. rock.

for example I know that I don't dig much turning up the bass. I am not sure how people use V as an EQ. I am not into metal guitars with a lot of bass. I like more mids and a good amount of gain but not like where buzz comes in. I like palm muting a lot. what I noticed with this amp is that it's more sensitive than my marshall JMP. I have to play really clean otherwise every single mistake can be heard.

Yeah, I don't get the V thing myself either. I've found that going 2/3, 3/4, 1/2, 3/4, 2/3 on the graphic works really nicely. It makes the amp a lot louder as well, but you get really sweet, smooth top and middle and then just enough bass that you know it's there without it being the focus of attention.

The Mark III is a great amp which is a little more ragged than the Mark IV but not quite into the 'vintage' territory of the II and the I, and certainly is a cool sounding beast. However, much as I love my vintage gear, the Mark IV is still my go-to amp for absolutely any sound. Once you get good with it you can get pretty much any sound by changing two controls (at most!) after you get a standard set up.

The difficult thing about demoing a IV is getting it set up - so I personally would recommend that particular EQ pattern. Channel-wise, RH1/2 bass + mid to 4/5, and then gain and treble to taste. I'd leave the presence controls set to 6 if you're just demoing the thing, I find they're most useful when you're changing rooms. Lead channel, run the gain and drive lower than you might think, again I think a lot of people see loads of gain on tap and think 'I have to use it all' - and you don't, I would say 6 on the gain and 5 on the drive or vice-versa.

Anyway I hope that sort of helps if ever you get to demo a IV, it's a tough one to master, but once you've got used to what all the controls do you can seriously get just about any sound you like with it.

 

[Sir Punk]

I demoed the IV for an hour or so. so many controls. but I was seriously disappointed. I tried full-power, tweed, simul-class, class A, I wasn't getting any decent rhythm, it was super nice for leads that's for sure. I really liked the lead channel. also I couldn't get any decent cleans, i was turning the gain down and the master V up but there was still a bit of overdrive. and where is the gain? I had the gain at 10 and it was not even near to my dual or even my JMP. maybe there was something wrong with the amp, the tube were glowing fine. I don't know.

but the gain acted a lot more like a volume control compared to my dual.

all in all I would give it another chance, but too many controls and I am not a fan of tweaking forever.

maybe the speakers really sucked, it was running through two 4x12, a sonic and a peavey. the bass was so flubby that I had to keep it around 1-2 for all channels.

 

[zebpedersen]

I've only played Mark IVs through Boogie cabs (quite a few combos, a few heads through Recto cabs) and the bass is never really an issue.

Maybe it's just not the right amp for you? You do really have to be a fan of tweaking if you get one, because it's pretty unavoidable.

The RHY1/2 setup is one of the most difficult balances to strike - I'm not surprised you didn't get it on the first try. The lead channel, by comparison, is much easier to dial in.

 

[screamingdaisy]

I demoed the IV for an hour or so. so many controls. but I was seriously disappointed. I tried full-power, tweed, simul-class, class A, I wasn't getting any decent rhythm, it was super nice for leads that's for sure. I really liked the lead channel. also I couldn't get any decent cleans, i was turning the gain down and the master V up but there was still a bit of overdrive. and where is the gain? I had the gain at 10 and it was not even near to my dual or even my JMP. maybe there was something wrong with the amp, the tube were glowing fine. I don't know.

On the lead channel. R1 is clean and R2 is supposed to low to mid gain crunch channel. LD is where all the high gain, Metallica style chugga chugga happens.