Your Opinion- Mark V over other Marks

[brion]

Curious if you feel that the Mark V is worth the extra money over a Mark III and or Mark IV. I have a Mark III and Mark IIB and love both of them, but they have their shortcomings with setting the EQ up for channel switching. I used to have a Mark IV and though the EQ setting issue was improved, I liked the Mark III lead tone better. I need to get out and play through a mark V to form my own opinion on this amp, but what do those of you who have owned previous Mark series amps feel the pro's and cons of a Mark V are over the III and IV?

 

[Neptical]

Versatility, hands down. The Mark V has it ALL in one box. It can be as aggressive as you want it, or as tame as you want it. A cater to many styles. Though I share the love for the IIIs as you, there's nothing bad to say about the Mark V. Definitely see one in my future.

 

[thunder100]

Hi brion

After you played the "V" I would be curious about you Mark IIB comparison vs Mark II C+ verdict

Thanks

Roland

 

[eudaimonia02912]

Since owning the Mark V, I've gotten to play a Mark IIB, Mark IIC+, a Mark III (don't recall which stripe), Mark IVa, and Mark IVb. I even found a genuine Mark IIC+ selling for $1600. I could have sold the V for that much and bought the IIC+ if it were really better.

Ultimately, there's a bit of a difference between the IIC+ and III vs the IV and V. The former are more aggressive while the latter are smoother. However, the latter tend to have more fullness and bottom end than the former. The IIC+ mode on the V didn't quite compare to the real deal IIC+, but I'd rather have the Mark IV and Extreme modes on the V than the real IIC+.

I spent 2 hours A/B'ing a Mark IV and a Mark V through the same cab. The differences on channel 3 were minimal, at least on any of the settings I would use.

 

[JOEY B.]

This- http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=37701&hilit=SHOOTOUT

 

[thunder100]

This- http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=37701&hilit=SHOOTOUT

Cool allready tried it!

Was there a part 2 as well?

Thanks

Roland

 

[Jeff R]

I've had several IIIs and IVs over the years and the thing that made me go with the V (and not look back) were the crunch and clean channels. High gain sounds were never a problem in the III and IV but it seemed that sacrifices had to be made on low- and no-gain modes to make the high gain shine. The V fixed that - I can get what I want out of any and all three channels at any time.

 

[brion]

Thanks for all of the responses. I'll get out and try a Mark V (I've read the manual to get an idea how to set it up). If I like it, I'll probably sell a couple of amps to get a Mark V head, but keep the Mark III just in case.

 

[JOEY B.]

I've had several IIIs and IVs over the years and the thing that made me go with the V (and not look back) were the crunch and clean channels. High gain sounds were never a problem in the III and IV but it seemed that sacrifices had to be made on low- and no-gain modes to make the high gain shine. The V fixed that - I can get what I want out of any and all three channels at any time.

I sold every Mark III that I have ever owned because of the "sacrifices". I now use a clean boost pedal with my Mark II amps to get me where I need to be. 8)

 

[MBJunkie]

I agree with Jeff R's post the most in that the V offers fantastic footswitchable clean/crunch sounds out of Ch1 and 2 that were just not nearly as good with my MkIV.

The big question to the OP is what is it that you are after? If you desire an amp that can deliver on the stage with a fantastic footswitchable clean, crunch and high gain lead....with the added benefit of footswitchable GEQ, Reverb, Solo Boost, Effects Loop....then you will like the V.

Honestly, I still own a MkIV widebody combo, but I rarely play it. Mesa Boogie provide me with all of my wish list when they came out with the V. It is by far my favorite amplifier for home, rehearsal, live, and recording use that I have ever had!! That being said, I have always appreciated the sound of the Mark series from Mesa.

One other bit of tidbit.........don't make the mistake of setting the MkV modes in any channel to sound exactly as your current MkII C+, MkIV, MkI, etc.... Instead, learn to dial in each individual mode of each channel and enjoy Mesa's lates offerings.

I still own my MkIV widebody, but never play it.......the V just works for me so much better!!

 

[JOEY B.]

One other bit of tidbit.........don't make the mistake of setting the MkV modes in any channel to sound exactly as your current MkII C+, MkIV, MkI, etc.... Instead, learn to dial in each individual mode of each channel and enjoy Mesa's lates offerings.

How does that quote go "Jack of all trades, but king of.............."?????????

I'm currently enjoying MESA's latest offering, in the Royal Atlantic. 8)

 

[MBJunkie]

Joey, I am pleased that you are enjoying your new RA!

Just to clarify, my note to say to not expect absolute duplication of the "modes" of the V to be exact replications of their counterparts was to inform potential buyers that their settings on the V to achieve these great sounds may be different from what they are used to.

IMO, the V is very capable of achieving those "iconic" sounds, but may need to be adjusted differently than what these owners are use to doing on their respective Mark amps!

To say the V is the "jack of all trades, but king of ????" is not doing it fair justice.

IMO, the Mark V IS the king of all Marks And Then Some!! Especially for any players out there that enjoy 3 highly flexible footswitchable sounds that can be further enhanced on the fly via the GEQ, solo boost, etc.

I just wanted to make sure people understood my take of the V for the portion of my reply that Joey B interpretted in his own way. No problem Joey....to each their own! :mrgreen:

IMO....the V is the King of the Mark Series without question!!

 

[JOEY B.]

Joey, I am pleased that you are enjoying your new RA!

Just to clarify, my note to say to not expect absolute duplication of the "modes" of the V to be exact replications of their counterparts was to inform potential buyers that their settings on the V to achieve these great sounds may be different from what they are used to.

IMO, the V is very capable of achieving those "iconic" sounds, but may need to be adjusted differently than what these owners are use to doing on their respective Mark amps!

To say the V is the "jack of all trades, but king of ????" is not doing it fair justice.

IMO, the Mark V IS the king of all Marks And Then Some!! Especially for any players out there that enjoy 3 highly flexible footswitchable sounds that can be further enhanced on the fly via the GEQ, solo boost, etc.

I just wanted to make sure people understood my take of the V for the portion of my reply that Joey B interpretted in his own way. No problem Joey....to each their own! :mrgreen:

IMO....the V is the King of the Mark Series without question!!

You know what they say about opinions. Mine is no better than yours. The Mark V has been simplified for people that are not used to dialing in the Mark series amps. The push-pulls are gone in favor of mini-toggles. For some, this is a good thing, for me it is not. I do love the Tweed CH1, and the Mark I CH2. Channel 3 is not my cup 'o tea.

The Royal Atlantic kicks some ***, FWIW.

 

[brion]

The big question to the OP is what is it that you are after? If you desire an amp that can deliver on the stage with a fantastic footswitchable clean, crunch and high gain lead....with the added benefit of footswitchable GEQ, Reverb, Solo Boost, Effects Loop....then you will like the V.

I'm just curious more than anything. I don't gig right now and may never gig again. I have several amps and thought that if I could be happy with just a Mark V and my 1965 Vibrolux Reverb, I could clear some clutter. I just need to spend a good afternoon playing with a V and form my own opinion about it.

 

[MBJunkie]

Joey B,

I am pleased that you are not pissed with my post! After reading through it again, it was a bit harsh, but not intended to be so.

I can completely understand and appreciate that the V doesn't exactly duplicate the "iconic high gain sounds" of previous Marks (not even my MkIV widebody Ch3 Lead sound that I still own). However, I do think that the V can come "very close" to duplicating my MkIV Widebody in Channel 3 with due diligence.

I also feel that the Mark V offers so much more to me than my MkIV does in overall flexibility of great footswitchable sounds in several modes of all 3 channels.

OP....it sounds like you are looking for a very versatile amp that can provide nice cleans, crunchs and lead sounds, but are not gigging. All that I can say is you should consider the V because it is capable of very nice sounds in each channel. It even sounds great to me in 10W mode of all channels. Be sure to read the manual in advance and really give the V some time because it offers so much that many get turned off by it without giving it due justice!
You can get some really nice cleans out of the V in the "Fat Mode" of Ch1.....for instance.

Joey B,
I am very jealous because I want to play through an RA, but they are nowhere to be found in my neck of the woods. How long have you owned it? Are you playing it live? What are the features you like best about it? I am sure it is a fine sounding amp and would like to have the chance to play it! :mrgreen:

 

[JOEY B.]

Joey B,
I am very jealous because I want to play through an RA, but they are nowhere to be found in my neck of the woods. How long have you owned it? Are you playing it live? What are the features you like best about it? I am sure it is a fine sounding amp and would like to have the chance to play it! :mrgreen:

I have owned it for one week. I bought it off Ebay for $1300 to my door. Today, I threw the other tubes at it. Penta Labs 12AX7M and Ruby 12AX7AC5HG in the preamp and Sylvania 6CA7 in the power amp. The attenuator sounds very good with this tube combo, for sure. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

 

[MBJunkie]

Wow.....that is a very nice price!! Nice score. :mrgreen:

 

[SgtPatton]

I owned both Mark IV and Mark V. Ended up selling Mk V. I did a/b-comparison a lot. Mk V was versatile, but lacked some that magic what makes earlier Marks so special. It just didn't quite have that signature powerstage punch.

I liked more MK V's clean channel thought. Especially tweed-mode was amazing. For me, lead-channel is most important channel and MK IV kicked V's arse on that. V was way more aggressive, gainy and trebly, but MK IV had just right amount of gain, definition and punch.

MK IV worked way better on bedroom volumes also.

 

[K-Roll]

having owned the mk4A (which is even slightly rawer than the B) and now the mk5 i must say that - yes there are differences in the sound but.. who cares? you won't hear a difference in a moderately loud band context.. my mk5 cuts just as good through the mix as did my mk4.. yes, the mk5 is slightly less raw, but I actually find this to be quite appealing cause now our band sounds more compact.. when I had the mk4 I was struggling with situations where I'd stick too much above the band context or how to say it.. just.. too much guitar you know

what I really love about the mk5 is that I am not limited with shared preEQ pots, there are low wattage options available in a second, the ch2 is a real improvement over the RHy2 of my old mk4A.. to me it's a step forward.. if I were to consider buying a mk4 vs mk5 I'd go with the mk5.. If I wanted a more of a rawer growly sound I'd pick the mark 3 but only if I were playing the lead channel only.. just my 2c..

what I don't like is that the head is so small that it's a one hour's work to get it out of the chassis once you run into problems that not very user friendly in on-stage situations you know.. but such is the mk4 short head too so..