Mesa MkIII - your thoughts

[Beyond Black]

First, to ask if anyone in this thread ever got around to getting something recorded about these elusive III+ and ++ mods and where the heck we could find them.

I am now the proud owner of this amp and it’s been one of my better gear acquisitions. It’s my first Mark III, so I can’t compare it to a stock III, but this one is definitely a killer. It’s extremely raw and aggressive, a very pissed off tone. It’ll go from really dry and tight to dripping with saturation depending on the settings. It’s very versatile in that way. As with any tube amp, the louder the better, but this amp gets downright jaw dropping when opened up. You could knock down a house with this beast.

 

[Tiger1016]

First, to ask if anyone in this thread ever got around to getting something recorded about these elusive III+ and ++ mods and where the heck we could find them.

Thank you sir!

I am now the proud owner of this amp.

Congrats and I am jealous! I am super curious to ask how you would compare it to your IV (rev A or B?). Does the III++ get really close to the unique mid range grind/growl that the IV's have?

For the longest time I was quite ignorant to what I have been missing with the III and IIC+ while instead being a mega fan of the IV (using the models in the Axe FX III & II and from the tone from one of my favorite bands who use them) while thinking the lead channel in the V that I owned for ~4 years left a lot of be desired. It seems like the III++ on the lead channel in fast13b's video seems to have more of the mid range grind/growl that I love from the IV.

If this was the case, then it would seemingly net to the perfect hybrid tone that I am now chasing, which is mostly the more raw and aggressive tone of the III but with some of the unique character of the IV blended in. Also, it would be a heck of a lot simpler and cheaper than the alternative plan I had started to contemplate, which was to get both a Mark IV Rev. A along with a Quad Preamp and blend the two preamp tones together (using channel 2, Mark III mode from the Quad) and then running the combined signal through the IV's power amp. I suppose I could also consider do the ++ mod on the Quad's channel 2, III mode as well as on channel 1, IIC+ mode if I could actually find a Quad to buy.

 

[Beyond Black]

First, to ask if anyone in this thread ever got around to getting something recorded about these elusive III+ and ++ mods and where the heck we could find them.

Thank you sir!

I am now the proud owner of this amp.

Congrats and I am jealous! I am super curious to ask how you would compare it to your IV (rev A or B?). Does the III++ get really close to the unique mid range grind/growl that the IV's have?

For the longest time I was quite ignorant to what I have been missing with the III and IIC+ while instead being a mega fan of the IV (using the models in the Axe FX III & II and from the tone from one of my favorite bands who use them) while thinking the lead channel in the V that I owned for ~4 years left a lot of be desired. It seems like the III++ on the lead channel in fast13b's video seems to have more of the mid range grind/growl that I love from the IV.

If this was the case, then it would seemingly net to the perfect hybrid tone that I am now chasing, which is mostly the more raw and aggressive tone of the III but with some of the unique character of the IV blended in. Also, it would be a heck of a lot simpler and cheaper than the alternative plan I had started to contemplate, which was to get both a Mark IV Rev. A along with a Quad Preamp and blend the two preamp tones together (using channel 2, Mark III mode from the Quad) and then running the combined signal through the IV's power amp. I suppose I could also consider do the ++ mod on the Quad's channel 2, III mode as well as on channel 1, IIC+ mode if I could actually find a Quad to buy.

They can be dialed in fairly close, but I think the Mark IV definitely has more of a midrange growl, and a complexity to the mids that few amps have. The IV has these chewy, swirling, growling harmonics happening that just kill me. There’s a lot going on if you really listen closely, and it’s a thing of beauty. The III isn’t quite as beautiful and complex sounding to my ears, but much more savage, rude and brutish, and I mean that in the best way possible. That being said, it’s still pretty gnarly sounding in the mids. I prefer the IV, but also love the III and encourage owning both. Your idea of running both sounds like a winner and would likely sound massive.

 

[Tiger1016]

First, to ask if anyone in this thread ever got around to getting something recorded about these elusive III+ and ++ mods and where the heck we could find them.

Thank you sir!

I am now the proud owner of this amp.

Congrats and I am jealous! I am super curious to ask how you would compare it to your IV (rev A or B?). Does the III++ get really close to the unique mid range grind/growl that the IV's have?

For the longest time I was quite ignorant to what I have been missing with the III and IIC+ while instead being a mega fan of the IV (using the models in the Axe FX III & II and from the tone from one of my favorite bands who use them) while thinking the lead channel in the V that I owned for ~4 years left a lot of be desired. It seems like the III++ on the lead channel in fast13b's video seems to have more of the mid range grind/growl that I love from the IV.

If this was the case, then it would seemingly net to the perfect hybrid tone that I am now chasing, which is mostly the more raw and aggressive tone of the III but with some of the unique character of the IV blended in. Also, it would be a heck of a lot simpler and cheaper than the alternative plan I had started to contemplate, which was to get both a Mark IV Rev. A along with a Quad Preamp and blend the two preamp tones together (using channel 2, Mark III mode from the Quad) and then running the combined signal through the IV's power amp. I suppose I could also consider do the ++ mod on the Quad's channel 2, III mode as well as on channel 1, IIC+ mode if I could actually find a Quad to buy.

They can be dialed in fairly close, but I think the Mark IV definitely has more of a midrange growl, and a complexity to the mids that few amps have. The IV has these chewy, swirling, growling harmonics happening that just kill me. There’s a lot going on if you really listen closely, and it’s a thing of beauty. The III isn’t quite as beautiful and complex sounding to my ears, but much more savage, rude and brutish, and I mean that in the best way possible. That being said, it’s still pretty gnarly sounding in the mids. I prefer the IV, but also love the III and encourage owning both. Your idea of running both sounds like a winner and would likely sound massive.

Welp there it is. That is the answer that I expected to hear and wanted to hear, but should not have heard (if you know what I mean). Makes total sense. I am pretty much dying to have this solution in my life ASAP now. Thanks, and enjoy your beast of a setup.

I actually talked to Chris over at Mesa earlier this evening about whether it might be possible to send a IV in to get mods done that would make it sound closer to a III. Not a big surprise that the answer was unfortunately no.

However, I turned the covo into whether the Quad preamp could have the channel 2, Mark III mode modded like the III++ as well as channel 1, IIC+ mode modded like the IIC++. He did not sound super bullish but passed me along to the infamous Mike B’s VM to ask the man himself. I’ll hopefully get a call back next week to find out what the answer is.

 

[Beyond Black]

First, to ask if anyone in this thread ever got around to getting something recorded about these elusive III+ and ++ mods and where the heck we could find them.

Thank you sir!

I am now the proud owner of this amp.

Congrats and I am jealous! I am super curious to ask how you would compare it to your IV (rev A or B?). Does the III++ get really close to the unique mid range grind/growl that the IV's have?

For the longest time I was quite ignorant to what I have been missing with the III and IIC+ while instead being a mega fan of the IV (using the models in the Axe FX III & II and from the tone from one of my favorite bands who use them) while thinking the lead channel in the V that I owned for ~4 years left a lot of be desired. It seems like the III++ on the lead channel in fast13b's video seems to have more of the mid range grind/growl that I love from the IV.

If this was the case, then it would seemingly net to the perfect hybrid tone that I am now chasing, which is mostly the more raw and aggressive tone of the III but with some of the unique character of the IV blended in. Also, it would be a heck of a lot simpler and cheaper than the alternative plan I had started to contemplate, which was to get both a Mark IV Rev. A along with a Quad Preamp and blend the two preamp tones together (using channel 2, Mark III mode from the Quad) and then running the combined signal through the IV's power amp. I suppose I could also consider do the ++ mod on the Quad's channel 2, III mode as well as on channel 1, IIC+ mode if I could actually find a Quad to buy.

They can be dialed in fairly close, but I think the Mark IV definitely has more of a midrange growl, and a complexity to the mids that few amps have. The IV has these chewy, swirling, growling harmonics happening that just kill me. There’s a lot going on if you really listen closely, and it’s a thing of beauty. The III isn’t quite as beautiful and complex sounding to my ears, but much more savage, rude and brutish, and I mean that in the best way possible. That being said, it’s still pretty gnarly sounding in the mids. I prefer the IV, but also love the III and encourage owning both. Your idea of running both sounds like a winner and would likely sound massive.

Welp there it is. That is the answer that I expected to hear and wanted to hear, but should not have heard (if you know what I mean). Makes total sense. I am pretty much dying to have this solution in my life ASAP now. Thanks, and enjoy your beast of a setup.

I actually talked to Chris over at Mesa earlier this afternoon about whether it might be possible to send a IV in to get mods done that would make it sound closer to a III. Not a big surprise that the answer was unfortunately now.

However, I turned the covo into whether the Quad preamp could have the channel 2, Mark III mode modded like the III++ as well as channel 1, IIC+ mode modded like the IIC+. He did not sound super bullish but passed me along to the infamous Mike B’s VM to ask the man himself. I’ll hopefully get a call back next week to find out what the answer is.

Report back when you hear from him. That would make for one super badass Quad.

 

[GJgo]

I prefer the IV, but also love the III and encourage owning both. Your idea of running both sounds like a winner and would likely sound massive.

Listen to old NOFX. The lead guitar is (often) a no-EQ MkIII and the rhythm is a MkIV.

 

[Tiger1016]

Report back when you hear from him. That would make for one super badass Quad.

Will do. I hope and think so too.

I am also dreaming up some silly fun I can have with this setup for solo jamming with the Quad + Mark IV preamps into the Mark IV power amps, running this into a loadbox then into the Axe FX III using an IR panned dead center, then running to additional amp models panned hard left and right (i.e. IIC+ and whatever else would round out the equation), and outputting through dual Atomic CLRs up on poles. Or I could just run the real amp through the real cab (2x12 hz recto), which is already in the middle, then keep the rest the same. Either way it would sound stupid huge and be totally impractical for anything other than dicking around at home, but it would be really fun. I already have enough fun running dual amps in the Axe as it is, but centering up my ideal core tone could turn it into a religious experience.

 

[RedPlated]

I have a red stripe Mark III with a factory hardwood shell and wicker grill (oh, look it's in my profile pic). Came with original Sylvania 6L6 and 6CA7 tubes. It's an amazing amp if you know how to dial them in.

I really only use the lead channel on mine.

 

[GJgo]

I bought two more red stripes this week. A DG, and a DRG with a 105 PT (WTF??) I'll hang onto my fav for a while & sell the other.

The DG arrived today. It's ripping! I have a 12AT7 in V2 out of the gate so it's a little more organic in the gain structure.

 

[Exo-metal]

Congrats Jer, non reverbs have a thing for sure.

 

[GJgo]

Thanks- and I agree. I also think the Simul models were voiced / are voiced better for EL34 / 6CA7s.

I threw this together today. It's massive in the room, and a little more grindy than the other IIIs I've had.

 

[Beyond Black]

First, to ask if anyone in this thread ever got around to getting something recorded about these elusive III+ and ++ mods and where the heck we could find them.

Thank you sir!

I am now the proud owner of this amp.

Congrats and I am jealous! I am super curious to ask how you would compare it to your IV (rev A or B?). Does the III++ get really close to the unique mid range grind/growl that the IV's have?

For the longest time I was quite ignorant to what I have been missing with the III and IIC+ while instead being a mega fan of the IV (using the models in the Axe FX III & II and from the tone from one of my favorite bands who use them) while thinking the lead channel in the V that I owned for ~4 years left a lot of be desired. It seems like the III++ on the lead channel in fast13b's video seems to have more of the mid range grind/growl that I love from the IV.

If this was the case, then it would seemingly net to the perfect hybrid tone that I am now chasing, which is mostly the more raw and aggressive tone of the III but with some of the unique character of the IV blended in. Also, it would be a heck of a lot simpler and cheaper than the alternative plan I had started to contemplate, which was to get both a Mark IV Rev. A along with a Quad Preamp and blend the two preamp tones together (using channel 2, Mark III mode from the Quad) and then running the combined signal through the IV's power amp. I suppose I could also consider do the ++ mod on the Quad's channel 2, III mode as well as on channel 1, IIC+ mode if I could actually find a Quad to buy.

They can be dialed in fairly close, but I think the Mark IV definitely has more of a midrange growl, and a complexity to the mids that few amps have. The IV has these chewy, swirling, growling harmonics happening that just kill me. There’s a lot going on if you really listen closely, and it’s a thing of beauty. The III isn’t quite as beautiful and complex sounding to my ears, but much more savage, rude and brutish, and I mean that in the best way possible. That being said, it’s still pretty gnarly sounding in the mids. I prefer the IV, but also love the III and encourage owning both. Your idea of running both sounds like a winner and would likely sound massive.

Welp there it is. That is the answer that I expected to hear and wanted to hear, but should not have heard (if you know what I mean). Makes total sense. I am pretty much dying to have this solution in my life ASAP now. Thanks, and enjoy your beast of a setup.

I actually talked to Chris over at Mesa earlier this evening about whether it might be possible to send a IV in to get mods done that would make it sound closer to a III. Not a big surprise that the answer was unfortunately no.

However, I turned the covo into whether the Quad preamp could have the channel 2, Mark III mode modded like the III++ as well as channel 1, IIC+ mode modded like the IIC++. He did not sound super bullish but passed me along to the infamous Mike B’s VM to ask the man himself. I’ll hopefully get a call back next week to find out what the answer is.

Ya know, this thread has given me Mark III fever and I’ve been playing the hell out of my III and IV the past few days. I stand by what I said about the III being much more rude, raw and savage, but it is pretty damn close to the IV as far as the mids being growling, complex and rich. They are both downright nasty in that department.

 

[Beyond Black]

Thanks- and I agree. I also think the Simul models were voiced / are voiced better for EL34 / 6CA7s.

I threw this together today. It's massive in the room, and a little more grindy than the other IIIs I've had.

Damn, that 2B+ is even more rude and snotty than the Mark III. That’s a nasty fucker. I definitely dig the III better with the 34’s. Cool clips, man.

 

[Little B]

The mk iii's are hard to beat.I have a coliseum red and blue stripe,mk iv, and a mkiic+.My iiis are definitely more raw and in your face than the iv.I love them all,but the iiis make it to more gigs than the others,as they have the rhythm 2 mod so they're fairly versatile for a 30 yr old amp to say the least.

 

[Mr. Willy]

I’ve never played one, but I like the MKIII tone best out of all the Mark Series amps. It’s just so raw and aggressive.

 

[Tiger1016]

I don't want to jinx it, but looks like I should be all set on sealing a deal on a IIC+ today! I am pumped about it. But I am also ded set on getting a III ASAP too.

Since I am planning on getting a IVa at the end of the day too and most likely blending two or three amps together in a mono fashion get some hybrid tones that I am chasing (in a studio setting), I am still struggling to figure out which stripe and power amp option will be best. The IIC+ to bring the body, 3D nature, and harmonic bloom; the IVa to add its unique the mid range grind; and the III to add its raw and aggressive character and extra bite; all dialed in to complement the equation. Practical or necessary? Absolutely now way. Fun, enjoyable, and incrementally better. Well I definitely hope so. I want the collection anyway, so i might as well try to get the best of all worlds.

Standalone, without any amp blending, my educated guess is a 60/100 red stripe might be most preferable. But my guess is a blue stripe or maybe even a green stripe might be better suited for the blending since they seem to be the most raw, aggressive, and differentiated from the IIC+ and IVa. Also my understanding is the 60/100 should be a bit more punchy and bolder while the simulclass with the el34/6l6 blend should be a bit smoother in comparison.

Any of the III experts have an opinions on the best option(s) to try to start with in this quest? I know there is a decent probability I'll wind up trying more than one III, but would like to get it right the first time.

 

[GJgo]

Bro you're headed down the rabbit hole. I wish you the best of luck. I'd recommend getting them all in a room where you can spend time with them & see what suits your needs best.

I will say that IME when I try to blend preamps I never really end up with something I like (same with blending speakers in a cab), but also I'm definitely not a pro engineer.

Do you prefer pentode or triode? Smooth & grindy or piercing top end? Organic or compressed?

Also to add, the III+ is like a IIC+ & a IV had a baby, not like a III.

 

[Tiger1016]

Bro you're headed down the rabbit hole. I wish you the best of luck. I'd recommend getting them all in a room where you can spend time with them & see what suits your needs best.

I will say that IME when I try to blend preamps I never really end up with something I like (same with blending speakers in a cab), but also I'm definitely not a pro engineer.

Do you prefer pentode or triode? Smooth & grindy or piercing top end? Organic or compressed?

Also to add, the III+ is like a IIC+ & a IV had a baby, not like a III.

Rabbit hole indeed. I think like an engineer and over engineering is the story of my life in a way. Can't stop it and I am a happy servant to feeding this compulsion as I enjoy it.

Welp, looks like I might have jinxed the IIC+ deal with my previous post as the one I was chasing is having to make a trip to the tech. It is nice to deal with honest people though. We'll see how it all turns out.

A III+ coming out as a love child of a IIC+ and IV sounds really intriguing. If this implies that the III+ will have a similar forward and aggressive midrange kind of grind of a IV, while not being as compressed as a IV, but still retaining some of the raw, bite, and aggression of a III, then it sounds like it could be a more ideal alternative than an actual IV would be for me. Perhaps a III+ green stripe with a pentode/triode switch would be a better alternative than a IVa if this was the case, but I might have assumed the wrong balance here.

Regarding your question, my preference for my main metal and heavier rock tone is for an aggressive, grindy, and in your face mid range tone; a bottom end that is on the tighter end, can be woody on tighter palm mutes, but is still nice and full too; and a top end that is crisp and crunchy when I dig in but not harsh or overbearing. I like a more organic, open, and punchy tone with a 3D quality as opposed to compressed. I'll smooth things out some for my more universal rock kind of tone, but I like to still shade it towards the raw and aggressive side, even for this. Tough to tell which III would be the best place to start to try to achieve all of this.

 

[GJgo]

Most IIs could use a trip to the tech anyway, so pick it up for a good price considering & then send it to Mike B. for his magic. That's what I do.

It doesn't sound to me like you want a IV. Black / purple / red IIIs are more grindy, blues & greens are more hair rock harsh. Mike can add a pentode / triode switch to any of them when he does the R2 volume mod. IIIs are more aggressive than IIs but IIs have better tone & feel. You'll see.

 

[Little B]

^^^this^^^ is spot on.Thats the same thing I do when I pick up a mk iii or ii.And the descriptions are spot on too.well said.^^^