Mark III - still turning heads.

[kdorsey]

Just because some people don't know how to make a MkIII sound great, doesn't mean it can't be done. I'm happy with my results and that's all that matters. And if I can help someone get 1/10 of the fun and happiness I've gotten out of my MkIII over the past 22 years, then I'm happy to do it. No regrets and no apologies...I've got nothing to prove.

 

[Facelift]

while I agree that the amp must back up the hype to justify it, I just dont see the spread of price between that and the III when the III is pretty **** close to the sound. The III backs up the hype given by its users just as much as the IIC+ users. Now, does this mean that eventually the III will catch up to its little brother in price in the future? Who knows? I tell you though, I dont see any people other than IIC+ users saying the III sucks. So who is right in this argument? To say they are totally different beasts is completely untrue, otherwise one of em wouldnt be in the Mark series. In reality all the Marks are just an evolution of a certain sound that they ALL create. They are all awesome in thier own right but the snobbish attitude of some/not all IIC+ users sickens me. Its one thing to be proud of the sound your amp creates but jeez, have some respect for others tastes as well. For fucks sake, were all using Mesa boogie amps in the Mark series here but it doesnt seem good enough, there has to be someone come in and bag on the ones that dont have "thier" amp. Its those kind of people that I grew up hating and after seeing the snobby, righteous attitude that some of the IIC+ users here have, I dont think I would want to be associated with the "IIC+ club". However, I will be forever a part of the III club, if there even is one because not one of em that Ive seen has that same kind of pisspoor attitude. If I were part of the "IIC+ club", I think I would evaluate the ones with that attitude and put em in check because its giving all you guys a bad name. This kind of thing makes me want to go find a 59 Les Paul and jsut smash it into pieces.

Mark III \m/ \m/

 

[SonicProvocateur]

Let me say this, before the mods lay into this thread.

I do love my III. Its a monster live amp, never lets me down and always puts a big grin on my face, the same it did the day I got it. That said, it has painstakingly been somewhat a pain to record just about every time I try to get -that- tone I want. Not saying it doesn't sound great, it's just not like a point and shoot Marshall. My Orange amp has this trouble too. I want a IIC+ not because it's particularly magical, or uber rare, but it seems to just record that much better. It hits the frequency ranges in all the right spots that the III has trouble transferring for some reason, even in Youtube vids.

PS; thanks for the compliment, Scott.

Boogie on.

 

[Facelift]

while I agree that the amp must back up the hype to justify it, I just dont see the spread of price between that and the III when the III is pretty **** close to the sound. The III backs up the hype given by its users just as much as the IIC+ users. Now, does this mean that eventually the III will catch up to its little brother in price in the future? Who knows? I tell you though, I dont see any people other than IIC+ users saying the III sucks. So who is right in this argument? To say they are totally different beasts is completely untrue, otherwise one of em wouldnt be in the Mark series. In reality all the Marks are just an evolution of a certain sound that they ALL create. They are all awesome in thier own right but the snobbish attitude of some/not all IIC+ users sickens me. Its one thing to be proud of the sound your amp creates but jeez, have some respect for others tastes as well. For f%&# sake, were all using Mesa boogie amps in the Mark series here but it doesnt seem good enough, there has to be someone come in and bag on the ones that dont have "thier" amp. Its those kind of people that I grew up hating and after seeing the snobby, righteous attitude that some of the IIC+ users here have, I dont think I would want to be associated with the "IIC+ club". However, I will be forever a part of the III club, if there even is one because not one of em that Ive seen has that same kind of pisspoor attitude. If I were part of the "IIC+ club", I think I would evaluate the ones with that attitude and put em in check because its giving all you guys a bad name. This kind of thing makes me want to go find a 59 Les Paul and jsut smash it into pieces.

Mark III \m/ \m/

I've seen more MKIII lovers on this forum talk smack about IIC+'s and have piss poor attitudes toward C+ owners than vice versa.
MkIII lovers often claming (as you did) that IIC+'s are overpriced and only "cork sniffers" own them balh blah blah blah. (what a piss poor attitude!)
It's another example of a 'forest for the trees' scenario, too much in love with your MkIII's to see the smack you MKIII owner/ lovers lay on the IIC+ and those that own them.

Much of this thread has been nothing more than one MKIII lover stroking another MkIII lover over and over again, just one big MkIII circle jerk.
You feel inadeqate about your amp so you stroke each other.

Only attitude that displayed here is in retort to the snobbish IIC+ lovers.

Inadequate? Not a chance. Its doing just fine and will for years to come. Seems to me, you're butthurt as well as jealous because there is love for another amp other than the IIC+ that can hang with it jsut as well.

Im thinking there has to be something to recording each one of these. Some things may need adjusted on the board or mics to pick up any frequency or wavelength that may not be transferring well. Ive heard some pretty dam good recordings of the III and that kwirk guy showed an example of that in the Mark III demo thread. Im willing to bet that if he had labeled the Battery clip as being recorded with a IIC+ EVERYONE would have believed it. Funny thing is, he paid THOUSANDS of $$$ less for that III that doesnt even work right to achieve the same sound as a IIC+ can get for metal. Am I wrong in this?

 

[Neptical]

Yeah....here I am.... :lol: :lol:

Just because some people don't know how to make a MkIII sound great, doesn't mean it can't be done. I'm happy with my results and that's all that matters. And if I can help someone get 1/10 of the fun and happiness I've gotten out of my MkIII over the past 22 years, then I'm happy to do it. No regrets and no apologies...I've got nothing to prove.

Amen, brother.

For the past 2 years, I've been playing these amps pretty constant through live use and through a bunch of studio session work. They've proven to me that they're real work horses. They offer everything to me I look for in guitar tones, and even more that are readily available. Other then sharing my love for the Mark III here, Kdorsey said it, there's nothing to prove. I've heard enough poor examples of BOTH amps..from all the Dream Theater and Metallica clips to cover bands to last a life time. But.. that's not the point, it's about each person being perfectly happy and content with their amp and what it can do for them. This board is here to share our knowledge and love for these amps...and hardly to nag on each other for what each other likes.

 

[Neptical]

Thanks, Ned!

Back on track...

 

[Lesgoldy]

Get over yourself and find a girl to stick your cock in instead of the input jack of your amp.

Nice!!!!

 

[JOEY B.]

while I agree that the amp must back up the hype to justify it, I just dont see the spread of price between that and the III when the III is pretty **** close to the sound. The III backs up the hype given by its users just as much as the IIC+ users. Now, does this mean that eventually the III will catch up to its little brother in price in the future? Who knows? I tell you though, I dont see any people other than IIC+ users saying the III sucks. So who is right in this argument? To say they are totally different beasts is completely untrue, otherwise one of em wouldnt be in the Mark series. In reality all the Marks are just an evolution of a certain sound that they ALL create. They are all awesome in thier own right but the snobbish attitude of some/not all IIC+ users sickens me. Its one thing to be proud of the sound your amp creates but jeez, have some respect for others tastes as well. For f%&# sake, were all using Mesa boogie amps in the Mark series here but it doesnt seem good enough, there has to be someone come in and bag on the ones that dont have "thier" amp. Its those kind of people that I grew up hating and after seeing the snobby, righteous attitude that some of the IIC+ users here have, I dont think I would want to be associated with the "IIC+ club". However, I will be forever a part of the III club, if there even is one because not one of em that Ive seen has that same kind of pisspoor attitude. If I were part of the "IIC+ club", I think I would evaluate the ones with that attitude and put em in check because its giving all you guys a bad name. This kind of thing makes me want to go find a 59 Les Paul and jsut smash it into pieces.

Mark III \m/ \m/

I've seen more MKIII lovers on this forum talk smack about IIC+'s and have piss poor attitudes toward C+ owners than vice versa.
MkIII lovers often claming (as you did) that IIC+'s are overpriced and only "cork sniffers" own them balh blah blah blah. (what a piss poor attitude!)
It's another example of a 'forest for the trees' scenario, too much in love with your MkIII's to see the smack you MKIII owner/ lovers lay on the IIC+ and those that own them.

Much of this thread has been nothing more than one MKIII lover stroking another MkIII lover over and over again, just one big MkIII circle jerk.
You feel inadeqate about your amp so you stroke each other.

Only attitude that displayed here is in retort to the snobbish IIC+ lovers.

Inadequate? Not a chance. Its doing just fine and will for years to come. Seems to me, you're butthurt as well as jealous because there is love for another amp other than the IIC+ that can hang with it jsut as well.

Im thinking there has to be something to recording each one of these. Some things may need adjusted on the board or mics to pick up any frequency or wavelength that may not be transferring well. Ive heard some pretty dam good recordings of the III and that kwirk guy showed an example of that in the Mark III demo thread. Im willing to bet that if he had labeled the Battery clip as being recorded with a IIC+ EVERYONE would have believed it. Funny thing is, he paid THOUSANDS of $$$ less for that III that doesnt even work right to achieve the same sound as a IIC+ can get for metal. Am I wrong in this?

I could comment on how overpriced and overrated the Dumble ODS is as compared to the Mark IIC+ (being as they have similar circuits), but I do not. That would require me having an educated opinion, which would require me OWNING a Dumble. Seeing as how I have scraped and saved for my C+ purchase (no spoiled rich brat here), I don't see me having an "educated opinion" anytime soon. Stop all the "hating", PLEASE. Go ahead and delete this post and/or my account for speaking the truth, I really don't give a **** at this point! :wink:

 

[Facelift]

Thats awesome that you scraped and saved for the amp of your dreams. Nothing wrong with that. Im sure this debate will fester on in the future one time or another but truth to the matter is that both amps are killer in thier own right and can create very similiar sounds. No, Ive never owned a IIC+ but listening to hundreds of different recordings, not just youtube clips either and there really isnt enough difference to my ears to justify the price spread so educated opinion or not, it really is what it is. Anyway, now that the thread is back on topic of the III I jsut want to add that mine sounds like the god of thunder came down and put it in my room. I always smile ear to ear whenever I play it. Nothing can pry this amp from me. I dont know what I would do if it were stolen, other than replace it of course. Unless its stolen, it will surely go to the grave with me.

 

[dodger916]

Thats awesome that you scraped and saved for the amp of your dreams. Nothing wrong with that. Im sure this debate will fester on in the future one time or another but truth to the matter is that both amps are killer in thier own right and can create very similiar sounds. No, Ive never owned a IIC+ but listening to hundreds of different recordings, not just youtube clips either and there really isnt enough difference to my ears to justify the price spread so educated opinion or not, it really is what it is. Anyway, now that the thread is back on topic of the III I jsut want to add that mine sounds like the god of thunder came down and put it in my room. I always smile ear to ear whenever I play it. Nothing can pry this amp from me. I dont know what I would do if it were stolen, other than replace it of course. Unless its stolen, it will surely go to the grave with me.

That's great, and it's what we all strive for. But Joey's point is well taken: it's a slippery slope when making a comparison to something not fully experienced, especially when the feel of playing the C+ is what some owners claim justifies the premium (some of whom have owned at least one Mark III stripe).

 

[zodiac272]

I'm sorry the horse pic got deleted... I might have to go watch Office Space now!

scott

 

[lesterpaul]

this is a simple fact,according to the vintage market-if you have originality, great condition, and a rare number of product, you have a greater market demand
-there are probably 10 times more mk III's than C+'s...here is the foundation of the price difference-I made calculated purchases based on that info-if I am a cork sniffer, than hellyeah 8) -mk III's are killer amps....I just appreciate a good investment portfolio-I lost most of my **** in an f-5 tornado, and believe me.....I am glad I had a few + amps....wow, what an appraisal!!!!I might take my settlement and buy that dumble, and a few +'s and III's to boot :lol: -its all about playing in the end-its all a means to an end.............the end