MK V wish list

[ursinus]

If Mesa put out a MK V, what would you want changed on it?

Here's my list:
1. Larger Flat face panel (the standard one can be hard to read at a glance)
2. fully independent tone controls for all three channels
3. Elimination of satellite jacks and controls.
4. Richer sounding reverb
5. Midi control of all switching options
6. NOOO TUBE RECTIFICATION! (ok, rant over...)
7. Elimination of recording out jacks (it sounds horrible anyway IMO)
8. Individual tube bias (I know, I know, its a pipe dream, but still....)
9. Parallell Effects loop with level contols for send and return.
Anyway, list yours........

 

[boogietone]

Your list plus seperate reverb level controls for each channel and solo boost.

 

[pmb]

A more brutal version of the classic mark series lead channel added. So a fourth channel.

 

[dodger916]

Add a Lone Star Classic channel but with a very broad gain range: from LSC clean to about Mark IV Rhy2 max level. Try it with EL34s or 6V6s...

 

[Matterra]

I really hope they don't turn it into a "modern metal" amp. Otherwise, I'll leave it in the hands of Mesa Engineers..

oh, and I hope they keep the classic Mark Stylings... if they make it look tacky, like a Recto or Stiletto (duece/trident, IMO the Ace is classy looking). Oh, and I love the angled faceplate, its easier to adjust, although they could lower it a bit, as it is a bit tough to read...

 

[Pinweaver]

Only 2 things I would like:
- a 16ohm jack
- A bit more room in a short head so it's easier to put in new power tubes.

 

[jvk]

I reckon that any improvements to the MarkIV won't come with higher gain. There's no point in putting out an all-rounder in their product line to do what they already do pretty well with the Rectifiers/RK/Roadster. The MarkV, if it ever comes out, will be the MarkIV but with more bells and whistles and completely independent channels with individual solo, reverb and possible EQs.

 

[Reeko81]

NO way...mark tone is the best tone available for crunchy and lead sound.
I wish only it has a super reverb, and a better switching control ( at least my mark III is more user friendly than a mark IV)...
I don't care about another channel....3 is the perfect number...
Clean, crunch, heavy lead.. if you need something else from your amp you can use a boost pedal in front of it.
But mesa mark amps always lacked a good reverb.

 

[psychodave]

Have more gain available for R2. ....keep it sounding the same, but have a gain switch to have it close to the lead channel. I like R2, but most of the time it needs a pedal 8)

 

[phyrexia]

3. Elimination of satellite jacks and controls.
7. Elimination of recording out jacks (it sounds horrible anyway IMO)

Why? You don't want extra bells and whistles? What would Petrucci do without his outputs to go to extra power amps? How would we all slave six amps and ten 4x12s together?

I think they should discontinue the Mark IV along with the I. Then, release a 50-watt amp with power-amp options and a mark series preamp (maybe just one or two channels. cascading gain.) which would be a Baby Mark or whatever the hell they'd call it.

Then release a big boy amp, four channels, A/B, A, Simul, solo, EQ, etc. Call it the Mark V.

 

[metalblitz84]

NO way...mark tone is the best tone available for crunchy and lead sound.
I wish only it has a super reverb, and a better switching control ( at least my mark III is more user friendly than a mark IV)...
I don't care about another channel....3 is the perfect number...
Clean, crunch, heavy lead.. if you need something else from your amp you can use a boost pedal in front of it.
But mesa mark amps always lacked a good reverb.

I agree Mark tone is the BEST tone out there.....they should definitely make control for all independent channels, but instead of another 5 band graphic eq, they should build it a parametrid. That would be so bad-***!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[sbalderrama]

R1 and R2 lonestar clean and drive, R3 Mark IV lead.

 

[fpoon]

I guess one more channel even though its not really necessary. Having a seperate GEQ for each channel but what I really want is a built-in delay to go along with the reverb *drools*.

 

[Nick_cor]

My dream Mark V has;

the lonestar cleans
the same rhythm channel
the same lead channel
another lead channel !

This way, you can have

shimmery clean tone,bluesy tone,heavy rock tone, liquid sustainined lead tone.

other then that, make it STEREO! AND have it midi'd up! AND it'd have to be super cheap!! so that everyone can afford one

 

[srf399]

Lonestar Cleans
Recto Crunch
Stiletto Crunch
MKIV Lead


Tube/diode rectifiers
4 Channel amp

 

[Fxrs]

The MarkV, if it ever comes out, will be the MarkIV but with more bells and whistles and completely independent channels with individual solo, reverb and possible EQs.

Randall Smith has already stated it would be a simplified version of the MKIV.

 

[Nick_cor]

The MarkV, if it ever comes out, will be the MarkIV but with more bells and whistles and completely independent channels with individual solo, reverb and possible EQs.

Randall Smith has already stated it would be a simplified version of the MKIV.

so how is that a simplified version?

 

[Monsta-Tone]

Lonestar Cleans
Recto Crunch
Stiletto Crunch
MKIV Lead

Sounds great, as long as they don't put that stupid Reverb delay between the channels.

I came really close to buying a Lonestar Classic, but the delay on the Reverb switching killed it for me.




R2 definitely sucks. I use a Custom 22 with Dragon II pups and can not get a really good tone out of it. Haven't tried my McCarty yet though.





My list:
R2 = Recto crunch capabillity (Vintage & Modern)
thicker Reverb
that's it..................

 

[Nick_cor]

What the hell? IT'S A MARK ladies and gentlemen! Not a recto or stilleto! The perfect mark V would be 2 lead channels, the r2 channel from the IVB and the lonestar cleans. END

 

[Fxrs]

The MarkV, if it ever comes out, will be the MarkIV but with more bells and whistles and completely independent channels with individual solo, reverb and possible EQs.

Randall Smith has already stated it would be a simplified version of the MKIV.

so how is that a simplified version?

That isn't a simplified version.