Mr. Willy
Well-known member
That sounds killer. I’m assuming Rev A is more aggressive than later revs? Because that sounds similar to MKIII aggression and rawness.
anomaly
Well-known member
I wouldn't say more aggressive, but a little more raw. The B is slightly more modern sounding. Honestly, there's more similarities between the revisions than there are differences... If you like one, you'll probably like the other as well. They all sound like Mark IV's.
They are not as aggressive as a Mark III, but to my ears they are much more pleasant sounding especially at higher volumes. The Mark III's can get fatiguing and harsh IMO and they sound a bit sterile in comparison. Also, the liquid lead tone is much more attainable with a IV, they play like a dream when it comes to leads.
Last edited:
ultimatemetalguitartones
Well-known member
Ditto! I totally agree! The mark 3 is more hairy and aggressive but the mark 4 is more refined and percussive. It's like it has all the right frequencies needed to sound amazing and pleasant to your ears. Also it's a hell of a recording amp!
anomaly
Well-known member
That's one thing I noticed when I switched from a Mark III to a IV... The IV is way easier to record and fits in a mix so well, while the III was a real bitch to record. If it wasn't too dark it was too bright. It's hard to capture what i'm hearing in the room, and no matter how I set the GEQ there was always some frequencies that bothered me. With the IV, it's just dial in a tone you like and press record and it usually sounds killer and sits in the mix well. That notorious midrange honk is much easier to dial out to.
Last edited:
thiswaythatway
Well-known member
My R2 cure is I use an ES5 instead of the stock foot switch. The ES5 changes channels but also switches in an OD pedal which makes R2 sound pretty awesome. Just as good as the crunch on the V.
ultimatemetalguitartones
Well-known member
exactly!!!
