Acquired a IIC+... pics inside. Opinions?

The Boogie Board

Help Support The Boogie Board:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Freefall

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
87
Reaction score
0
I recently acquired another IIC+, a nice DR model. Pics are posted below. From my limited knowledge, OT and PT look proper for a simul. Any insight on the guts or anything else from the gurus among us would be greatly appreciated... thanks! :D

guts1.jpg

guts2.jpg

top2.jpg

top1.jpg

side.jpg
 
Could use a recap, otherwise, it looks clean to me. If you decide to send it in to Mike B, you might as well ask him to install porcelain sockets on the power board as well.
 
>Photi G< said:
Could use a recap, otherwise, it looks clean to me. If you decide to send it in to Mike B, you might as well ask him to install porcelain sockets on the power board as well.
The amp has a few (probably minor) issues, so it's definately headed to Mike B. The power tubes were a bit loose so he'll be looking at those sockets. I'm a tech noob... are porcelain sockets better?
 
Freefall said:
The amp has a few (probably minor) issues, so it's definately headed to Mike B. The power tubes were a bit loose so he'll be looking at those sockets. I'm a tech noob... are porcelain sockets better?

What kind of issues?

Yes, porcelain sockets are generally better. The preamp board has already been fitted with them, but they are essential in the power amp, because they prevent base arcing, and they handle heat better than teflon,plastic, and what you have here, which I believe is bakelite. Mesa has gone back and forth between plastic and porcelain. their early amps were all bakelite sockets, then with the IIC+, they started fitting porcelain thruought. They started using plastic sockets in the preamp again around 2003 because they can be sent through the wave solder machine, unlike porcelain. That's OK though, because porcelain is really important on the rectifier tubes, and power tubes because of the reasons I stated above, and they are still standard in those places.

BTW, is there chassis damage on this amp? the output transformer looks pretty mangled. Maybe someone just over-torqued the bolts though.
 
>Photi G< said:
BTW, is there chassis damage on this amp? the output transformer looks pretty mangled. Maybe someone just over-torqued the bolts though.

I torque bolts on diesel engines, with huge wrenches. That OT has taken a lick, at some point. It is probably working just fine, though.
 
Nice grab,

yeah mike b. will have it back to brand new in no time. He will suggest new sockets, change caps, a resistor here and there, check the tubes, optimize the tone, play test it and clean it up all around. I'm excited for you

scott
 
JOEY B. said:
>Photi G< said:
BTW, is there chassis damage on this amp? the output transformer looks pretty mangled. Maybe someone just over-torqued the bolts though.

I torque bolts on diesel engines, with huge wrenches. That OT has taken a lick, at some point. It is probably working just fine, though.
"Mangled" is definately not a word you want to hear when posting gut/chassis shots! :shock: :) I was wondering why the OT was leaning a bit toward the power tubes... hadn't checked my other C+ to compare. Funny thing is, the sheet metal under it and the OT itself don't really appear obviously bent.

The issues I mentioned probably have nothing to do with that, fortunately. The lead channel wasn't working right when I first tried the amp (no gain and loss of volume), but it started working later, and I think it may have just been a loose preamp tube. It sounds good. The lead master still isn't working either, and there's the usual noisy pots and jacks. I called Mesa prior to buying the amp and they said in all likelihood these should be minor problems. The seller's a nice guy (fellow board member) and I think we reached a fair deal on the price.

I already have the RMA number, so the amp's headed for Mike B tomorrow.
 
Hey, yeah, I was talking with the seller before it was posted on the board, but I was away, and he wouldn't ship it. He told me through email that it was checked a year ago and was supposed to be perfect. I asked him specifically about the tranny's, and he said he knew of no problems. He seemed like a great guy, but I as feeling like it may need work, even though advertised as in perfect condition. The last two IIC's I got needed 200 on top of the $400 and $350 to upgrade by mike b. But they are still cheaper than $1500 each for "brand new" from mike b. hands. So that's why I wasn't going to send my friend from philly to baltimore to get it. I had a feeling it would need a trip to mesa. But still a great deal. say 1500 plus 300 ship/work from mesa to total $1800 or so "brand new" DR IIC+. All in all you got a good deal. shouldn't cost more than 150 to 200 to get it perfect.

thanks for sharing

scott
 
I had pretty much planned on sending whatever C+ I bought to Mesa anyway, unless it had been there in recent years, so that wasn't a problem for me. It was nice to find a simul just 15 minutes from home.

With the OT leaning toward the power tubes a bit, is there any risk of unwated interference between the two?
 
I'm sure any extra interference will be minimal, but a tube shield would help that. do you have the 105 PT? Yeah, finding a IIC+ pop up for sale within 15 minutes is like winning the lottery. :)

scott
 
Yep, it has the 105PT (see pic). Good idea on the shield... haven't seen one for power tubes before.
 
Spoke with Mike B, and he said he'd probably be able to straighten the OT while it's at Mesa. He's the man 8) .
 

Latest posts

Back
Top