Mark II C+ question

[adrenaline junkie]

I'm glad you found your grailtone in the MkIII, and have dialed it in to sound how you like compared to a MkIIC+. Personally, I doubt you'll find many people that will agree with you on coping an exact tone and feel but I doubt that's high on your priority list. :wink:

As far as the MKIIIC+ mod, it retains R2, and they ran out of C+ boards long ago otherwise they'd be able to use them to convert MKIIA's and MKIIB's. That's the reason they give for not being able to convert them, they don't have the boards. According to Mike B when I talked to him about converting mine, he said that the mods they do will get the tone of a MkIIC+ but the feel will still be a bit different because of the Transformers and a few other small details.

PTs have an effect on tone as well, that's why the 100. 105 and X101 all exhibit different qualities, and one of the reasons a MkIII has a different tone and feel is because it's got a much smaller PT. The Voltage may be the same, but it's still different. Marshall learned that the hard way in the 90's, now their new amps have gone back to having the large trannys.

As far as why they didn't go back to the MKIIC+ that's an easy one. Money. It was MUCH easier time wise, and monetarily to make MkIII's. Same reason Marshall dropped plexi panels, and then went to PCB. Easier to mass produce more amps, and do it cheaper to make more money. If you listen to one of the reissues, then a real plexi, you'll find a similar comparison with the MkIII and MKIIC+. Sounds pretty close, but not the same. IMHO of course. Also I'm not inferring that the MKIII is an inferior amp, Just that they're different, and my preference is the MKIIC+ by a slight margin. I'm hoping to pick up another MKIII this fall if the prices aren't too obscene.

 

[Nomad]

I disagree. Sorry. I dont however have all night to go down your post. Have a good evening.

 

[carlosasi]

Thanks Nomad for splainin your theory on the III and C+, I love your passion for the III it is a great amp but has to be different tonally than a C+, just has to. I just added a JAN Philips 12AX7WA in V3 for the lead channel and OMFG what a huge difference. That coupled with the STR420 in the middle power tube sockets and a JAN GE 5751 in V1. Now if I could remember to save the settings I had on the lead channel last night I will never need another amp. If the C+ is the Holy Grail then the III has to be the scene in Monty Python where Sir Gallahad found the castle with all the virgins.

 

[Nomad]

OK rather than me going back through the same points again I have a question.

In a Mark IIIC+ conversion if the PCB isnt being removed, R2 is left intact, and the Trannys arent changed then what pray tell are the components being changed? The only thing left is cap and resistor values and maybe a little minor cinfiguration change to a couple simple aspects of the circuit?

 

[adrenaline junkie]

OK rather than me going back through the same points again I have a question.

In a Mark IIIC+ conversion if the PCB isnt being removed, R2 is left intact, and the Trannys arent changed then what pray tell are the components being changed? The only thing left is cap and resistor values and maybe a little minor cinfiguration change to a couple simple aspects of the circuit?

BTW this is a simple ABC question with a simple answer. 8)

Just because they leave the board doesn't mean they don't completely rebuild part of it. Just like they do when they do a C to C+ mod. They also change them to Pentode or triode or whatever it is the MKIIC+ runs that the MkIII doesn't on some stripes. Also, one of the reasons they say the tone will be about the same but the feel is still different is because the transformers are different. I don't know what all they change I haven't had the mod done yet although I probably will when I get my next MKIII.

I really don't give a rats *** about the technical parts of it. What I do know is that both the MkIIC+ and MKIII are great sounding amps, that are very close to each other, but not exact no matter how hard you try to convince yourself. I've owned both, you've owned both, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

 

[Nomad]

10-4 On that. Though I dont ever remember saying anything about exact. When I said a dimes worth of difference I was speaking in a genrality though to put it more specifily how about $39.95 worth of cap and resistor values.

And yes a Bigger Tranny translates into harder less pliable tone on the C+'s part though. The Bigger the Iron the stouter and more rigid it is.

Like the difference bewtween a 65 Bassman and 65 Tremolux heads. One is 50 watts and one is 40 watts with about the only real difference is the Bassman has Bigger Trannys. Now play each and its easy to tell the difference. The Bassman has very little give and less breakup but when it does breakup it gets raunchy. The Tremolux is softer and more liquid when it breaks up and it breaks up sooner. Though those two amps are very very similar. About like the difference between a III and a C+. :lol:

 

[goodwill559]

great thread!