Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

[decker]

Also James talk about the C+ as a ”thickener" on Classic Albums, if I remember correctly.

Yes, James said something about the "thickener" but he didn't tell if it was just one amp and one cab or the entire wall of sound just like for the left and for the right channels.

 

[JD]

Also James talk about the C+ as a ”thickener" on Classic Albums, if I remember correctly.

Yes, James said something about the "thickener" but he didn't tell if it was just one amp and one cab or the entire wall of sound just like for the left and for the right channels.

3 Tracks left, right and the thickener

 

[decker]

3 Tracks left, right and the thickener

Yes, the thickener is for the center (both sides).

 

[Audiokill]

I actually owned one of the factory produced C++ and it does in fact have a push pull middle.
When I purchased the amp I wasn't aware it was a C++ nor even knew it existed. I found out when I sent the amp in for service at Mesa.
Mike B called me with the information. He told me I had one of the original C++'s that were factory produced.

OK, I was just going off of what I was told on the phone the other day.

What the hell? I'm with you themisfit138. DaveP, you sure you understood Mike B. correctly? Because Mike Bendinelli, himself, specifically told me over the phone that NONE of the C++ amps he ever worked on were ever given a push/pull on the mid knob by him. Not one. After asking him about all the push/pull mid equipped C++ amps that I've seen or heard of online, he speculated that the push/pull mid pot installation on these amps must have been performed by someone outside of Mesa. Why would he tell misfit138 and me one thing and then tell you the complete opposite? Doesn't make sense.

 

[DaveP]

That's what Mike told me on the phone. He stated the amp was one of only a limited number that left that factory with that mod.
Mine had the push/pull middle control. He never brought up any mods or if it did or didn't have the push/pull added after the fact or not.
Usually he would being that to your attention. He didn't in my case. It still could have been added after the fact, anything is possible.

 

[GuitarPlayer]

Same here! Mike called me last year when I had it for service and explained he built my amp like a mark III meaning when I pull the mid pot I have an extra channel for lead. And yes he called my amp a c++ and put the marker on the back. If you want go ahead and call him and ask about the mark IIc ++ # 13882. Or give me your Facebook and I can send you pics and some demo videos.. By the way guys I just got a 60W mark IIc today and I'm not impressed. The IIc has good cleans but the crunch is pretty bad compared to my c+. I'm gonna have to shoot a video comparing the 2 before I have Mike B converte it to c+. Maybe this IIc is never going to be like the c++ I got here cause its not simul class but those are too much money now on days. I'm hoping this 60Watter becomes a sweet IIc+. I'm definitely gonna make sure yo get that v1.1 mod done cause the its annoying having to cranck the cleans on the c+. Anyone ever compared a 60w c+ to a simul-class?

 

[GuitarPlayer]

That's what Mike told me on the phone. He stated the amp was one of only a limited number that left that factory with that mod.
Mine had the push/pull middle control. He never brought up any mods or if it did or didn't have the push/pull added after the fact or not.
Usually he would being that to your attention. He didn't in my case. It still could have been added after the fact, anything is possible.

He told me the very same thing over the phone.. I have just discovered how to make use of it too lol.. It works best to play killswitch engage. I love that channel now ;-)

 

[decker]

Is it possible to achieve the sound of the IIC++ from a IIC+ putting some boost pedals or something else in front of the amp (before the input jack) or in the effect loop ?

What does the ++ mod change exactly ? The behaviour of the Volume 1 knob, the Master 1, the Lead Drive, The Lead Master ? All of them ? Other knobs too ?

Thanks.

 

[loylo69]

What does the ++ mod change exactly ? The behaviour of the Volume 1 knob, the Master 1, the Lead Drive, The Lead Master ? All of them ? Other knobs too ?

I believe that just a few people knows what exactly the ++ mod by MB consists in. I'm not sure you will find those information on the BBoard.
Personnally, I presume that the ++ mod consists in modding the architecture of the preamp circuit similar to what achieved for the R2 channel of the Mark III. It is mor complex than just "changing" the behaviour of a pot.
I wrote about my assumption on this post:
http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=68218&start=15#p469289

From the nature of the mod I supposed, you wouldn't have the exact same sound with a boost or an overdrive pedal in front of the IIC+.
But you may achieve the same kind of sound.

 

[decker]

Thanks for your abswer loylo69. Your link is very interesting too, I didn't see it.

 

[Markedman]

A few things....

The MKIIC+(++) are either 60w, 60/100w, or 75w Simul-Class. (or the Coli)

There were a few IIC++'s made (probably 5) that have a pull mid, which use a relay to switch between + and ++. This was done in development towards the MarkIII. Not all IIC++'s have the pull mid...and none of the ones modded later have the pull mid.

_________________
MESA/Boogie - Product Specialist/Customer Service - http://www.mesaboogie.com/US/info.html

I'd like this feature on my amp.

 

[decker]

What does the ++ mod change exactly ? The behaviour of the Volume 1 knob, the Master 1, the Lead Drive, The Lead Master ? All of them ? Other knobs too ?

I believe that just a few people knows what exactly the ++ mod by MB consists in. I'm not sure you will find those information on the BBoard.
Personnally, I presume that the ++ mod consists in modding the architecture of the preamp circuit similar to what achieved for the R2 channel of the Mark III. It is mor complex than just "changing" the behaviour of a pot.
I wrote about my assumption on this post:
http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=68218&start=15#p469289

From the nature of the mod I supposed, you wouldn't have the exact same sound with a boost or an overdrive pedal in front of the IIC+.
But you may achieve the same kind of sound.

Do you think the IIC++ is closer to the IIC+ or the III (blue stripe) ?

 

[loylo69]

Do you think the IIC++ is closer to the IIC+ or the III (blue stripe) ?

I don't think the ++ mod would make the IIC+ closer to the gain structure of the blue stripe III. IIC++ would have more gain than the IIC+, in the vein of the blue stripe being the gainest of the mark line. But the blue stripe is brighter, with high end sizzle. I feel the ++ mod bring more midrange gain.

If I'd have to look at a specific amp to compare what a IIC++ would sound like, it would be a no/black stripe III with Lead and R2 engaged.

 

[decker]

Thanks for your answer loylo69.

 

[decker]

Whatever the C++ mod is, it has nothing to do with any modification of the power amp section of the IIC+, that's it ?

 

[Elpelotero]

I just had my C+ modded to ++ a few months ago. It's basically just extra gain, no pull-pot where I can engage and disengage it. I live near the factory and have been by to speak with them about it. I'm not discrediting anyone with the Mid pull-pot, but this is simply my experience. Thankfully I have a V1 mod so I'm able to have independent channel master volumes. This helps a lot with keeping a nice clean channel despite the extra gain that is supposed to wreck the cleans.

 

[loylo69]

Have you seem the post by Authorited Boogie:

There were a few IIC++'s made (probably 5) that have a pull mid, which use a relay to switch between + and ++. This was done in development towards the MarkIII. Not all IIC++'s have the pull mid...and none of the ones modded later have the pull mid.

http://www.grailtone.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=49577#p469326

 

[decker]

Thanks for your answers guys.

I just had my C+ modded to ++ a few months ago. It's basically just extra gain

I would like to know how does it feel exactly when playing especially palm mutes on the low E string (0 ... 0 ...0 PM) : do you feel that the sound is much thicker ?

And what about chords, do you see a lot of differences in this case ?

 

[Elpelotero]

Thanks for your answers guys.

I just had my C+ modded to ++ a few months ago. It's basically just extra gain

I would like to know how does it feel exactly when playing especially palm mutes on the low E string (0 ... 0 ...0 PM) : do you feel that the sound is much thicker ?

And what about chords, do you see a lot of differences in this case ?

I'm able to get extra gain at lower volumes compared to before, however I still need to crank it to get a great sound. It takes all of the best sounds of the C+ and amplifies them. There is more of that creamy squishy goodness.

 

[decker]

Thanks for your answers guys.

I just had my C+ modded to ++ a few months ago. It's basically just extra gain

I would like to know how does it feel exactly when playing especially palm mutes on the low E string (0 ... 0 ...0 PM) : do you feel that the sound is much thicker ?

And what about chords, do you see a lot of differences in this case ?

I'm able to get extra gain at lower volumes compared to before, however I still need to crank it to get a great sound. It takes all of the best sounds of the C+ and amplifies them. There is more of that creamy squishy goodness.

OK, thanks for your answer Elpelotero.

One (last) question : does the Mark IIC++ have more or less gain than the Mark IV ?