Mesa boogie mkiic+ kit

[Dbyer1]

Has any one built one and what did you think of it

 

[SonicProvocateur]

No, and I doubt we/anyone will.

A) we are protective of our secret tones. B) Mesa's simulclass technology is patented. C) What makes the C+'s tone and "mojo" isn't just a cold diagram of it's circuits but it's selection of parts and it's tedious selection of components and the transformers are no longer available. Imagine getting a Soldano without Deyoung tranny's. It just isn't the same.

C) Bugera (of all people) are trying very hard to release a (poor) copy of the Mark IV. It will doubtfully ever be released here in the US because Mesa has a very firm and obvious patent on it's simulclass technology and it's circuits. D) a forum member here made a clone of the lead only circuit of the IIC+ but utilizing only part of the required preamp cascades and torroidal transformers, it hits the mark no more than a Mark III does.

 

[chipaudette]

Not that I disagree with your overall assessment, but the patent argument isn't true anymore. Yes, simul-class is patented, but its filing date was 1985 and its issue date was 1986. If you believe Wikipedia, the term of US patents is about 20 years, so this technology is now off patent.

Similarly, the "dual mode instrument preamplifier" (ie, channel switching) was filed in 86 and granted in 87, so that's off patent too.

So, in my estimation (though I'm no legal guy), the technology in the Mark IIC+ is no longer patented. You can't clone the original PCB traces (that would break copyright on the PCB "art") but you can recreate the circuitry itself using your own PCB art. The hard part, though, would be getting the more unique components within the amp...and I'm mainly talking about the simulclass transformers. You could get someone to wind you some simulclass transformers, but it ain't gonna be cheap...'cause your market is going to be pretty small.

Chip

 

[Dbyer1]

Thinking that I would a mark preamp section with el83 output section

 

[RR]

My buddy build a Mark II preamp section with a EL84 power section. It sounds pretty good.

 

[SonicProvocateur]

Schumacher still makes transformers, but I have no idea what the winding/build specs are on the transformers and again, I am 99.9% certain Randall isn't just isn't going to give that info out to have custom transformers built. Now, I dunno if a IIC+ has ever had to have a factory replacement around here lately, but it wouldn't be a Schumacher.

Thats a good point though, Chip about the fact that the IIC+ has hand drawn traces. I didn't even think about that. I've always thought that accounted for some of the tone differences between the Mark III and the IIC+. Alot of early effects pedals (my EH Electric Mistress comes to mind) similarly has the same thick hand drawn traces and sounds much better than the newer thin straight looking traces.

 

[Boogiebabies]

I have the specs to the Simul OT and 105 PT, but unless you have a TON of time and a C+ to sacrifice in order to draw the exact board on the exact material it won't sound right.
According to some, Tony Stark has the corner of the palladium market sewn up, so the OT won't sound right....

I have hunted down Mallory tantalum caps, Hermetically sealed Kemet .47 and .22 cathode caps, beyschlag resistors and god knows what else. I still don't feel the work would warrant an exact representation. It may to me, but try getting fourty helen's to agree.

As for the Soldano, I totally agree. There are poor schmucks paying 2K for a clone when you can actually get a real one for 2K. Comparing a clone with Onetics to my 93' SLO was a joke. Not even in the same zip code.

 

[ochrisl]

If Mesa themselves can't reproduce it accurately like they tried to on the Mark V how the hell is anyone else going to do it?

 

[JOEY B.]

If Mesa themselves can't reproduce it accurately like they tried to on the Mark V how the hell is anyone else going to do it?

OUCH!!!

 

[D2dark]

Even if mesa can reproduce it, why would they? I think the fact that you can't have one anymore add to the magic

 

[Dbyer1]

There are people that make the boards if you did not do the simulcasts you could get close

 

[fretout]

IMHO, I would love to see Mesa make an exact reissue of the reissue, but I can see pros and cons to it.

First the pros. Mesa knows it would sells tons of a C+ reissue. That's why they attempted to get so close to it on the Mark IV (they duplicated the Mark IIC Lead curcuit), and they added a C+ mode on the Mark V. Also, if they worked with some of the original suppliers to make exact replicas of the transformers, Caps, ect., it would definitely give the parts suppliers a decent bump in product sales. So, overall, guitarists win with an exact reissue, Mesa wins since they sell a ton of units (provided the price point is fair), suppliers win with increased demand. Sounds like a good deal, right?

The cons. If Mesa did an exact reissue of the C+, which would they choose? The have long heads, short heads, simulclass, export Trannys, ect. Quite a few options to choose from. Now, if memory serves me correctly, they based the C+ mode in the Mark V off Doug West's non-GEQ C+ because they favored its tone over the other C+s, and the non-GEQs have different caps on the tone circuit. In short, purists will always say the originals always sound better, even if the reissue 100% correct, but it most likely never would be. Some of the original suppliers are no longer in business, therefore, you could have another company make an exact duplicate of say the original STRs for example, but I have a suspicion that no matter if it's a perfect match, there would always be some skepticism that brings attention back to the original C+s on the used market.

Also consider Mesa's business model of "always moving forward" (not necessarily always improving). The reason why there are few C+s in the first place was because Randall saw the Mark III as superior to the C+ and rushed it out as soon as he could. I love my Mark IIIs, but it seems unanimous that the feel of the C+ is somehow missing, even though, at least in theory, a 3 channel amp with the C+ design would seem like a huge improvement. Even though Mesa knew they had something special with the C+, they wanted to make it better. I think you can see their efforts to move forward with the C+ as the definitive "Mark tone" since the revisions on the Mark III feature a preamp and power amp attempt to go back to the C+ in the Red and Blue Stripes. I just don't see Randall doing a reissue because the guy always wants better, and I can appreciate this mindset with Mesa. I think all Marks going will always be (at least in theory) a step closer at getting the C+ feel back into a Mark, but it will need to be an advancement in the amp itself.

With the inavailability of certain components, I highly doubt Mesa could keep a decent price point to accurately reissue a true C+. Parts aren't available anymore, and they were critical to retain the feel of the C+, and while it's possible to reverse engineer any of the components, what would they cost? I think a true reissue would make the going rates for C+ on the used market look like a bargain.

So, while I would love to own a C+, unless I can find one on the used market at the current price point, I think we could only look to Mesa to release a Mark VI, Mark VII, ect., that finally nails the feel of a real Mark IIC+. A reissue would be priced too high, and Mesa wouldn't take a step back just to "risk" naysayers making claims that the reissue is off by .001%, so it's inferior to the original.

Just my long winded .02, but the topic seems to come up ever couple of months, so it seemed like a good time to chime in...

 

[JOEY B.]

The only way to shed off a "naysayer" is to put out a complete reissue. The Sylvania tubes would be a *****, but the other things could happen, if needed.

 

[fretout]

The only way to shed off a "naysayer" is to put out a complete reissue. The Sylvania tubes would be a *****, but the other things could happen, if needed.

I agree with you, it is possible, but I think the price to build would be too high, especially if you had to request manufacturers to build specific components of another out-of-business manufacturer. I think the final product would be much higher than the originals sell for.

It seems like a perfect-to-spec Mark IIC+ would have some consumer demand outside of just M/B's requirements. What if there was an exact replica of a Mark IIC+ export tranny? I could see some people upgrading...

 

[Elpelotero]

I think if people are still talking about having a reissue, then it means Mesa has been unsuccessful in recreating that elusive tone in the III, IV, and V.

 

[stokes]

Dont understand why there is this big internet mystique about the simul OT.It is just an ultra-linear OT with the taps that would be used for the screens attached to a seperate pair of output tube plates.I'm no patent attorney,but I'm sure there are ways the lawyers at Mesa could have thier patents extended.In my view Mesa has always been almost abusive with the patents.They've spent years patenting circuits that have been around since tube technology has begun.

 

[okgb]

One of the things about the IIC is the way the lead drive is broken up between two different tubes
one of which also handles the reverb , could it make a difference ? is this the only amp they did that in ?

 

[kdorsey]

One of the things about the IIC is the way the lead drive is broken up between two different tubes
one of which also handles the reverb...

Doug Sewell over at PRS is using the same technique on a couple of his amp designs to squeak out a little more gain. Since the other half of the reverb tube is unused, why not? It's not exactly a secret weapon, but instead of loading an extra tube, just use the part that's just sitting there. That's economical circuit design.