IIC+ - GEQ - Mesa Pedal or F n' C

[Crimson King]

I'm sticking with what I said, I thought the onboard GEQ sounded better than the boogie EQ in the loop (but using the loop was still very cool). I don't think the boogie EQ pedal has transistors in it like the onboard GEQ. The onboard sound sweeter to me. I wonder if anyone else has made the comparison? FWIW, I have 2 Boogie EQ pedals... so I do like them.

That's cool, but what you're saying seems inconsistent. You say the onboard is 100% better, but later say that the pedal is also very cool but just not as good. Not trying to nitpick, but either you're really into hyperbole or your tastes/opinions change by the minute. Also, they don't appear to match up with general recommendations out there that an EQ in the loop - much less a Mesa EQ - matches closely with the onboard GEQ.

Mesa has repeatedly told me and has posted on the web that it's the same EQ, using the same parts. In fact, they actively persuaded me to choose the cheaper pedal than paying more in retro-fitting my amp.

Finally, have you compared your GEQ equipped IIC+ with non-EQ model running the pedal in the loop? Given the noted differences between the EQ and non-EQ models, and the fact that you can't equate them by merely turning off the EQ, I think that's a more accurate comparison. Otherwise it's apples to oranges.

I was just trying to be more polite in my 2nd response. But, again, the onboard GEQ is yes, 100% better to me. BUT, it wasn't like the pedal EQ sucked. I just heard a big difference. If I had a choice, I would take the onboard GEQ 100% of the time over a non GEQ. There was a non GEQ 2C+ for sale on TGP for $800 last year and it sat for a long time. If I thought it sounded close with an EQ in the loop I would have bought it and enjoyed it.

I have spoken to someone at Boogie and they agreed with me that the pedal is NOT the same as the onboard GEQ. No need to have a pissing match about it though and I'm not going into my conversation about it.

I have not tried it through a non GEQ equipped 2c+. I only played one non GEQ 2C+ and I didn't like it.

Bottom line is if someone likes their amp with a EQ in the loop then that is great. No need to worry about what I think. 8)

Let's just say that as someone pricing out IIC+s deliverable to the western U.S. for the past 6 mos., you're totally wrong about price. Think I am wrong, go ahead and link one selling for less than $1,750.00.

Also, let's just say your opinion - which you are definitely entitled to - is almost totally anomalous to what almost all respected posters have previously written, what Mike B. personally has told me, what Doug W. wrote about in the MK V manual and what Mesa decided to do in designing the Mark IIC+ setting on the MK V.

But, whatever, it's cool. I just feel no need to spend $400/500 in retrofitting my amp when Mike B. personally told me the pedal is just as good. Hence, my question on whether the Mesa pedal is itself worth it over other options.

 

[psychodave]

That's cool, but what you're saying seems inconsistent. You say the onboard is 100% better, but later say that the pedal is also very cool but just not as good. Not trying to nitpick, but either you're really into hyperbole or your tastes/opinions change by the minute. Also, they don't appear to match up with general recommendations out there that an EQ in the loop - much less a Mesa EQ - matches closely with the onboard GEQ.

Mesa has repeatedly told me and has posted on the web that it's the same EQ, using the same parts. In fact, they actively persuaded me to choose the cheaper pedal than paying more in retro-fitting my amp.

Finally, have you compared your GEQ equipped IIC+ with non-EQ model running the pedal in the loop? Given the noted differences between the EQ and non-EQ models, and the fact that you can't equate them by merely turning off the EQ, I think that's a more accurate comparison. Otherwise it's apples to oranges.

I was just trying to be more polite in my 2nd response. But, again, the onboard GEQ is yes, 100% better to me. BUT, it wasn't like the pedal EQ sucked. I just heard a big difference. If I had a choice, I would take the onboard GEQ 100% of the time over a non GEQ. There was a non GEQ 2C+ for sale on TGP for $800 last year and it sat for a long time. If I thought it sounded close with an EQ in the loop I would have bought it and enjoyed it.

I have spoken to someone at Boogie and they agreed with me that the pedal is NOT the same as the onboard GEQ. No need to have a pissing match about it though and I'm not going into my conversation about it.

I have not tried it through a non GEQ equipped 2c+. I only played one non GEQ 2C+ and I didn't like it.

Bottom line is if someone likes their amp with a EQ in the loop then that is great. No need to worry about what I think. 8)

Let's just say that as someone pricing out IIC+s deliverable to the western U.S. for the past 6 mos., you're totally wrong about price. Think I am wrong, go ahead and link one selling for less than $1,750.00.

Also, let's just say your opinion - which you are definitely entitled to - is almost totally anomalous to what almost all respected posters have previously written, what Mike B. personally has told me, what Doug W. wrote about in the MK V manual and what Mesa decided to do in designing the Mark IIC+ setting on the MK V.

But, whatever, it's cool. I just feel no need to spend $400/500 in retrofitting my amp when Mike B. personally told me the pedal is just as good. Hence, my question on whether the Mesa pedal is itself worth it over other options.

I wish I had taken a screen shot of that original non GEQ 2C+ for sale for $800... I just didn't care about it. I am no longer a member on TGP, Otherwise I would search it out for you... of course I'm sure the thread is gone. I have no need to lie about it. I do wish now that I had bought it... I would have flipped it for almost a $1,000 profit. I won't make that mistake twice

No need to retrofit anything. If you're happy with your amp, that's great. 8)

 

[Crimson King]

By the way, to all considering the Mesa 5-Band pedal, the following link includes posts from the Mesa rep confirming the points that I mentioned - http://www.rig-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=152445. As mentioned this corresponds with what I was told by Mike B. and others at Mesa.

Now the question is what EQ out there - if any - potentially betters the Mesa?

 

[psychodave]

By the way, to all considering the Mesa 5-Band pedal, the following link includes posts from the Mesa rep confirming the points that I mentioned - http://www.rig-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=152445. As mentioned this corresponds with what I was told by Mike B. and others at Mesa.

Now the question is what EQ out there - if any - potentially betters the Mesa?

Can you open up your Boogie pedal and show me the transistors that are inside it that are the same as in the onboard GEQ? Of course this is a loaded question because the pedal doesn't use the same parts as the onboard GEQ... The transistors sound better to my ears than the Opamps, etc. Feel free to call up Boogie and ask them as well. Or ask some of the long timers here.

I still like the pedal though and as I mentioned before, I own two of them.

 

[Crimson King]

By the way, to all considering the Mesa 5-Band pedal, the following link includes posts from the Mesa rep confirming the points that I mentioned - http://www.rig-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=152445. As mentioned this corresponds with what I was told by Mike B. and others at Mesa.

Now the question is what EQ out there - if any - potentially betters the Mesa?

Can you open up your Boogie pedal and show me the transistors that are inside it that are the same as in the onboard GEQ? Of course this is a loaded question because the pedal doesn't use the same parts as the onboard GEQ... The transistors sound better to my ears than the Opamps, etc. Feel free to call up Boogie and ask them as well. Or ask some of the long timers here.

I still like the pedal though and as I mentioned before, I own two of them.

You're right Dave, and Boogie and Mike B. are wrong. It's all a lie - they are purposefully lying to the marketplace. It's a totally different pedal with totally different components, thanks Nancy Drew.

 

[psychodave]

By the way, to all considering the Mesa 5-Band pedal, the following link includes posts from the Mesa rep confirming the points that I mentioned - http://www.rig-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=152445. As mentioned this corresponds with what I was told by Mike B. and others at Mesa.

Now the question is what EQ out there - if any - potentially betters the Mesa?

Can you open up your Boogie pedal and show me the transistors that are inside it that are the same as in the onboard GEQ? Of course this is a loaded question because the pedal doesn't use the same parts as the onboard GEQ... The transistors sound better to my ears than the Opamps, etc. Feel free to call up Boogie and ask them as well. Or ask some of the long timers here.

I still like the pedal though and as I mentioned before, I own two of them.

You're right Dave, and Boogie and Mike B. are wrong. It's all a lie - they are purposefully lying to the marketplace. It's a totally different pedal with totally different components, thanks Nancy Drew.

lol. No need to get upset. Please don't think for one second I haven't discussed this in detail with the same people you have... :wink:

 

[Crimson King]

lol. No need to get upset. I'm just talking out of my ***... :wink:

Well, you've finally got one thing right on this thread!

Now back to my question - any EQ pedal/rack piece comparable priced that is better than the Mesa EQ?

 

[Markedman]

I'm curious enough now after reading this thread that I'm going to get one to try it in the loop and compare the two. It'll work with my Marshall hopefully.

 

[Rhoads]

Right now i use Furman PQ3 in the loop of my C+, it give me more control on the Mid and treble with a little bit of aggressiveness for the crunch.

 

[Crimson King]

Well, the Mesa 5-Band landed. I had ordered it along with a MXR 10-band to test against my current F n' C. The difference between the three is pretty stark, and I'm happy to report that the Mesa pedal is well worth the premium. In terms of tonality, I think I prefer the F n' C to the MXR. The MXR has more functionality, but it has this unavoidable artifact to its tone that can't be dialed out. I've heard others refer to it as "transistory" and that makes sense to me. It has since been returned.

The Mesa 5-Band on the other hand sounds awesome. It's almost virtually dead silent, as far as my ears can detect. Further, given it's focused frequencies and inherent Q ranges, it's easier to dial in than the F n' C. I'm tracking down another IIC+ - a recently converted DRG - locally and had the chance to play it this past weekend. Oddly enough, I think I prefer my 60w as it has more gain/sustain and a more immediate tone - I guess what others call "smooth" I tend to feel as being more "veiled". I understand all amps differ, so I digress... Nonetheless, they can both be setup to be remarkably similar (w/ presence having the largest effect). With the EQ engaged on both, they sound nearly identical when so set - definitely close enough to end the EQ hunt for me and call my purposes complete w/ the pedal. I will add, however, the pedal has a greater effect on tone than the onboard and its therefore easier to go overboard. Not sure if it's due to the slight difference in placement or not, but you can accomplish the same changes w/ the pedal as you can with the onboard but need to make only incrementally smaller changes.

Hopefully this proves helpful to others considering - the lay of the land has certainly changes with the introduction of this pedal.

 

[gts]

Also, let's just say your opinion - which you are definitely entitled to - is almost totally anomalous to what almost all respected posters have previously written, what Mike B. personally has told me, what Doug W. wrote about in the MK V manual and what Mesa decided to do in designing the Mark IIC+ setting on the MK V.

A little side track here not directly related to this threads subject:

Ok, Not to throw gasoline on a fire but there was substantial discussion about the Mk-V and its "IIC+" channel, and especially what Doug W. wrote.
The majority of those well schooled in C+ knowledge felt Doug was talking a bunch of smack/ crap, done solely for the purpose of marketing/ selling the Mk-V.
He lost a few levels of credibility within the Boogie Board community due to this.

Now back to our regularly schedule program; the discussion about the onboard GEQ, using an EQ pedal (Mesa's or other brands) with a C+

-------------

Btw CK I like your review (below) of the three EQ pedals. A very nice descriptive comparison.

Well, the Mesa 5-Band landed. I had ordered it along with a MXR 10-band to test against my current F n' C. The difference between the three is pretty stark, and I'm happy to report that the Mesa pedal is well worth the premium. In terms of tonality, I think I prefer the F n' C to the MXR. The MXR has more functionality, but it has this unavoidable artifact to its tone that can't be dialed out. I've heard others refer to it as "transistory" and that makes sense to me. It has since been returned.

The Mesa 5-Band on the other hand sounds awesome. It's almost virtually dead silent, as far as my ears can detect. Further, given it's focused frequencies and inherent Q ranges, it's easier to dial in than the F n' C. I'm tracking down another IIC+ - a recently converted DRG - locally and had the chance to play it this past weekend. Oddly enough, I think I prefer my 60w as it has more gain/sustain and a more immediate tone - I guess what others call "smooth" I tend to feel as being more "veiled". I understand all amps differ, so I digress... Nonetheless, they can both be setup to be remarkably similar (w/ presence having the largest effect). With the EQ engaged on both, they sound nearly identical when so set - definitely close enough to end the EQ hunt for me and call my purposes complete w/ the pedal. I will add, however, the pedal has a greater effect on tone than the onboard and its therefore easier to go overboard. Not sure if it's due to the slight difference in placement or not, but you can accomplish the same changes w/ the pedal as you can with the onboard but need to make only incrementally smaller changes.

Hopefully this proves helpful to others considering - the lay of the land has certainly changes with the introduction of this pedal.

 

[psychodave]

Let's just say that as someone pricing out IIC+s deliverable to the western U.S. for the past 6 mos., you're totally wrong about price. Think I am wrong, go ahead and link one selling for less than $1,750.00.

Here is someone selling a IIC for $875 or best offer on eBay... I bet he would take a lower offer of like $700. Buy it and send it to boogie. I bet your final cost will be below $1,750.

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&alt=web&id=121645986631

 

[Brad737]

I sent the seller an offer. Didn't accept.

 

[psychodave]

I sent the seller an offer. Didn't accept.

Someone snagged it...

 

[Crimson King]

I sent the seller an offer. Didn't accept.

Someone snagged it...

At full price too. I appreciate the help, PD, but we were talking about an original IIC+. I've seen a few deals on IICs as well, but for better or worse "originals" command a higher price in the market (regardless if they sound the same) even after the upgrade/maintenance fees.

That said, I was really tempted to send a $500.00 offer just to see what happened.

 

[psychodave]

I sent the seller an offer. Didn't accept.

Someone snagged it...

At full price too. I appreciate the help, PD, but we were talking about an original IIC+. I've seen a few deals on IICs as well, but for better or worse "originals" command a higher price in the market (regardless if they sound the same) even after the upgrade/maintenance fees.

That said, I was really tempted to send a $500.00 offer just to see what happened.

I was hoping someone here snagged it. I hear ya about original 2C+'s, but modded 2C's are just as good and if they can be had cheaper, more power to us. 8)

 

[sotosprince]

I have a IIc+ with no GEQ and a Mark III with. I've also owned other IIc+ amps fully loaded. I always come back to my 100 watt IIc+ with a reverb unit in the effects loop. I don't feel any need to have a GEQ on it. My Mark III is a different story, I am glad its there as it rounds out the amp quite nicely. Of course all this depends on that kind of music you are doing which is?????

HI there! I read your posts about having a non eq mark IIC+ and since I ve found one here in Europe which doesn't have the GEQ I was wondering if you could give me ur 2 cents. I also own a quad + 2:90 and I usually use a parametric eq to scoop the mids ala metallica. Do you think I should go for it ? I mean would I be able to just scoop the mids with my parametric eq for the old metallica sound or do you think I should look for one with the eq? Thank you!!