Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Mark I's, II's, III's and the almight IV

Moderators: Guitarzan, Grandor, ned, Platypus

GuitarPlayer
Mark I
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:12 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by GuitarPlayer » Sat Nov 29, 2014 3:13 am

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?
Mesa MarkII C++ Simul-Class GEQ
Mesa MarK IIC 60W GEQ
Sterling By Music Man JP100D
Blackstar 2X12 cab.
Tc electronic Flashback x4
Tc electronic Shaker Vibrato

GuitarPlayer
Mark I
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:12 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by GuitarPlayer » Mon Dec 01, 2014 9:36 pm

DaveP wrote: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 ;-)
Mesa MarkII C++ Simul-Class GEQ
Mesa MarK IIC 60W GEQ
Sterling By Music Man JP100D
Blackstar 2X12 cab.
Tc electronic Flashback x4
Tc electronic Shaker Vibrato

decker
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Fri Apr 24, 2015 7:52 am

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
Mark II
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by loylo69 » Fri Apr 24, 2015 9:27 am

decker wrote: 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.ph ... 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
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:10 pm

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

User avatar
Markedman
Donating Member
Posts: 1254
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, CT

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by Markedman » Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:50 pm

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.
JP2C, Mark llC++ DG, Mark IV-A/B.

decker
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:01 am

loylo69 wrote:
decker wrote: 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.ph ... 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
Mark II
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by loylo69 » Wed Oct 28, 2015 4:42 am

decker wrote:
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
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:06 pm

Thanks for your answer loylo69.

decker
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Wed Nov 04, 2015 5:14 pm

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

User avatar
Elpelotero
Road King
Posts: 4054
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 2:57 pm
Location: MIA, NYC, CA
Contact:

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by Elpelotero » Wed Nov 04, 2015 11:38 pm

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.
'92 Dual Recto Rev. D, Volume mod
'84 Mark IIC+ Coliseum
'85 Mark IIC++ DRG, V1 mod
Mesa Standard 4x12
1980's EV Thiele
Sold:
'92 Dual Recto Rev. C
'92 Dual Recto Rev. E
'05 Dual Recto 3ch
'84 Mark IIC+ DR
http://www.TheBoogieArchives.com

loylo69
Mark II
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by loylo69 » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:56 am

Have you seem the post by Authorited Boogie:
Authorized Boogie wrote: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/viewtopi ... 77#p469326

decker
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Fri Nov 06, 2015 5:59 am

Thanks for your answers guys.
Elpelotero wrote: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 ?

User avatar
Elpelotero
Road King
Posts: 4054
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 2:57 pm
Location: MIA, NYC, CA
Contact:

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by Elpelotero » Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:22 am

decker wrote:Thanks for your answers guys.
Elpelotero wrote: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.
'92 Dual Recto Rev. D, Volume mod
'84 Mark IIC+ Coliseum
'85 Mark IIC++ DRG, V1 mod
Mesa Standard 4x12
1980's EV Thiele
Sold:
'92 Dual Recto Rev. C
'92 Dual Recto Rev. E
'05 Dual Recto 3ch
'84 Mark IIC+ DR
http://www.TheBoogieArchives.com

decker
Mark I
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: Mark IIC++ Hetfield mod

Post by decker » Sat Nov 07, 2015 4:17 am

Elpelotero wrote:
decker wrote:Thanks for your answers guys.
Elpelotero wrote: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 ?

Post Reply