JP2C closer to a C++?

Discussion area for the new (and first) Signature Model from Mesa Engineering.

Moderators: Guitarzan, Grandor, ned, Platypus

User avatar
Audiokill
Mark II
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:07 pm
Location: Santa Clarita, California

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Audiokill » Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:18 am

Authorized Boogie wrote:That was directly FROM Mike Bendinelli!
My information is also directly from Mike Bendinelli. I asked him specifically about this very topic roughly 8 years ago. Mike was adamant that no C++ mod was ever made to be switchable, even the handful of production C++ amps he built. That's why I'm confused. However, please know that I'm not implying that I'm definitely right and you're wrong. I'm more than ok with being wrong, but after 8 years, I just want to put this to bed.
Elpelotero wrote:These are the notes I typed down last year as I spoke to Mike B. when he was doing my amp...
It (the C++ Mod) is not selectable via a push-pull pot or switch. Once it’s in, it’s in. However, Mike B. is able to remove it and bring the amp back to stock gain. It costs approx. $200 to have it put in.
This correlates with my 2008 phone call with Mike. It seems that Mike B. has told Elpelotero and I one thing, whereas you (Authorized Boogie) and kippiejr have clearly been told something different by Mike. That or somebody simply heard wrong. Again, I may very well be totally incorrect - you actually work at Mesa and I'm just a random guy - but the glaring discrepancy is still there for me.
Last edited by Audiokill on Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
IIC++ | III Red Stripe | Triaxis/2:90 | LSC

User avatar
Audiokill
Mark II
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:07 pm
Location: Santa Clarita, California

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Audiokill » Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:09 am

kippiejr wrote:...channel 3 (of the JP-2C) can be both C+ and C++ depending on gain setting and shred toggle.....
By the way, was there any source of info you could provide that confirms this? Or have you personally found that the JP-2C's shred mode sounds pretty spot on to your C++ amps? I'm really stoked about this actually being the case.

Or, could the JP-2C's shred mode simply be its own sound?

Thanks.
IIC++ | III Red Stripe | Triaxis/2:90 | LSC

kippiejr
Mark III
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:56 pm

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by kippiejr » Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:03 am

The shred mode per the manual says something about adding a bit more gain and other tonal properties. I don't have the manual in front of me right know. As well the 3rd channel is internally set at "1 more" than channel 2. So in theory lets say 9 and 9 per the original. Adding shred toggle to the equation puts its over they top. They don't mention the value of the shred knob. It gets into the C++ realms, but to me still a modern version with current production tubes. I am planning a era correct tube swap today to see if that gives me a more "aged" version. Maybe this is what a factory 1984 C+ sounds like. Who can remember what even happened back in 1984... wink wink.. Which leads right into the next paragraph..

As far as factory and switchable C++'s go, just remember back in the 80's and its quoted some where, " those where interesting times back then."

The C++ mod is "basically" and I use that word liberally, a clean boost into the front end at some point in the chain... Is the shred mode that, no, not a boost, but the result is more gain than a factory C+ can produce. I mean the ++ mod isn't some eye opening, tonal god of a mod. It just adds a but more gain than a factory C+ can do. Which is already more gain than anyone needs... :lol:

I can see for a fact that a switchable C++ is a heck of a lot of work internally, where as a "always on" C++ is not as bad. I don't think the master wants to go there anymore. After all, I am sure his bench is full with other projects anyway...

Mr chipmunk said to me once, "Kevin, just shut up and play the damn thing." so I pass this wisdom on....
"Gone to the Mark side of the force."

User avatar
Authorized Boogie
Mark IV
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:12 pm
Location: Petaluma, California
Contact:

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Authorized Boogie » Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:14 am

Audiokill wrote:
Authorized Boogie wrote:That was directly FROM Mike Bendinelli!
My information is also directly from Mike Bendinelli. I asked him specifically about this very topic roughly 8 years ago. Mike was adamant that no C++ mod was ever made to be switchable, even the handful of production C++ amps he built. That's why I'm confused. However, please know that I'm not implying that I'm definitely right and you're wrong. I'm more than ok with being wrong, but after 8 years, I just want to put this to bed.
Elpelotero wrote:These are the notes I typed down last year as I spoke to Mike B. when he was doing my amp...
It (the C++ Mod) is not selectable via a push-pull pot or switch. Once it’s in, it’s in. However, Mike B. is able to remove it and bring the amp back to stock gain. It costs approx. $200 to have it put in.
This correlates with my 2008 phone call with Mike. It seems that Mike B. has told Elpelotero and I one thing, whereas you (Authorized Boogie) and kippiejr have clearly been told something different by Mike. That or somebody simply heard wrong. Again, I may very well be totally incorrect - you actually work at Mesa and I'm just a random guy - but the glaring discrepancy is still there for me.
My information was directly from Mike B that I asked him to send me in an email so I could post his words. Thanks
MESA/Boogie - Product Specialist/Customer Service - http://www.mesaboogie.com/support/index.html

User avatar
Audiokill
Mark II
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:07 pm
Location: Santa Clarita, California

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Audiokill » Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:13 pm

Authorized Boogie wrote:My information was directly from Mike B that I asked him to send me in an email so I could post his words. Thanks
No need. I've derailed my own thread for quite long enough. Time for me to eat crow. :oops:

I talked with Mike again. He reluctantly admitted that there actually were some C++s made with the push/pull mid pot for switching between C+ and C++ modes, even mentioning kippiejr's amp as being among them. He doesn't like telling a lot of people about it because its a very time consuming, pain-in-the-butt job to do, which is why he may have been slightly less than forthcoming about it the last time he and I spoke. The master clearly doesn't want to go there anymore.

So yes, I was wrong. Boom, indeed.:roll:
I apologize to Authorized Boogie, kippiejr, and the 5 other switchable C++ owners out there for doubting you.
IIC++ | III Red Stripe | Triaxis/2:90 | LSC

kippiejr
Mark III
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:56 pm

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by kippiejr » Tue Apr 05, 2016 6:38 pm

Thank you, Mike swore me to secrecy. :lol: I was dying to tell.......
"Gone to the Mark side of the force."

User avatar
Elpelotero
Road King
Posts: 4055
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 2:57 pm
Location: MIA, NYC, CA
Contact:

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Elpelotero » Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:39 am

I thought I obsessed over details. You guys got me beat!
'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

User avatar
Audiokill
Mark II
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:07 pm
Location: Santa Clarita, California

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Audiokill » Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:50 am

Elpelotero wrote:I thought I obsessed over details. You guys got me beat!
Yeah, I am on this, but for good reason, I think. There are consequences to believing in things that aren't true - in this case, the spread of bad information can have an affect on an amp's resale value. And then there's the new discovery aspect - for example, if the mid push/pull had turned out to not be a C++ mod, then what is it? A mystery mod like that would be interesting to learn more about.
IIC++ | III Red Stripe | Triaxis/2:90 | LSC

Markedman
Donating Member
Posts: 1422
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, CT

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Markedman » Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:33 am

Back to the subject, hopefully the JP2C will arrive this week but I have my doubts from playing a mark V25 as to how close in tone it won't be. There was something missing that I get with my old amp. No matter where I set the gain or tone knobs or EQ I just couldn't get that warm tone. I ended up having nightmares about that little amp after a week of using it. With my new C++, I have to shut down at around 11:00 to let my family sleep. It's hard for me to get to sleep at night because I'm dreaming about playing just one note and holding it and the first thing I do when I get up is play for about 20 minutes before I go to work, I literally have been playing it at least five hours a day I love it so much and I play it in my dreams too. It dawned on me is that if I bought the JP2C it would just sit in the box, $2700 box. I got my C++ on a straight up trade and have sold enough gear and have my wife's blessing to buy the new amp, it goes against everything I've ever done in my selfish life. $2700.00 box? We'll see.
JP2C, Mark llC++ DG, Mark IV-A/B.

Markedman
Donating Member
Posts: 1422
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, CT

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Markedman » Mon Aug 22, 2016 8:39 pm

I would say the JP2C is much closer to a C++ than a C+ from what I've read and my own personal experience with all three amps. The C++ that I now own has an uncanny resemblance to my JP2C and it is simul-class, but the bark and the bite could not be closer. Right now, today, I've played both amps side by side and I could parallel the tone all the way throughout the different ranges from sparkly clean to full shred and it was spot on.
I have so much more experimenting to do with JP2C because so far I'm only really comfortable with channel 2 and GEQ1. When I have gigged with the JP2C, I have to radically change the settings on Ch. 1&3 plus GEQ2, so I end up pretty much living in ch. 2 most of the time, fiddling with the knobs on ch. 1&3 and sliders on GEQ2 all night without being happy with the tone. I'm not sure why they sound so different at shows than at practice or at home playing along to stuff? It's almost as if the tone on ch. 2 and GEQ1 can't be beat!
JP2C, Mark llC++ DG, Mark IV-A/B.

Markedman
Donating Member
Posts: 1422
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, CT

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by Markedman » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:51 am

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

User avatar
themisfit138
Mark III
Posts: 223
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:01 am

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by themisfit138 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:10 pm

I agree Markedman, the JP is really close in tone and attack to the C++. After playing around with the JP I can get an awesome "Justice" tone.
1985 Mark IIC++
1989 Mark III Blue Combo
1991 Mark IV Short Head

decker
Mark I
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:39 am

Re: JP2C closer to a C++?

Post by decker » Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:52 am

Elpelotero wrote:
Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:19 pm
These are the notes I typed down last year as I spoke to Mike B. when he was doing my amp...

C++ Mod:
o It is an extra Gain mod, wherein the Bass frequencies are cut out, and there are more upper mids put in. This allows you to dial the Bass and Mid knobs higher than normal (previously from 0 and 2 up to 3, 4, 5, etc). Having the EQ is essential if you do this mod, as it allows you to dial the bass back in that is being sucked out. On a Simul, some of the smooth rounded tone will disappear in favor of a more raw, hairy tone. It is not selectable via a push-pull pot or switch. Once it’s in, it’s in. However, Mike B. is able to remove it and bring the amp back to stock gain. It costs approx. $200 to have it put in.

I’ve just bought a IIC+ from a friend who owned it for ten years. So now I have the IIC+ and a JP2C. I love them both. I would like to have a IIC++ but I don’t want my IIC+ to be modded.

Reading this thread, I had an idea but I need some help : do you think it would be possible to have my IIC+ sounding like a IIC++ just using a parametric EQ in front of my IIC+ ? Elpelotero explained that the input EQ of the IIC++ is different from the input EQ of the IIC+ in that it had bass frequencies cut out and more upper mids. I could simulate that with a parametic EQ in front of my IIC and adjust the output level of the parametric EQ to have the appropriate gain.

The problem is : how to set exactly the paramétric EQ ? Should I cut everything before 80 Hz, 100 Hz or 200 Hz for exemple ? How can I boost upper mids, should I boost around 2 000 Hz with a shelving filter ?

To find the exact settings I need your help.

Have anybody tried to analyse the differencies between the input EQs of the IIC+ and the IIC++ ?

Post Reply