JP2C closer to a C++?

The Boogie Board

Help Support The Boogie Board:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Audiokill

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Location
Santa Clarita, California
Given that it's a John Petrucci signature amp, I would expect the JP-2C to feature a lead tone that is emulated after the C++ (aka Petrucci mod), which has more low-mids and gain than the standard C+ voicing. However, I haven't played a JP-2C yet to see how it compares tonally with a C++ or C+. Any thoughts, insight or informed opinions on this?
 
I was under the impression that the C++ mod is a metallica mod. The petrucci mod is a separate volume knob for the lead channel ...
 
Well, I've got a couple IIC+'s sitting right beside my JP-2C. Are they the same? No, but anyone who expects a modern reissue - even if it is spec for spec - to be exactly like a 30+ year old amp despite having multiple channels, newer components, tons of extra features, etc...will be sorely disappointed.

What I can say is that you can tell - without question- that the JP-2C is a IIC+ at its core. It's NOT just an expanded version of the Mark V's IIC+ mode. I can dial them in very close and it sounds very much like a IIC+, albeit a modern one.

For the IIC++, I don't have a direct comparison right now. Mike has a couple of my IIC's for a refresh right now (IIC++ included), but I'll give some comments when I get them back.
 
Silverwulf said:
Well, I've got a couple IIC+'s sitting right beside my JP-2C. Are they the same? No, but anyone who expects a modern reissue - even if it is spec for spec - to be exactly like a 30+ year old amp despite having multiple channels, newer components, tons of extra features, etc...will be sorely disappointed.
I'm not trying to rationalize anything here, but I wonder if 30 years of time might also be a differentiator. Probably not, or not much, it just crossed my mind when I was reading this, thinking about how guitar pickups can change over decades, for instance.

Silverwulf said:
What I can say is that you can tell - without question- that the JP-2C is a IIC+ at its core. It's NOT just an expanded version of the Mark V's IIC+ mode. I can dial them in very close and it sounds very much like a IIC+, albeit a modern one.
I have to say, those are some of the coolest words I've ever read on this forum. I know I love this amp, after 20 years of chasing tone it's the most satisfying and exciting amplifier I've ever played. Having never played a real C+ before, it's still neat to read these words from someone who knows the real deal.

I looked at some C+'s on eBay last night for the heck of it, and had found myself thinking "my C+ is newer, has a ton more features, and is in much better shape." I no longer felt as much of the reverence as I used to, it felt more like how I feel about my Mark III - a lot of appreciation, but also "man, this thing is really dated in a lot of ways."

Silverwulf said:
For the IIC++, I don't have a direct comparison right now. Mike has a couple of my IIC's for a refresh right now (IIC++ included), but I'll give some comments when I get them back.

I'm really interested in hearing what you think when you get yours back. Despite what I said about feeling like the original C+'s are starting to seem dated, I still do have a lot of respect for them. I'm interested to know how they compare in contrast in terms of tone and feel to you.

-Dan
 
C++ is the Hetfield mod. The Vol1 mod is the Petrucci Mod. I have a couple of C+'s that have both mods and switch between all three, one rare factory one and one Mike with a lot of convincing did for me. Which is basically what the JP-2C is now at 1/2 the price.. :lol: .. Channel 1 (petrucci mod) Channel 2 original C+ and Channel 3 (Hetfiled mod) C++. Although channel 3 can be both C+ and C++ depending on gain setting and shred toggle.....The beauty is the reissue has all that and much more.......
The C+ to C++ is not a crazy amount of gain difference because the C+ has that already. It just pushes it over the edge... :lol:
 
This is all quite interesting. I didn't realize that the Vol1 mod is also referred to as the Petrucci mod. To add further clarification (and also further bewilderment), I just found this post by jvk;
http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=32031

...and this post by deskman (12th post from the top);
http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12658

...and this post by Elpelotero;
http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=69422

It seems perfectly logical that Petrucci would own an assortment of C++s and Vol1 modded C+s, (likely even a couple amps that feature both mods together), thereby rendering the use of the name "Petrucci Mod" for either the Vol1 mod or C++ as technically correct, albeit very vague and confusing. The terminology should be specified as either "Vol1 mod" or "C++ mod". But yes, snorkel54, you're correct in that the Vol1 mod seems to exclusively be a Petrucci mod, as evidenced by photos of his Mk II amps all over the net.

However, I remain skeptical that the "Metallica mod" is a different thing from the C++ mod as jvk suggests. Hetfield has been interviewed talking about his beloved C++ (aka crunchberries), but I've never seen any evidence for the existence of a non-C++ Metallica mod anywhere.
 
kippiejr said:
C++ is the Hetfield mod. The Vol1 mod is the Petrucci Mod. I have a couple of C+'s that have both mods and switch between all three, one rare factory one and one Mike with a lot of convincing did for me. Which is basically what the JP-2C is now at 1/2 the price.. :lol: .. Channel 1 (petrucci mod) Channel 2 original C+ and Channel 3 (Hetfiled mod) C++. Although channel 3 can be both C+ and C++ depending on gain setting and shred toggle.....The beauty is the reissue has all that and much more.......
The C+ to C++ is not a crazy amount of gain difference because the C+ has that already. It just pushes it over the edge... :lol:
This is exactly what I've been wondering about the JP-2C. The Vol1 mod is obviously apparent due to the separate channel controls. But having the C+ and the C++ voicings available in one amp would be fantastic! If you don't mind me asking, is your assertion that the JP-2C's 3rd channel is switchable between C+ and C++ modes via Shred mode just a hunch like mine? Or is there really evidence that confirms this to be the case? :p
... Sh¡t. Just. Got. Real.

As for your C++ amps, are you saying that they can switch between C+ and C++ modes? And were modded by Mike Bendinelli? I've heard of C+'s with a "pull mid" that supposedly can do this very thing, but I remained highly skeptical after speaking to Mike about it. He told me directly, flat out, and under no uncertain terms that he has never, ever built or modded any C++ to be capable of doing this. :|
 
Audiokill said:
I've heard of C+'s with a "pull mid" that supposedly can do this very thing, but I remained highly skeptical after speaking to Mike about it. He told me directly, flat out, and under no uncertain terms that he has never, ever built or modded any C++ to be capable of doing this. :|
There was a thread and a specific post about this a little while ago.
Authorized Boogie said:
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.
http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=49577
 
These are the notes I typed down last year as I spoke to Mike B. when he was doing my amp...

C++ Mod:
• Many people confuse the ++ mod for different things:
o It’s not a Volume 1 mod, that is something else, wherein one of the front ¼” jacks are plugged up to be used as Volume knob for the dirty channel, giving the amp 2 true separate channel volume knobs and a master volume knob.
o It’s not an “R2” mod, to make it more akin to a Mark3, selectable via a push-pull knob. There are some factory C+’s done this way, as this was something Randy and Mike B. were doing almost as a prototype for the Mark3 (which has 3 channels). It basically gives a boost to the clean channel to give it some crunch, essentially turning a C+ into a 3 channel amp of sorts.
o It’s not a Bright Reduction mod, which is very common on Simul heads to help round them out.
o It’s not the Mark 3+ mod, either. This is a mod wherein a Mark3 has some of its specs changed to reflect a C+. It will sound very close, but not 100% like a real C+.
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.
 
Authorized Boogie said:
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 said:
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.
 
kippiejr said:
...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.
 
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 **** thing." so I pass this wisdom on....
 
Audiokill said:
Authorized Boogie said:
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 said:
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
 
Authorized Boogie said:
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.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top