I have a decision to make. C -> C+ or C++?

[NewWorldMan]

I agree with everyone above that it's all preference in regards to PT. I've tried them all countless times over and (probably sounding like a broken record) kept a pair with 105s because I personally liked them best. I know people that swear by virtually all of them or did at some point in time.

 

[GJgo]

They all sound great and have small differences that set them apart. But the 3D high gain vintage yet modern tonal assault is there with any of the 3 variations. I played a Mark 3 with the 105 trans, wasn't even close in ANY way to my C+. It's the sum of all that goes in to a C+.

I agree. Lots of good word in this thread that I'm finding out for myself is all true. I actually just sold my III. In the $1000 range it's an epic amp no doubt, but in a room next to a C+ it gets left in the dust.

I have a friend that asked me to do a comparo where I slave the different preamps into the different power sections to see (mostly between the C+ and the JP2C) where the magic JuJu is, or if it's the sum of all parts. Have to read up on how to do this correctly.

 

[psychodave]

I agree with everyone above that it's all preference in regards to PT. I've tried them all countless times over and (probably sounding like a broken record) kept a pair with 105s because I personally liked them best. I know people that swear by virtually all of them or did at some point in time.

I agree as well.

Tubes make a difference as well. That's whay I pointed out using 415's in simul-class models.

 

[sg guy]

-is the graphic EQ part of the magic as well?.... Seems the non-EQ MK IIC's go for a lot less, I'm just looking at maybe getting a MK IIC and sending it to mesa for the + upgrade, or am I wasting my time and just buy a IIC+ with the factory graphic EQ and call it a day.

 

[Racerxrated]

-is the graphic EQ part of the magic as well?.... Seems the non-EQ MK IIC's go for a lot less, I'm just looking at maybe getting a MK IIC and sending it to mesa for the + upgrade, or am I wasting my time and just buy a IIC+ with the factory graphic EQ and call it a day.

I would always look for one with the GEQ, I've switched my EQ off and it's WAAY too honky. Maybe there are differences between one with the EQ and switching it off, and those that never had one...but if they are similar then I would never consider one without EQ.

 

[GJgo]

The new C++ sounds KILLER with the GEQ turned off. Surprisingly so compared to the other Marks I've had. That amp just flat kills.

I would not hesitate to get a non-GEQ model, you can easily throw a Mesa GEQ in the loop. Do not hesitate if you have an opportunity for any IIC or variant. For years I JUST HAD TO KNOW, now I do, and I totally get why guys drop the bucks on these amps. You will not be disappointed with any of them.

 

[psychodave]

The new C++ sounds KILLER with the GEQ turned off. Surprisingly so compared to the other Marks I've had. That amp just flat kills.

I would not hesitate to get a non-GEQ model, you can easily throw a Mesa GEQ in the loop. Do not hesitate if you have an opportunity for any IIC or variant. For years I JUST HAD TO KNOW, now I do, and I totally get why guys drop the bucks on these amps. You will not be disappointed with any of them.

I've never heard a non GEQ with an EQ in the loop sound as good as the onboard GEQ. I've used boogie GEQ's and it just falls very short. Just my .02.

 

[glip22]

The new C++ sounds KILLER with the GEQ turned off. Surprisingly so compared to the other Marks I've had. That amp just flat kills.

I would not hesitate to get a non-GEQ model, you can easily throw a Mesa GEQ in the loop. Do not hesitate if you have an opportunity for any IIC or variant. For years I JUST HAD TO KNOW, now I do, and I totally get why guys drop the bucks on these amps. You will not be disappointed with any of them.

I've never heard a non GEQ with an EQ in the loop sound as good as the onboard GEQ. I've used boogie GEQ's and it just falls very short. Just my .02.

I have a Boogie EQ and I cannot even get close with my IIC++ with it in the loop and my EQ off. With the EQ off theres a mid honk that I couldn't dial out with the EQ in the loop or out front. I tried both ways to see. I could make it work for cleaner tones but not with any amount of gain.

 

[Racerxrated]

^^Only way I'd buy one without the GEQ is if the price was WAAY below what a 2C+ with GEQ goes for. If it were priced similarly I'd just wait for one with EQ to show up.

 

[GJgo]

I was talking to Mike today about tubes with the 105PT & its 515 plate volts. He says the only tubes that Mesa has that hold up to that much juice are the STR-425 / 5881 and I haven't heard good things about their tone. Obviously most of you guys are using STR-415s or 6CA7s ($$$), which I assume are tough enough. For guys with 105PTs, what other tubes are able to hold up in this amp?

 

[NewWorldMan]

I was talking to Mike today about tubes with the 105PT & its 515 plate volts. He says the only tubes that Mesa has that hold up to that much juice are the STR-425 / 5881 and I haven't heard good things about their tone. Obviously most of you guys are using STR-415s or 6CA7s ($$$), which I assume are tough enough. For guys with 105PTs, what other tubes are able to hold up in this amp?

I'm using STR 415 & STR 416, but I honestly don't mind the STR 425. I used them in a Mark III for a long time and thought they worked well.

 

[psychodave]

The 425's are okay. A bit dark sounding.

I've had no issue using Sovtek 6L6WXT and WXT+'s in a Mark III coliseum with 525 plate volts.

 

[mxr2000]

And to further your confusion I found an original HRG for 1300 as my SRG was at Mesa for the + mod. Got the newly upgraded SRG back, and thought it was a bit hairier and more aggressive than the HRG. So I sold the original. Everyone, or at least many have the opinion that 'original' C+ sound better than upgraded Cs..that wasn't my experience at all. Go figure.

Maybe what your c+ needed was a recap and service..

 

[Racerxrated]

And to further your confusion I found an original HRG for 1300 as my SRG was at Mesa for the + mod. Got the newly upgraded SRG back, and thought it was a bit hairier and more aggressive than the HRG. So I sold the original. Everyone, or at least many have the opinion that 'original' C+ sound better than upgraded Cs..that wasn't my experience at all. Go figure.

Maybe what your c+ needed was a recap and service..

Nah, it was a killer sounding amp just like the 60w but the 60 was just a bit better to me, small difference really. Both were very close. I've talked to many guys that have owned over 10 C+, some were original and some were upgraded. Every one said the same thing..there were upgraded C+ that sounded better than originals, and the differences you hear were more related to the inherent differences in any 2 amps of the same model vs the original/upgraded debate.

 

[glip22]

And to further your confusion I found an original HRG for 1300 as my SRG was at Mesa for the + mod. Got the newly upgraded SRG back, and thought it was a bit hairier and more aggressive than the HRG. So I sold the original. Everyone, or at least many have the opinion that 'original' C+ sound better than upgraded Cs..that wasn't my experience at all. Go figure.

Maybe what your c+ needed was a recap and service..

Nah, it was a killer sounding amp just like the 60w but the 60 was just a bit better to me, small difference really. Both were very close. I've talked to many guys that have owned over 10 C+, some were original and some were upgraded. Every one said the same thing..there were upgraded C+ that sounded better than originals, and the differences you hear were more related to the inherent differences in any 2 amps of the same model vs the original/upgraded debate.

So hard to say with these. Mesa was known to have some odd values in different amps. Consistency only went so far. Pretty far but not perfect in these days with Mesa. You have to remember the period of time after the C+ came out. Mesa issued a return period on the IIC for an upgrade to C+. These IIC's were fashioned to exact IIC+ specs where they swapped the board of the C for a C+ board. They then left the factory exactly as a IIC+ accept they had the IIC transformer and C export tranny. The 100 US tranny and 101X export I think. These transformers are lower PV and give a saggier feel which some love,

 

[GJgo]

Do the 425s have that vintage grind or are they more sterile?

Anyone used these TAD 6L6? Looks like they are rated for the plate voltage.
http://www.thetubestore.com/lib/thetubestore/TAD-6L6GC-STR.pdf

 

[mojotone]

Maybe these tubes for new production units? I don't get why you are seeing 515v of plate voltage though.

https://www.tubedepot.com/products/tung ... acuum-tube

 

[rottingcorpse]

So much great tech talk in this thread. Thanks for the schooling!

Congrats on the monster of an amp.

 

[GJgo]

Alright guys, here it is!

http://www.rig-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=189378

 

[GJgo]

Hey guys, time for an update now that I've had the amps for a few months.

The C+ is a damn fine amp. Rich, harmonics, sustain, everything you've ever heard. It's great. but..

The C++ is THE BEST GOD DAMN TONE I'VE EVER HEARD. It blows my mind. It inspires me to play more. It makes me proud to play for others. When I plug it into my old 1960B I can't imagine ever wanting for anything else in a rig. Well, short of a good acoustic sound..

Comparing the two directly now, the ++ obviously has more gain but it's more than that. The character and 3 dimensionality is stronger, and it's not something you can replicate by boosting the +. Also, the ++ has slightly less mid presence all else equal. Both them are excellent in that they have no ear fatigue, which was a big problem I had with my IIIs.

So, I just sent the C+ back to Mike B. to add another plus. He told me he's actually done very few ++ upgrades to HRGs so it'll be a rare beast. I know this might seem silly to some, but the guy has to be retiring at some point & I don't want to miss the opportunity.