Paging Danyeo and Other IIC+ Experts....

[Larks' Tongue]

Recently picked up a factory IIC+ and was simply floored by how good it is. Perhaps it's just the honeymoon phase, but it's totally drubbed any other amp that I've had the pleasure of owning/playing/etc. (won't name as to not offend).

Now the thing is, it's a 60 watt with a Mesa EQ being used at the end of my loop's chain. The amp is too middy on the lead channel not to use an EQ, so I understand the sentiment that an EQ is needed. However, I'm not sure if it strictly needs to be a Mesa onboard GEQ or if one in the loop would be indistinguishable (particularly with the release of the Mesa 5-band pedal). To this end, I have the chance to add the EQ but Mike recommends against it and, frankly, I don't necessarily want to butcher an original factory model while spending an extra $500 on top of the pedal.

Beyond the EQ issue, I would also appreciate any perspectives on how different a Simulclass model sounds compared to a 60. Are we talking night/day differences, or differences largely premised on internet hyperbole. In all honesty, I'm particularly baffled since people describe Simulclass IIC+s as being smoother while also stating that its brighter - which, to me, is a bit of a contradiction. This, of course, also doesn't further account for the changes in tone when running out of the 4 ohm outputs rather than 8 (which on the 60 and 100/60 is supposed to replicate the Simulclass tonality).

Thanks for any help.

 

[steve_k]

A IIC+ without the GEQ and using a 5 band EQ in the loop will never sound near the same as one with the GEQ. This is because the GEQ is in the mixer circuit of V2 prior to the tone stack. In the loop, you EQ is coming after the tone stack.

A 100 watt SC will sound bigger right off the bat than the 60 watt. Soon as you turn the amp on you will notice the difference. The SC amps are class A/B on the inner pair and the outers are class A triode.

There is a bit of difference in the 100w and the 105 transformers. The 105 of course puts out more plate voltage which will make it harder hitting and a little more head room. The 100 is a bit smoother and I think a little more gain than the 105. But, the difference is not much.

MB cannot make your amp a GEQ model because there are no more face plates for the conversion.

The IIC+ is an amazing amp, especially if you have a loaded one. If you like the amp, I would suggest you look around and get one fully loaded. The difference in it and what you have now is astounding. I know, because I own 4 of them and one is a 60 watt, one 100 and 2 are 105's.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

 

[glip22]

A IIC+ without the GEQ and using a 5 band EQ in the loop will never sound near the same as one with the GEQ. This is because the GEQ is in the mixer circuit of V2 prior to the tone stack. In the loop, you EQ is coming after the tone stack.

A 100 watt SC will sound bigger right off the bat than the 60 watt. Soon as you turn the amp on you will notice the difference. The SC amps are class A/B on the inner pair and the outers are class A triode.

There is a bit of difference in the 100w and the 105 transformers. The 105 of course puts out more plate voltage which will make it harder hitting and a little more head room. The 100 is a bit smoother and I think a little more gain than the 105. But, the difference is not much.

MB cannot make your amp a GEQ model because there are no more face plates for the conversion.

The IIC+ is an amazing amp, especially if you have a loaded one. If you like the amp, I would suggest you look around and get one fully loaded. The difference in it and what you have now is astounding. I know, because I own 4 of them and one is a 60 watt, one 100 and 2 are 105's.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

End of thread
Great first post and welcome.

 

[Heritage Softail]

Steve advised me in a similar way in the past and I bought a loaded simulclass model.

Awesome amp with a surprisingly great clean channel as a bonus.

 

[Racerxrated]

Great info. I had a loaded MKIII long head and liked it. I turned the GEQ off and tried running an eq through the loop to see if I could duplicate the sound of the amp with the GEQ on. No chance, and I tried a number of eq pedals, and a rack mount / parametric that I have lying around. Reason being there have been 2 MKIIC+ combos available, but without the GEQ. Neither were SC either. But that onboard GEQ was so important to getting that mid honk outta there that I passed on the MKIIC+ without the eq. But, it sounds like you enjoy yours......

 

[cardinal]

I always ended up turning the GEQ off when playing a Mark. Just too much to fuss over and the amp sounds great without it once your ears adjust to not having the bass overhyped IMHO.

 

[thegame]

A IIC+ without the GEQ and using a 5 band EQ in the loop will never sound near the same as one with the GEQ. This is because the GEQ is in the mixer circuit of V2 prior to the tone stack. In the loop, you EQ is coming after the tone stack.

I may not be comprehending this correctly. I've always understood the Mark series have the B/M/T tone stack before the gain stages, Fender style. So are you saying the built in GEQ affects the signal even before the B/M/T tone stack ? Or perhaps its more complicated and some of the effected GEQ signal occurs between some gain stages (between V1 & V2) and the rest down the line so to speak ? I do agree an outboard EQ is never as powerful as the built in GEQ & I've experimented ad nauseam with that.

 

[Larks' Tongue]

A IIC+ without the GEQ and using a 5 band EQ in the loop will never sound near the same as one with the GEQ. This is because the GEQ is in the mixer circuit of V2 prior to the tone stack. In the loop, you EQ is coming after the tone stack.

A 100 watt SC will sound bigger right off the bat than the 60 watt. Soon as you turn the amp on you will notice the difference. The SC amps are class A/B on the inner pair and the outers are class A triode.

There is a bit of difference in the 100w and the 105 transformers. The 105 of course puts out more plate voltage which will make it harder hitting and a little more head room. The 100 is a bit smoother and I think a little more gain than the 105. But, the difference is not much.

MB cannot make your amp a GEQ model because there are no more face plates for the conversion.

The IIC+ is an amazing amp, especially if you have a loaded one. If you like the amp, I would suggest you look around and get one fully loaded. The difference in it and what you have now is astounding. I know, because I own 4 of them and one is a 60 watt, one 100 and 2 are 105's.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

Thanks for your reply, but some of your points are not at all accurate. First of all, Mesa can still add the GEQ, that is if you want a late Mark III faceplate. Second of all, an EQ through the loop is 100% after the tone stack. The difference being that the EQ through the loop is at a point before the master volume, with the latter being after the master volume (itself being a parallel route starting at the end of V2). The biggest practical difference between them is how they feed the reverb circuit, with the EQs in the loop being able to push them a bit harder for a wetter tone. Also, to be clear, Mesa themselves advised that the two would be essentially indistinguishable sonically when using the 5-band outboard pedal.

 

[Larks' Tongue]

Great info. I had a loaded MKIII long head and liked it. I turned the GEQ off and tried running an eq through the loop to see if I could duplicate the sound of the amp with the GEQ on. No chance, and I tried a number of eq pedals, and a rack mount / parametric that I have lying around. Reason being there have been 2 MKIIC+ combos available, but without the GEQ. Neither were SC either. But that onboard GEQ was so important to getting that mid honk outta there that I passed on the MKIIC+ without the eq. But, it sounds like you enjoy yours......

Without a doubt, the EQ is what makes the lead channel useable to me. That said, I'm not sure if you had the chance to try the Mesa 5-band as an outboard - those frequencies and Q ranges make a difference, definitely over the MXR. Also, the fairer comparison is to try a non-GEQ model with the EQ in the loop against a onboard-GEQ model. The onboard GEQ models use a parallel structure with the EQ always effecting tone to some degree.

 

[Larks' Tongue]

A IIC+ without the GEQ and using a 5 band EQ in the loop will never sound near the same as one with the GEQ. This is because the GEQ is in the mixer circuit of V2 prior to the tone stack. In the loop, you EQ is coming after the tone stack.

I may not be comprehending this correctly. I've always understood the Mark series have the B/M/T tone stack before the gain stages, Fender style. So are you saying the built in GEQ affects the signal even before the B/M/T tone stack ? Or perhaps its more complicated and some of the effected GEQ signal occurs between some gain stages (between V1 & V2) and the rest down the line so to speak ? I do agree an outboard EQ is never as powerful as the built in GEQ & I've experimented ad nauseam with that.

The onboard GEQ takes the signal from V2 and runs it parallel to the phase inverter.

 

[Larks' Tongue]

A IIC+ without the GEQ and using a 5 band EQ in the loop will never sound near the same as one with the GEQ. This is because the GEQ is in the mixer circuit of V2 prior to the tone stack. In the loop, you EQ is coming after the tone stack.

A 100 watt SC will sound bigger right off the bat than the 60 watt. Soon as you turn the amp on you will notice the difference. The SC amps are class A/B on the inner pair and the outers are class A triode.

There is a bit of difference in the 100w and the 105 transformers. The 105 of course puts out more plate voltage which will make it harder hitting and a little more head room. The 100 is a bit smoother and I think a little more gain than the 105. But, the difference is not much.

MB cannot make your amp a GEQ model because there are no more face plates for the conversion.

The IIC+ is an amazing amp, especially if you have a loaded one. If you like the amp, I would suggest you look around and get one fully loaded. The difference in it and what you have now is astounding. I know, because I own 4 of them and one is a 60 watt, one 100 and 2 are 105's.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

End of thread
Great first post and welcome.

Thanks for the welcome!

 

[Racerxrated]

Great info. I had a loaded MKIII long head and liked it. I turned the GEQ off and tried running an eq through the loop to see if I could duplicate the sound of the amp with the GEQ on. No chance, and I tried a number of eq pedals, and a rack mount / parametric that I have lying around. Reason being there have been 2 MKIIC+ combos available, but without the GEQ. Neither were SC either. But that onboard GEQ was so important to getting that mid honk outta there that I passed on the MKIIC+ without the eq. But, it sounds like you enjoy yours......

Without a doubt, the EQ is what makes the lead channel useable to me. That said, I'm not sure if you had the chance to try the Mesa 5-band as an outboard - those frequencies and Q ranges make a difference, definitely over the MXR. Also, the fairer comparison is to try a non-GEQ model with the EQ in the loop against a onboard-GEQ model. The onboard GEQ models use a parallel structure with the EQ always effecting tone to some degree.

No I didn't try the Mesa eq pedal. Just a Boss, Danelectro, and a couple rackmounts including a parametric. Thought about it but didn't pull the trigger. Those loaded IIC+ amps are out of my price range. So Mesa CAN put a GEQ in a non eq IIC? Interesting....it would be worth it even if it had a MKIII faceplate.

 

[Larks' Tongue]

Great info. I had a loaded MKIII long head and liked it. I turned the GEQ off and tried running an eq through the loop to see if I could duplicate the sound of the amp with the GEQ on. No chance, and I tried a number of eq pedals, and a rack mount / parametric that I have lying around. Reason being there have been 2 MKIIC+ combos available, but without the GEQ. Neither were SC either. But that onboard GEQ was so important to getting that mid honk outta there that I passed on the MKIIC+ without the eq. But, it sounds like you enjoy yours......

Without a doubt, the EQ is what makes the lead channel useable to me. That said, I'm not sure if you had the chance to try the Mesa 5-band as an outboard - those frequencies and Q ranges make a difference, definitely over the MXR. Also, the fairer comparison is to try a non-GEQ model with the EQ in the loop against a onboard-GEQ model. The onboard GEQ models use a parallel structure with the EQ always effecting tone to some degree.

No I didn't try the Mesa eq pedal. Just a Boss, Danelectro, and a couple rackmounts including a parametric. Thought about it but didn't pull the trigger. Those loaded IIC+ amps are out of my price range. So Mesa CAN put a GEQ in a non eq IIC? Interesting....it would be worth it even if it had a MKIII faceplate.

I was there last week and my amp is still with them and they were pushing hard against it - very hard. Mike B. said it would make an absolutely nominal difference soundwise and was not worth it - also, not the first time he told me this. Trust me, I went in there with full confidence that I was going to get it added, but the guy was adamant and knows infinitely more about IIC+s than I do.

By the way, check out the pedal from Sweetwater if you can. It's great, and definitely does sound different/better than what I've tried.

 

[Tone Monster]

Yes they can still add the GEQ. I owned a IIC+ with said Mark III plate.

 

[Racerxrated]

Great info. I had a loaded MKIII long head and liked it. I turned the GEQ off and tried running an eq through the loop to see if I could duplicate the sound of the amp with the GEQ on. No chance, and I tried a number of eq pedals, and a rack mount / parametric that I have lying around. Reason being there have been 2 MKIIC+ combos available, but without the GEQ. Neither were SC either. But that onboard GEQ was so important to getting that mid honk outta there that I passed on the MKIIC+ without the eq. But, it sounds like you enjoy yours......

Without a doubt, the EQ is what makes the lead channel useable to me. That said, I'm not sure if you had the chance to try the Mesa 5-band as an outboard - those frequencies and Q ranges make a difference, definitely over the MXR. Also, the fairer comparison is to try a non-GEQ model with the EQ in the loop against a onboard-GEQ model. The onboard GEQ models use a parallel structure with the EQ always effecting tone to some degree.

No I didn't try the Mesa eq pedal. Just a Boss, Danelectro, and a couple rackmounts including a parametric. Thought about it but didn't pull the trigger. Those loaded IIC+ amps are out of my price range. So Mesa CAN put a GEQ in a non eq IIC? Interesting....it would be worth it even if it had a MKIII faceplate.

I was there last week and my amp is still with them and they were pushing hard against it - very hard. Mike B. said it would make an absolutely nominal difference soundwise and was not worth it - also, not the first time he told me this. Trust me, I went in there with full confidence that I was going to get it added, but the guy was adamant and knows infinitely more about IIC+s than I do.

By the way, check out the pedal from Sweetwater if you can. It's great, and definitely does sound different/better than what I've tried.

Really? It made a HUGE difference in the MKIII I had when I switched the EQ on/off. Even after re-eq ing, it wasn't close. Had to have it on.

 

[cardinal]

No, he's saying you couldn't tell the diff between an on-board GEQ and the new Mesa GEQ pedal. I think.

 

[Larks' Tongue]

No, he's saying you couldn't tell the diff between an on-board GEQ and the new Mesa GEQ pedal. I think.

Yeah, exactly. I'm sure the Mesa rep will chime in soon enough, but they use the same bits and pieces as the onboard GEQ now and even increase the voltage internally to operate exactly like the onboard. Again, the lead channel is almost unusable to me w/o an EQ, but with it on, it's the best lead tone I've ever heard/played. Mike B. did say that the 60W transformers are particularly sweet in terms of single note tones, especially against the 105, and I have no reason to disagree with him (I have tried a 105 btw).

 

[Racerxrated]

OK. So the Mesa pedal EQ, through the loop, is very close to having the GEQ installed? I thought the placement of the loop versus where the GEQ is in the circuit would make that impossible? Maybe I'm reading something wrong...

 

[Larks' Tongue]

OK. So the Mesa pedal EQ, through the loop, is very close to having the GEQ installed? I thought the placement of the loop versus where the GEQ is in the circuit would make that impossible? Maybe I'm reading something wrong...

As explained to me by Mike, yes, it'll be very close and not worth hacking up the amp. The difference between the loop and the onboard is the fact that the onboard is parallel and runs past the master volume into the P/I. An EQ into the loop runs into the master volume. Again, I heard that the only noticeable effect is how it impacts the reverb...

The problem at first was the fact that no EQ pedal had the same frequencies and Q ranges, unless running a para (which again is different). Now that the same EQ is out, it's turned into an issue of placement. I had cash in hand ready for Mesa to do the install and was talked out of it. It goes to my point of Internet hyperbole, since I'm just wondering if those talking up the Onboard GEQ amps are just trying to retain value. I don't know.

 

[Racerxrated]

Yeah, I guess the only way to really know is to get identical 2 MKIIC+, one with eq one without and try it. Have to have same power section though.