Mark IIC+ Tips

So I dialled up Cliffs settings, with stock cabs F060 and F061 as Stereo Ultra res. That was 30 minutes ago.. so much for my lunch break!! Here is the offending preset. Scene 1 is rhythm, Scene 2 is lead; same blocks, just alternate settings on "Y" to solo your lunchtime away. Never explored this amp model before, i'm suitably impressed. I did crank the Mid dial on the amp up around 5.

AXE FX II only.
For AXE FX XL users use the CSV file to get the settings.

Dig this muchly sir. Had to throw an 808 in front just for saturation and tightening up of the low end but this is solid. Earned a spot on my top 10 list. Thanks!
 
if i wanna use this preset with a real cab where should i place the cab block and the fx loop block ?
Everything left on the chain of the FX LOOP-block will be sent to output 2 (I assume the power amp for the real cab is connected there). In your case, you'd probably want to put the FX LOOP-block before the enhancer. Also, there is usually no need to use the CAB-block when using a real cab, unless it's an FRFR – so you may just bypass it. But ... tastes may vary. It is not wrong to use a CAB-block even when using a non-FRFR real cab.
 

I agree with most of this.

But I like the mid control dimed - I always played Mesas, both 'real' and 'virtual' with M/T/P dimed and bass off. Bright on.

The model I like so much from 17.04 has the two gains at about 7.3, master as it came (5 I think), and a similar GEQ setup to yours - 4.3, 2.9, -2.0, 1.4, 2.5 low to high. I usually roll off treble in the cab at about 8K.

If you set the IIC+ bright model up like that, then compare it to any of the IIC+ types in the newer firmwares, they sound nothing alike. The new ones have a ton more upper mids and highs.

I'm not really complaining - if what's current is the 'realest', then that's the goal, right? It's just amazing that it's so different.

I finally got close enough to work with a Mark IV model and a lot of outboard EQ, both P and G, and with the master at about 3.
 
Last edited:
I know most people aren't looking to this model for this, but I always thought that the IIC+ model had the richest clean cleans.
not sure if the IIC+'s clean is immensly different to the MkIV's, but I'd love to have a model of it.
 
I was glad to see that my settings were very similar to what Cliff posted. Made a couple very minor tweaks and got some even better results. I throw an 808 in front of it and it tightens up amazingly well. Big pair of balls on this amp.
 
@FractalAudio while we're at it I have a couple of questions:

1) Is the speaker resonance page on the IIC+ sim based on the combo speaker or a Mesa 4x12 cab?

2) Do you know of any differences between a GEQ-less combo and a GEQ'd head version of a IIC+. If so are there some tweaks to close the gap?

The Mark IV amp sims are some of my favorites in the Axe-Fx. I don't think I've recorded any clips with the IIC+. I feel like it's even harder to dial in especially the low end chugg. It feels plexi-esque to me.
 
The resonance changed a lot between 17 and later versions. I don't know the answer to your question, as far as whether it's for a combo or separate, but it's different. However, it doesn't account for the changes in tone.

As far as the second question, there's no circuitry difference between combo and head builds; having said that, there's a belief that the presence (or lack) of the GEQ's transistor buffer/amp circuitry affects the sound even when set flat. The Blue Angel had a 'magic module' that was epoxy-gooped on the PCB, that was really just a Mark series GEQ (allegedly) set flat.

There's also a belief that the amps without reverb sound different. I've never played two otherwise similar amps back-to-back so I can't offer a comment on that, but the best-sounding Mark I've played didn't have reverb. OTOH, it was a fairly odd amp anyway, a six-tube Mark III Coliseum.
 
What do you guys do with the sat switch? (I find off and ideal to sound to crunchy and not smooth, but I find Auth too saturated with a layer of gain fuzz that I can't dial out.)
 
What do you guys do with the sat switch? (I find off and ideal to sound to crunchy and not smooth, but I find Auth too saturated with a layer of gain fuzz that I can't dial out.)

If it doesn't sound good, don't use it?

The saturation 'mod' is something that doesn't necessarily works well with every amp model.
 
If it doesn't sound good, don't use it?

The saturation 'mod' is something that doesn't necessarily works well with every amp model.
I get that Yek, what I'm saying is I dislike it on and off for different reasons, if I leave it off it is very mid crunchy and not smooth and scooped, if I turn it on, it's nice and smooth but has this layer of gain that won't go away.
 
I get that Yek, what I'm saying is I dislike it on and off for different reasons, if I leave it off it is very mid crunchy and not smooth and scooped, if I turn it on, it's nice and smooth but has this layer of gain that won't go away.

Are you using the GEQ? Turn 750 Hz down more
 
Ya it just doesn't quite get it right, if anything I get a better tone with the triaxis yellow model of the 2c+ which is fine, I use it. It just bugs me that the triaxis yellow gets a better 2c+ sound than the 2c+ does lol
 
I've never even tried the triaxes models because the IIC+ model always gave me great results. Curious to see what makes the difference to you between them that you can't get the one to sound right. Mind sharing your presets?
 
The triaxis model sounds great but I think the C+ has a bit of a warmer sound when dialed in properly.
It's easier to get the scooped metal sound with the triaxis though.
With my IIC+ presets I do like to use the USA Rhythm tonestack.
That seems to make a big difference for me.
Try that!
 
Ya it just doesn't quite get it right, if anything I get a better tone with the triaxis yellow model of the 2c+ which is fine, I use it. It just bugs me that the triaxis yellow gets a better 2c+ sound than the 2c+ does lol

Maybe important:
The model of the IIC+ is based on a IIC+ "Simul-Class" amp, without GEQ.
 
Back
Top Bottom