Are we just, not gonna talk about the Rev F Dual rec Reissue or???

  • Thread starter Thread starter VESmedic
  • Start date Start date
GJgo said:
I’ve owned lots of all of them. My point is that no reissue is going to sound like the OG due to modern components. Therefore logically, a reissue F will sound like a MW (which is closer to F in voicing than any other revision).

Note that’s not a bad thing, I think the MW is a modern classic. It’s as good as modern Mesas get. I just don’t think a 2ch reissue will be different/special unless they go full epic Rev C or full tubby Rev G.
Click to expand...
Sometimes I think that’s maybe just aging (not drifting) of the components that brings the extra mojo? Like pushing electrons for 30 years through the trannies makes the difference?
 
BesaMoogie said:
Sometimes I think that’s maybe just aging (not drifting) of the components that brings the extra mojo? Like pushing electrons for 30 years through the trannies makes the difference?
Click to expand...
I suspect the OGs sounded just as epic when they were new. I'm no EE, but my best guess is it's from the miniaturization of components. And from going from designs with 4-8 XL filter caps to 2-4 small ones. ...And from a recent conversation with someone who knows, the germanium thing. The juice just doesn't flow through the straw like it used to.
 
GJgo said:
I suspect the OGs sounded just as epic when they were new. I'm no EE, but my best guess is it's from the miniaturization of components. And from going from designs with 4-8 XL filter caps to 2-4 small ones. ...And from a recent conversation with someone who knows, the germanium thing. The juice just doesn't flow through the straw like it used to.
Click to expand...
What’s funny is I remember when they first came out and have memories of trying them in Daddy’s Junky Music in Boston. Was not impressed. Felt they were bloated and had too soft an attack. No idea what revision I was demoing but they were hot off the presses when I did. At that time I was a total Marshall guy and the Rec’s were just the complete opposite of that type of feel and sound. What’s weird is Boogie made them to be an 80’s style hard rock amp but that was the last kind of sound is was actually capable of…90’s music turnaround turned their mis-step into a happy accident.
 
skoora said:
What’s funny is I remember when they first came out and have memories of trying them in Daddy’s Junky Music in Boston. Was not impressed. Felt they were bloated and had too soft an attack. No idea what revision I was demoing but they were hot off the presses when I did. At that time I was a total Marshall guy and the Rec’s were just the complete opposite of that type of feel and sound. What’s weird is Boogie made them to be an 80’s style hard rock amp but that was the last kind of sound is was actually capable of…90’s music turnaround turned their mis-step into a happy accident.
Click to expand...
I LOOOOVE this story lol! Me and my 2 guitar buddies I always hung with at the time played one at our local shop and we thought it was a big piece of crap and would end up jamming and worshipping the JMP-1 and A/DA micro tube 200 power amp combo LMFAO!!! 🤣🤣🤣 such nooblets when you’re young, huh? 😁
 
GJgo said:
I’ve owned lots of all of them. My point is that no reissue is going to sound like the OG due to modern components. Therefore logically, a reissue F will sound like a MW (which is closer to F in voicing than any other revision).

Note that’s not a bad thing, I think the MW is a modern classic. It’s as good as modern Mesas get. I just don’t think a 2ch reissue will be different/special unless they go full epic Rev C or full tubby Rev G.
Click to expand...
I hear ya man. It’s like the JP2c thing. Most say it doesn’t sound enough like an original IIC+. The thing with the Multiwatt for me was that the lowend is different , the Rev F is tighter and faster responding , the midrange also sits in a nicer place IMO. Im hoping they get this one right.
 
It's going to be a rectifier with a switch for every revision like a Mark Vll
 
MetalThrasher said:
Wow. Thanks for the info. The change between the revisions really happened that drastically during those years.
Click to expand...
Yes. Keep in mind, that the transition from C to F only included like 650 amps of which the first 100 or so were dedicated to artists and studios. This leaves approximately 550 amps for the global market launch that happened during 1992
 
skoora said:
What’s funny is I remember when they first came out and have memories of trying them in Daddy’s Junky Music in Boston. Was not impressed. Felt they were bloated and had too soft an attack. No idea what revision I was demoing but they were hot off the presses when I did. At that time I was a total Marshall guy and the Rec’s were just the complete opposite of that type of feel and sound. What’s weird is Boogie made them to be an 80’s style hard rock amp but that was the last kind of sound is was actually capable of…90’s music turnaround turned their mis-step into a happy accident.
Click to expand...
Except for a C....the early one I had, #40 something, was a modded Marshall all day. But with a lower mid emphasis...no bloat, tight af, huge tight lows(you could dime the Bass and no bloat), even dime the mids and no honk....easily play 80s stuff without a boost.
A very different amp than either F Triple I had, and farther yet from a G.
 
GJgo said:
I suspect the OGs sounded just as epic when they were new. I'm no EE, but my best guess is it's from the miniaturization of components. And from going from designs with 4-8 XL filter caps to 2-4 small ones. ...And from a recent conversation with someone who knows, the germanium thing. The juice just doesn't flow through the straw like it used to.
Click to expand...
With Mesas, whether it's a Mark or Recto, I don't think it's age since a 2B, or C+ has that great vintage thing going on, as does an F or earlier Recto...yet the Mark IIIs and later or Gs and later, they are both just a year removed from the great tones yet they sound more generic/sterile to me than the earlier versions...but they are all 30+ yrs old. Gotta be some different parts.
 
311splawndude said:
:LOL:

Think of all the tonal options with this?

HNvGUO7.jpg
Click to expand...
My eyes blank out looking at those multi channel amps. You gotta be a NASSAU scientist to run those. If I have to use something like that as backline I'm gong to have a huge problem. My hands will get all clammy, my stomach will get all tight, I'll start cold sweating under the lights. The knobs will appear to stretch skyward when I lean in to see what I'm adjusting. It'll induce vertigo and I'll fall over with my guitar in my hands. Somebody get an ambulam.
 
Racerxrated said:
Except for a C....the early one I had, #40 something, was a modded Marshall all day. But with a lower mid emphasis...no bloat, tight af, huge tight lows(you could dime the Bass and no bloat), even dime the mids and no honk....easily play 80s stuff without a boost.
A very different amp than either F Triple I had, and farther yet from a G.
Click to expand...
IMG_1486.jpeg
 
By the way. Think I read that @GJgo said James son had one of the very first rectifiers to use with his band and saw it in a instagram post

IMG_5223.png
 
peterc52 said:
By the way. Think I read that @GJgo said James son had one of the very first rectifiers to use with his band and saw it in a instagram post

View attachment 263463
Click to expand...
Yeah, a bud of mine toured with them. Here's what he said about it.

"Doing the Metallica tour, their kids bands play every Saturday night. One uses rectifier R0010 and one uses a stock Badlander. After 1 month of curiosity I was pretty floored and honestly a bit upset that every time the Badlander sounded noticeably better. Of course both were mic’d through a PA so low end didn’t really matter, but the Badlander tone cut so much better."
 
Racerxrated said:
With Mesas, whether it's a Mark or Recto, I don't think it's age since a 2B, or C+ has that great vintage thing going on, as does an F or earlier Recto...yet the Mark IIIs and later or Gs and later, they are both just a year removed from the great tones yet they sound more generic/sterile to me than the earlier versions...but they are all 30+ yrs old. Gotta be some different parts.
Click to expand...
The Mark III’s and G’s IME very much still have that raw vintage sound, it’s just their voicing itself was off/not on point. The Mark III’s have that less musical/messy high end, more scooped/off mids, G’s flubby, but if we’re talking just rawness and the qualities that vintage amps have vs recent amps they have it. Generic/sterile imo would be like mark V’s and 7’s or really almost any recent amps besides Wizards, Naylor’s or Alessandro. It seems like somewhere around the mid to late ‘90’s amps started to get that more bland/less flavorful sound, but I guess some mark iii’s and many G’s were also made at that time

Literally any piece of gear I’ve tried pre-mid ‘90’s or so has had that raw/unfiltered sound I prefer without exception and then with ‘50’s or ‘60’s it just gets a league or 2 better for that ime
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top