I finally get the Badlander- it's voiced like the Rev C.

  • Thread starter Thread starter GJgo
  • Start date Start date
GJgo

GJgo

Well-known member
Last year I had a Badlander 100 for a while. At the time I knew it felt nothing like a "normal" Rectifier- it had no bottom end, super snarly upper mids, and a very complex harmonic swirl that felt great to play. Killer liquid lead tone as well. A boost did help but it didn't "need" it like all other Rectos. I surmised it was a fantastic rock amp but not really what I wanted in my 3 piece metal band.

Recently I was fortunate enough to pick up a very early Rev C and the other night and after sending it off to Mike B. for some TLC I got it home & played it in the band for the first time. Now that I've spent a few hours jamming it at home & with the band, I finally get it. The Badlander is voiced like the Rev C. Of course it's not identical- but like how the MultiWatt is voiced like the Rev F but with a more modern tone as opposed to the vintage organic tone, this is the same parallel. The C has those snarling upper mids, a very swirling complex harmonic under the fingers, and a pretty damn good liquid lead tone. It has a distinct lack of ass compared to a "normal" Recto, though I will say the Badlander has even less bottom. Outside of the band it doesn't "need" a boost to be satisfyingly tight. This amp is classic George Lynch tones all day long.

This was kind of a revelation, and I'm super glad to have gotten here.
 
Last edited:
That’s kinda what I hear on clips; when listening to Rev C vs BL. I’m sure that the C has the edge in a vintage way; but like an F does get the nod vs a MW recto it’s not a huge difference.
Definitely have a BL in my sights for a future purchase.
 
Tom, I think there are things about the BL that you'd like. The lead tone is really very good (with EL34s) and it has a great grind. That said I think the Rev F & the MW are "closer" to each other than the BL is to the C. The BL does have that Mesa modern thing going on, however the voicing I do think is really in the spirit of the C.
 
Just want you metal heads to know I've been playing my Badlander 50 with 6l6's through 2 Bogner OS 2x12 cabs with a combination of g12h30 and v30's . I don't care about revisions A--Z, this thing definitely sounds like a modded Marshall and not a Recto which actually suits me fine.
 
What are the stock power tubes?

Prolly get more bottom with JJ’s (6L6GC/E34L/KT77) or some OG Sylvanias.
 
I wonder if changing the Bass pots out to a higher value might give it more lows? Not a tech but when I increased the gain pot value on the F I had, HUGE gain increase
 
Doing some tube testing with the Badlander and the KHE switcher. I notice tubes are dictating a lot with this amp. Some C8 in the preamp and Mesa STR-420 in the power section. In variac mode in gets closer to the F.

Imagine with a resonance mod!
 
Metal1977 said:
Mesa 447, i think they are EH EL34’s. Currently running mine with Sovtek 6L6 WXT+. I plan on doing further tests with JJ’s KT77 and E34L.
Click to expand...
Indeed you should; those are inferior offerings with respect to the JJ's. Another interesting experiment would be to get real OG Russian Military 6P3S-E's, which the wafter and plastic base Sovteks are but mere reproductions. They do NOT sound the same, with the Mil Spec being vastly superior. HiFi circles have been in the know for decades and even compare the 6P3S-E to Mullard EL34's. Your mileage may vary, but imho EH/Sovtek post-rebranding glass is sub par.

Advice? Yank that cheap shit out of your tone machine and get some vital valvage in there! :)
 
I had a Rev C and have wondered if the Badlander was supposed to be that vibe. The Rev C was very tight and could get unpleasantly bright if not careful, but was an absolute metal beast.

But it had monster gain available. The reviews I've seen said the Badlander with the gain maxed is still not a lot of gain, which is very much not like a Rev C.
 
cardinal said:
I had a Rev C and have wondered if the Badlander was supposed to be that vibe. The Rev C was very tight and could get unpleasantly bright if not careful, but was an absolute metal beast.

But it had monster gain available. The reviews I've seen said the Badlander with the gain maxed is still not a lot of gain, which is very much not like a Rev C.
Click to expand...
Are you using a Mesa cab with that Rev C?
 
Nigel said:
Are you using a Mesa cab with that Rev C?
Click to expand...
I sold it 😭 but at the time, I had a straight/slant OS412 with the Diamond plate armor. The head was a chrome chassis too. Probably would put my kids through college now.
 
cardinal said:
I had a Rev C and have wondered if the Badlander was supposed to be that vibe. The Rev C was very tight and could get unpleasantly bright if not careful, but was an absolute metal beast.

But it had monster gain available. The reviews I've seen said the Badlander with the gain maxed is still not a lot of gain, which is very much not like a Rev C.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that like with the old Mark IIs, the pre-500s seem to have a lot of variability from reading various guys' descriptions. This one I have is pretty darn tight, not overly bright, and it has just enough gain. My Rev F/Gs were a lot hotter, and much more loose "wall of sound", but this C rips them a new a-hole in tone, feel & clarity.
 
I tried the 100 watt a few weeks ago. I was in the city waiting for doors to open for a Baroness show.

I kinda got a modded Marshall vibe from it vs a Mesa although I just have a Mark IV to compare it to. I was surprised it didn't have a ton of gain.

Not a bad amp and I bet with a boost or something to get the saturation up it would be fantastic.
 
The BL has plenty of low-end and gain but nothing like a Recto. You can get the Crush channel to somewhat match some sounds of the Recto but I think it's a misnomer that Mesa put Rectifier on the name plate, it keeps giving people the wrong impression. I've never played a Rev C so idk about that comparison in particular.
 
GJgo said:
It seems to me that like with the old Mark IIs, the pre-500s seem to have a lot of variability from reading various guys' descriptions. This one I have is pretty darn tight, not overly bright, and it has just enough gain. My Rev F/Gs were a lot hotter, and much more loose "wall of sound", but this C rips them a new a-hole in tone, feel & clarity.
Click to expand...
My old Rev C was fully saturated by 1:00 on the gain. Any more than 3:00 was really too much. But I think there's disagreement over what value gain pot was used with Rev C, which makes me wonder if it just varied.

Presence over 9:00 irritated by tinnitus badly. It didn't sound bad at all. But left me with a terrible headache. So might have just been me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top