NAD: Mesa Rev C/D/F

  • Thread starter Thread starter itsgoodnow
  • Start date Start date
Racerxrated said:
I'm pretty sure the C has different pot values (gain, presence) vs the other Revs. When I did the C mod to an F triple, the gain pot value doubled. I also agree the feel of the C is FAR different than the other versions...very bouncy and similar to a C+ but not quite at that level.
Click to expand...
I agree. There’s some definite overlap in that camp. It’s not quite as bouncy but you can get some common tones. I have a c+(+) on the next rack over and it’s fairly surprising what they can do when you alternate
 
Wtf dude. Damn that’s an epic score lol Congrats!

While I feel like the Rev C is the meanest sounding of them all (MW a close 2nd), I personally prefer the 2ch Rev G for the stuff I play. It just chugs so much more heavier. The C has that angry midrange roar that is addictive to play, and can be used without a boost IMO. It does benefit from a boost though still.
 
Yeah I had an '89 SLO also. It did not sound like any of the Rectos, including the Rev C. The C was more like a boosted 5150 I guess. Not a SLO to me. I know all three are related but they sound and feel different.
 
cardinal said:
Yeah I had an '89 SLO also. It did not sound like any of the Rectos, including the Rev C. The C was more like a boosted 5150 I guess. Not a SLO to me. I know all three are related but they sound and feel different.
Click to expand...
Yeah I meant here that it had more saturation than the other 2 revisions I have. The C is significantly tighter than a SLO.
 
cardinal said:
Yeah I had an '89 SLO also. It did not sound like any of the Rectos, including the Rev C. The C was more like a boosted 5150 I guess. Not a SLO to me. I know all three are related but they sound and feel different.
Click to expand...
The C had some similarities to the SLOs I had but definitely more different than similar. The C also had GREAT feel; like the SLO also does but in a different way.
 
I don't know if it was said yet exactly but like you pointed out in your OP - there will be significant change comparing EL34 to 6L6s in these amps. Then you have the differences in all the preamp tubes involved in all 3 signal chains. Lastly, the component level differences as just mentioned. I bet you will get some new/different opinions if you start doing some tube rolling.

Either way - Epic NADs and enjoy the hell out of them :yes:
 
311splawndude said:
I don't know if it was said yet exactly but like you pointed out in your OP - there will be significant change comparing EL34 to 6L6s in these amps. Then you have the differences in all the preamp tubes involved in all 3 signal chains. Lastly, the component level differences as just mentioned. I bet you will get some new/different opinions if you start doing some tube rolling.

Either way - Epic NADs and enjoy the hell out of them :yes:
Click to expand...
Thanks man! I'll update as I roll some tubes!
 
braintheory said:
Congrats on have all those 3 Rev’s!!! One thing I’d recommend when AB’ing (which I did) is to literally use the exact same powertubes when comparing. I believe my C is pretty close to your in serial #. With my C I’d agree with a lot of what you said, but with that exact D I found my C to be tighter, faster tracking and actually have a more extended low end, but less low mids vs the D. I haven’t liked as much so far 6L6’s in my Recto’s, but really like 5881’s surprisingly, but EL34’s ftw to me and some US 6CA7’s are cool too
Click to expand...
I agree about the 5881s. FWIW I did this power tube comparo in my old Rev C, the 5881s always had the best tone to my ears.

 
GJgo said:
I agree about the 5881s. FWIW I did this power tube comparo in my old Rev C, the 5881s always had the best tone to my ears.

Click to expand...

Agreed! I’ve become a big fan of 5881’s in general over many 6L6’s. I particularly like the GE 5881’s (Canadian and US versions) and also really like my RCA, Sylvania, US Tung-Sol and JAN Philips 5881’s. I’m surprised how much cheaper vintage 5881’s are vs their 6L6GC’s counterparts, but good for us lol
 
braintheory said:
Agreed! I’ve become a big fan of 5881’s in general over many 6L6’s. I particularly like the GE 5881’s (Canadian and US versions) and also really like my RCA, Sylvania, US Tung-Sol and Sylvania 5881’s. I’m surprised how much cheaper vintage 5881’s are vs their 6L6GC’s counterparts, but good for us lol
Click to expand...
I have 5881 in my M180 and it's transparent AF. My Colis all have so much HP that I've considered moving more in that direction for the better tone.
 
Have any of you guys compared the Rev E to Rev C?

I'm currently sitting on a Rev E & a Rev F Dual Rectifier.

I'd like to hear your experiences as to what I may be missing out on.
 
GJgo said:
I have 5881 in my M180 and it's transparent AF. My Colis all have so much HP that I've considered moving more in that direction for the better tone.
Click to expand...
I’ve not tried them yet in my coli’s (not sure if I even have well matched sextets of my 5881’s), but I liked them a lot in my iic+ hrg, Naylor’s and ‘89 SLO
 
For those who know, are there significant component differences between all of the rectifier revisions?
 
pipboy90 said:
For those who know, are there significant component differences between all of the rectifier revisions?
Click to expand...
The Rev C mods are listed in the Boogie forum; I did them (most anyway) to a Rev F triple. You bypass 1 LDR, bypass 4 resistors/caps and change out the gain pots to 1 Meg, and presence pots to 250. There’s a few more but they involved removing and replacing some resistors and that was too difficult for me as everything is so cramped on that board. Definitely makes the amp tighter/brighter with much more gain. This can be done to any G or earlier Recto
 
Bossman415 said:
Have any of you guys compared the Rev E to Rev C?

I'm currently sitting on a Rev E & a Rev F Dual Rectifier.

I'd like to hear your experiences as to what I may be missing out on.
Click to expand...
I personally like the E the best out of any Revision. It still inherently sounds like a dual rec but has that crazy brightness and presence without being harsh.

Also the gain on tap doesn’t flub the amp out. I think this is the case for E, D, and C. They all sound like they’re boosted out of the gate in comparison to the Fs and Gs and so on.

Which brings me to another tangent Mesa did a pretty damn solid job with the multi watt. The red channel on the rev f vs the multi watt is VERY similar. But they fucked the orange channel up still and didn’t nail that. Too much honkiness in the multi watt vs the OGs. I love the rectifiers so much because of their inherent scooped sound, they fit in a mix great and don’t have that honky shit going on.

I think the c can be a bit tighter than the E and sound a bit more middy than scooped IMO. The E has more ass. But I am going off of memory here. And never played them side by side to compare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top