Recto Rev F vs G

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZEN Amps
  • Start date Start date
I've had 14-ish Rectos of all flavors, including Rev C. I've either owned played every iteration except for D & E. While I agree that the Rev C was "the best", it wasn't really a Recto in the pure sense. More like a freaky good hybrid of other amazing amps.

Within the ones that actually behave like Rectos, the one I currently own, which also happens to be my overall favorite behind the Rev C, is a particularly good Triple G.

While the Triple F was arguably my favorite in the "bedroom", I also found that the F was particularly difficult to record well. The Triple Gs for me sit in the sweet spot of "sounding like a Recto is supposed to sound", and recording well.

I've gigged C, F, G & Tremoverb, plus played almost all the others at band practice, and honestly live it doesn't make enough difference to matter. That said if I had to pick a "best live cut" of the amps that sound like a Recto it may be the Dual MultiWatt on orange modern. If we expand this to anything with a Recto name on it, it'd probably be the Badlander.

So, I totally get a guy needing to experience all the cool kid amps for themselves- I needed that as well. If it calls to you, do it! ...And don't be surprised if you end up with a good G & cash out on the rest.

Anyway, here's some G audio.

In the room. The Recto G clip is straight in here.

On the mic- this one is boosted.
 
GJgo said:
I've had 14-ish Rectos of all flavors, including Rev C. I've either owned played every iteration except for D & E. While I agree that the Rev C was "the best", it wasn't really a Recto in the pure sense. More like a freaky good hybrid of other amazing amps.

Within the ones that actually behave like Rectos, the one I currently own, which also happens to be my overall favorite behind the Rev C, is a particularly good Triple G.

While the Triple F was arguably my favorite in the "bedroom", I also found that the F was particularly difficult to record well. The Triple Gs for me sit in the sweet spot of "sounding like a Recto is supposed to sound", and recording well.

I've gigged C, F, G & Tremoverb, plus played almost all the others at band practice, and honestly live it doesn't make enough difference to matter. That said if I had to pick a "best live cut" of the amps that sound like a Recto it may be the Dual MultiWatt on orange modern. If we expand this to anything with a Recto name on it, it'd probably be the Badlander.

So, I totally get a guy needing to experience all the cool kid amps for themselves- I needed that as well. If it calls to you, do it! ...And don't be surprised if you end up with a good G & cash out on the rest.

Anyway, here's some G audio.

In the room. The Recto G clip is straight in here.

On the mic- this one is boosted.
Click to expand...

After how you describe that G Triple on the red channel, I'm still gonna bet that's been C modded. Or partially. That's exactly how my Red Modern sounded after the C mods. Not your typical stock G, for sure.
 
Racerxrated said:
After how you describe that G Triple on the red channel, I'm still gonna bet that's been C modded. Or partially. That's exactly how my Red Modern sounded after the C mods. Not your typical stock G, for sure.
Click to expand...
That may be & we'll find out next time I pull the chassis. That said, the triple G I sold to @RaceU4her (that I missed which led to buying this one after going around the carousel) also sounds pretty damn good in all of his clips, and I know that one was stock because Mike B went through it for me.

Blake's new Triple G sounds pretty well balanced too.


Just happened to come across this clip as well. Other than the low volume, I think it shows the difference pretty well.
 
Racerxrated said:
I've had 2 Rev G Duals, 2 Rev G Triples and 2 Rev F Triples. Oh, and 1 Rev C which easily and without question, rules them all. No contest.

But, back to the F/G. The G duals, both small logo early versions were a tubby bloated mess that you all can have. No thanks. Gladly returned those to GC. The 2 G Triples, are much much better with less bloat, and boosted sounded great. One in particular was special. The first F Triple, was WAY more rich/3D/Harmonic laden than either G Triple, and was tighter by a good margin but still had that loose 'wall of sound' thing if you wanted it. Just an all around better tone than the G Triples. The 2nd F Triple was even better than the first one; it was so good my C+ Coliseum tone was not heads/tails above the F in richness/3D....they were about equal. That was very surprising. I ended up doing a few of the Rev C mods to it, which improved the red channel a ton. The Orange Modern stayed about the same. But that particular F Triple was special, for sure.

I found the Fs were easily a far better overall tone, than any of the Gs and a good step up from the Gs. If I'm gonna own a G though, it'll be a Triple only. Couldn't stand the Duals.
Click to expand...
My G is a triple, and yeah it does sound really good. Not the first time I've heard preference for the triples, I wonder why that is?

And you're not helping my wallet.

GJgo said:
...don't be surprised if you end up with a good G & cash out on the rest.
Click to expand...
Finally, someone that cares about my outgoings!

I think I'll just stick with the triple G, it's going to cost me dearly to get an F in and as I mentioned I can borrow that C once it's healthy. Now that I've just saved 5k maybe it's time to browse for another Marshall....
 
I couldn’t really get into the G’s.

I made a small video showcasing a IVa, Dual rev F, Hermansson rev F and a Dual G.

The G lost.

It’s on Facebook. Lost my phone last year and didn’t save

I’ll try to find it
 
I have a Triple G that I got not long after getting a non-MW 3-channel and it blew me away, how much more I liked it compared to the 3ch.

My Rev F Dual just came back from Mesa repair this week with a clean bill of health from Mike B - pretty sweet, and as an added bonus, a Dual G just showed up too, so I'll get to compare all 3 back to back soon. Really looking forward this weekend because of it!

When my Rev F was working-ish (it had channel cutting out issues but theoretically the tone should've been fine), I felt it had noticeably more upper mids and a tighter low end than the Triple G when I A/B'd them. There's a certain sloshiness I liked about the G in the room but if I were picking an amp to boost or play metal with, the F would be it, which probably means I should try to find a C or modify one of these G's into a C to try it out. Either way, great amps across the board. I definitely think most people couldn't tell the difference in a blind test between a boosted Rev G and Rev F though, but I suppose that's the case for almost every amp we discuss in detail around here.
 
ZEN Amps said:
My G is a triple, and yeah it does sound really good. Not the first time I've heard preference for the triples, I wonder why that is?

And you're not helping my wallet.


Finally, someone that cares about my outgoings!

I think I'll just stick with the triple G, it's going to cost me dearly to get an F in and as I mentioned I can borrow that C once it's healthy. Now that I've just saved 5k maybe it's time to browse for another Marshall....
Click to expand...
The G Duals vs the Triples....The Duals I tried, which again were small logo attached power cord 3K serials, the low mids were way too forward no matter how you set the EQ. They both had an undesirable 'honk' that reminded me of the nasty honk of a non eq Mark. Just nowhere to go with that type of ugly midrange.
The Triples, didn't have that at all. Sure, you could crank the mids to get it but the amp could be scooped rather easily. And, then the punch of the Triple vs the Duals, it's no contest.
 
ZEN Amps said:
My G is a triple, and yeah it does sound really good. Not the first time I've heard preference for the triples, I wonder why that is?

And you're not helping my wallet.


Finally, someone that cares about my outgoings!

I think I'll just stick with the triple G, it's going to cost me dearly to get an F in and as I mentioned I can borrow that C once it's healthy. Now that I've just saved 5k maybe it's time to browse for another Marshall....
Click to expand...
In the 2 channels, the Triple is a lot tighter- which is a big deal. Voicing is generally the same, but the Duals are tubbier.

In the Multi Watts however- they are all F tight and the Dual has better mids where the Triple has a scoop that IMO hurts it in the live band so I'd go with a Dual. You can hear it here.
 
So I watched Fluff's video on his multi-watt versus his Rev F, and I wasn't convinced he'd dialled his in well enough. I did this today which I think sounds pretty great:


What do people generally think about Rev F and Rev G, versus the MW's ???

I tried a Rev F at a studio once, and without a tubescreamer, it just really sounded like boomy boomer nonsense to me. I had my MW besides it, and it sounded much better to me.
 
@Orvillain your clip sounds like what I've experienced with the not-Gs which is that the mic simply isn't picking up the hugeness in the room which makes them sound thin compared to the live experience.

The MW is voiced most like the F. They're very close, with the F having more clarity & bounce, which IMO makes it a better home / studio amp. However, for gigging I'd take a MW all day because of the features.

Here are a few more samples.





 
Orvillain said:
So I watched Fluff's video on his multi-watt versus his Rev F, and I wasn't convinced he'd dialled his in well enough. I did this today which I think sounds pretty great:


What do people generally think about Rev F and Rev G, versus the MW's ???

I tried a Rev F at a studio once, and without a tubescreamer, it just really sounded like boomy boomer nonsense to me. I had my MW besides it, and it sounded much better to me.
Click to expand...

With your review of that particular F, I'd wager a bunch that something was amiss...tubes shot, caps garbage or something else going on....The 2 Fs I had were clearly and obviously a far better tone in every way than any of the 4 Gs I tried.
Better clarity, 3D/Richness, etc.
 
GJgo said:
@Orvillain your clip sounds like what I've experienced with the not-Gs which is that the mic simply isn't picking up the hugeness in the room which makes them sound thin compared to the live experience.

The MW is voiced most like the F. They're very close, with the F having more clarity & bounce, which IMO makes it a better home / studio amp. However, for gigging I'd take a MW all day because of the features.

Here are a few more samples.





Click to expand...

Nice, will check these out later tonight!
 
Racerxrated said:
With your review of that particular F, I'd wager a bunch that something was amiss...tubes shot, caps garbage or something else going on....The 2 Fs I had were clearly and obviously a far better tone in every way than any of the 4 Gs I tried.
Better clarity, 3D/Richness, etc.
Click to expand...
So much agree
 
I've had them all but D. The F is a bit faster/tighter/meaner than G. I thought it noticeable. But they all sound like Rectos and if you like an F, you'll do fine with a G.

And if you're going to boost it anyway, I'd buy a G (really I'd buy a Multiwatt).
 
GJgo said:
I've had 14-ish Rectos of all flavors, including Rev C. I've either owned played every iteration except for D & E. While I agree that the Rev C was "the best", it wasn't really a Recto in the pure sense. More like a freaky good hybrid of other amazing amps.

Within the ones that actually behave like Rectos, the one I currently own, which also happens to be my overall favorite behind the Rev C, is a particularly good Triple G.

While the Triple F was arguably my favorite in the "bedroom", I also found that the F was particularly difficult to record well. The Triple Gs for me sit in the sweet spot of "sounding like a Recto is supposed to sound", and recording well.

I've gigged C, F, G & Tremoverb, plus played almost all the others at band practice, and honestly live it doesn't make enough difference to matter. That said if I had to pick a "best live cut" of the amps that sound like a Recto it may be the Dual MultiWatt on orange modern. If we expand this to anything with a Recto name on it, it'd probably be the Badlander.

So, I totally get a guy needing to experience all the cool kid amps for themselves- I needed that as well. If it calls to you, do it! ...And don't be surprised if you end up with a good G & cash out on the rest.

Anyway, here's some G audio.

In the room. The Recto G clip is straight in here.

On the mic- this one is boosted.
Click to expand...

I tried the C you had a few months ago (serial in the 40's) and currently have a C serial in the mid teens (also double black like yours) and another in the 100's. My C in the teens similar to how I remember yours being (didn’t AB) (more mark-like, very different from typical Recto's), but the one in the 100's as well as a Rev C I tried in the 200's both sound like Recto's to me through and through, just so much better (more aggressive, complex/3D, much better feel and response). The serial 100's C is my favorite Boogie amp I've tried. It seems to be the pinnacle of growl that I've heard in a high gain amp (along with my Langner modded Marshall), while the earlier ones seemed to be way tighter, faster and clearer, but a lot smoother also on powerchords. At least based on this sample size of 4 C's I've tried, it seems somewhere after the 40's (who knows when exactly) they evolved into the Recto sound we know with that fat lower mid wall of sound and iconic throaty growl with some sag

I don't know that much about recording yet, but when my friend used the Triple Rev F/C mod I had for his album it surprisingly seemed to be one of our favorites in the mix of what I owned at the time. I didn't though yet own a D or C to compare, but I'd bet they would've done better. I had a Badlander at the time that we also tried for it and wasn't crazy about it, but it did cut well
 
Last edited:
Racerxrated said:
With your review of that particular F, I'd wager a bunch that something was amiss...tubes shot, caps garbage or something else going on....The 2 Fs I had were clearly and obviously a far better tone in every way than any of the 4 Gs I tried.
Better clarity, 3D/Richness, etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, seems off to me as well... Granted I will say the multi watt was meant to be rev f voiced; and they did do a good job on the red channel. You can get real close to what a rev f sounds like. However, they completely fucked the orange channel on EVERY revision after F. IMO they turned it into a honky mess. The orange channel on the early rectos is one of my favorite amp sounds ever and Mesa completely missed the mark with the new generation of rectos on this channel.
 
Bram576 said:
Yeah, seems off to me as well... Granted I will say the multi watt was meant to be rev f voiced; and they did do a good job on the red channel. You can get real close to what a rev f sounds like. However, they completely fucked the orange channel on EVERY revision after F. IMO they turned it into a honky mess. The orange channel on the early rectos is one of my favorite amp sounds ever and Mesa completely missed the mark with the new generation of rectos on this channel.
Click to expand...
The Orange channel cloned to modern is by far my favourite tone in my RevC. On later revisions, it tends to get dark but the RevC has the brightness that brings this channel alive. Instead of a big wall sound, you get instant push from the mids and a kind of fatness I associate with JCM800s
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top