Recto Rev F vs G

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZEN Amps
  • Start date Start date
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...
I genuinely really love the orange on my multi watt!
 
BesaMoogie said:
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
Click to expand...
Yep, Orange to Modern is the ticket on G or earlier Rectos...
 
Bram576 said:
Hey man, that’s cool you dig it, and it’s a good purchase then for you. We all have different taste.
Click to expand...
I'm still not over the 7 hour round-trip it took to go and get it! :ROFLMAO:

Absolute ballache of a day, but well worth it. I've got quite a few amps, but recto quickly became a keeper. I wish I had gotten one ages ago now, but back in like 2006 or something, I had a Rectoverb combo, and it really put me off the range because I thought they'd all sound as shit as that did. Stupid me.
 
GJgo said:
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.
Click to expand...


I have to wonder about stuff like this, if we're just hearing the 5-10% component tolerance and tube differences.

Because pulling up the schematics of the Rev G's, the Dual and Triple are identical besides an extra pair of tubes in the power section. Not sure how that equates to "tightness" in terms of how it feels in the low end but I'd imagine unless you are playing at 150 decibels you can't possibly notice. I've never had both a Triple and Dual of the same model at the same time but I do right now, maybe I'll check a few values between them and see if anything is actually different that isn't noted in the schematics.

Same with the Multiwatts, same exact preamp spec with no changes between the Dual and Triple. So how would the Triple have a scoop? An extra pair of power tubes does not affect the pre-eq which is where shaping like that would be happening.

I think if you really were painstaking enough to go through the signal path and check every component to be identical measurements and used the same set of tubes in both amps (minus 2-3 tubes in the dual) they will sound identical. They even use the same transformers, so it's not like the usual argument that the transformers between 50w and 100w models are different like with Marshalls.

Keep in mind if a component has a 10% tolerance spec, say for example the Orange channel of a Rev G EQ Slope Resistor is 47k, it could measure as low as 42k or as high as 52k. So two amps with just that change alone are going to have a pretty noticeably different sound, then expand that across the entire circuit... but most people only ever play one or two copies of the same amp, and almost never in the same room at the same time through the same cab etc...
 
They all sound good. It's more about the individual amp than anything.
 
TotallyRadGuitars said:
I have to wonder about stuff like this, if we're just hearing the 5-10% component tolerance and tube differences.

Because pulling up the schematics of the Rev G's, the Dual and Triple are identical besides an extra pair of tubes in the power section. Not sure how that equates to "tightness" in terms of how it feels in the low end but I'd imagine unless you are playing at 150 decibels you can't possibly notice. I've never had both a Triple and Dual of the same model at the same time but I do right now, maybe I'll check a few values between them and see if anything is actually different that isn't noted in the schematics.

Same with the Multiwatts, same exact preamp spec with no changes between the Dual and Triple. So how would the Triple have a scoop? An extra pair of power tubes does not affect the pre-eq which is where shaping like that would be happening.

I think if you really were painstaking enough to go through the signal path and check every component to be identical measurements and used the same set of tubes in both amps (minus 2-3 tubes in the dual) they will sound identical. They even use the same transformers, so it's not like the usual argument that the transformers between 50w and 100w models are different like with Marshalls.

Keep in mind if a component has a 10% tolerance spec, say for example the Orange channel of a Rev G EQ Slope Resistor is 47k, it could measure as low as 42k or as high as 52k. So two amps with just that change alone are going to have a pretty noticeably different sound, then expand that across the entire circuit... but most people only ever play one or two copies of the same amp, and almost never in the same room at the same time through the same cab etc...
Click to expand...
I agree with you on the whole, but there are also the power and output transformers to consider and whether all voltages are equivalent in the amp. I don't think there should be a huge difference between the amps, but sometimes things slip through the net (like a 2204 having half of the NFB of a 2203 because they didnt change the NFB resistor to account for the lower wattage).
 
TotallyRadGuitars said:
I have to wonder about stuff like this, if we're just hearing the 5-10% component tolerance and tube differences.

Because pulling up the schematics of the Rev G's, the Dual and Triple are identical besides an extra pair of tubes in the power section. Not sure how that equates to "tightness" in terms of how it feels in the low end but I'd imagine unless you are playing at 150 decibels you can't possibly notice. I've never had both a Triple and Dual of the same model at the same time but I do right now, maybe I'll check a few values between them and see if anything is actually different that isn't noted in the schematics.

Same with the Multiwatts, same exact preamp spec with no changes between the Dual and Triple. So how would the Triple have a scoop? An extra pair of power tubes does not affect the pre-eq which is where shaping like that would be happening.
Click to expand...
With additional power tubes comes increased bandwidth and headroom which provides higher high and lower low frequencies. That can be perceived as being relatively scooped compared to lower wattage models of the same amp.
 
thegame said:
With additional power tubes comes increased bandwidth and headroom which provides higher high and lower low frequencies. That can be perceived as being relatively scooped compared to lower wattage models of the same amp.
Click to expand...
This, and the different transformers used are the recipe for differences in tightness, and the triples are less mid heavy in comparison to the duals if all else is equal. In the room, the differences between a G dual and Triple are huge and obvious.
 
I'm not an EE so I haven't put much thought into "these are the specs on paper so this should be the outcome". I filed that away with the guy that said "since the IIC+ and JP2C look the same on the oscilloscope they should be the same".

I've always taken the more "fuck around & find out" approach of owning many examples of all iterations and seeing what I can ascertain from experience. Then, share what I've observed & see if it jives with other people's experience or not. For example, I've had 2 Dual MW & 2 Triple MW, and they all had the same sound signature as can be heard in the Axe Palace vid. The difference in mids was especially obvious in the band.

I've also had 2 Dual Gs and 2 Triple Gs. The difference in perceived "tightness" is significant. These (unlike the MWs) are starting to get into the age where component float is real, and still, there are trends. At the end of the day it's about how we each feel about the experience we're having with the gear. If I can use some personal experience to help answer a guy's questions then it's (hopefully) a win.

After all, the reason any of us are doing this is about our personal narrative & how it intertwines with our emotions. That's what's driving the bus.
 
I find it funny after all these years how pricing, market value and the in factor change peoples perception of things. The rev g at the time 20 plus years ago ish if you weren’t a 7 string nu metal guy represented everything most recto haters disliked in that revision. Bottom end loose, fizzy, etc etc matter of fact it’s why the modding of rectos started. Lol to remove flubby bottom end, fizz, add clarity and string separation, harmonics that were easy leap off the fretboard. Usual tag lines.
Personally I would take a rev f over my g triple or dual, multi watt and most times over my modded rev C.

Not that the g is bad when I’m doing slower hard rock, radio hard rock metal I love that slow wall of sound.

It’s so cool how we all interpret stuff with our ears. 👂 hands and heart. ! Rock on 🤘
 
I don't mind a good rev-G at all. Between my 95 dual, 99 t-verb, 09 single, and multi-triple, I actually prefer all of them!
The 95 might eventually get modded to F-specs, but the t-verb I can't see ever changing it.
 
Maybe one reason I like the stock G is because I'm always running mine through a mix of mesa v30 and k100 speakers, either my x-pattern 412 or my pair of 212s (one mesa-recto and one avatar k100).

Those k100 add some snap to the lows and some clarity through the mids and highs.
 
got my buddies multi watt here for a few weeks. just did a very quick A/B with my Rev G. Just used whatever valves were in each amp, just roughly dialled in by ear. I think the 2 channels are cool to own, they are a piece of history and have that desirable factor. I think the Multi Watt's sound just as good and have better features, and unless you really just want to own an old one I think they're the more sensible purchase:




 
easstudios said:
got my buddies multi watt here for a few weeks. just did a very quick A/B with my Rev G. Just used whatever valves were in each amp, just roughly dialled in by ear. I think the 2 channels are cool to own, they are a piece of history and have that desirable factor. I think the Multi Watt's sound just as good and have better features, and unless you really just want to own an old one I think they're the more sensible purchase:




Click to expand...



the G just has more of "that" recto scooped sound to me in these. this was v30s?
 
RaceU4her said:
the G just has more of "that" recto scooped sound to me in these. this was v30s?
Click to expand...
Yeah, load box and IR's here but dialling them in with a mesa cab in the room. Just trying the Orange Modern mode, its harder to get them to match. Guessing its because the MW has a presence control whereas on the Rev G the presence control is out of the circuit. The MW with presence at 0 can get closeish but its still less scooped and a slightly different vibe.

I think the MW can do the 2 channel era red modern thing pretty well, orange is a little bit different but I wouldn't say better or worse. But the Rev G just has that scooped raw big 90's thing, the MW is more refined and controlled.
 
Bxlxaxkxe said:
Going to switch over to 6l6 soon. I’ve preferred 6l6 with every dual I’ve played so won’t be surprised if I stick with them for the triple. Can’t complain about the el34s though
Click to expand...
Blake, I think I've seen you post before that you use a Suhr RL into a Bogner Uberkab v30 IR. Would you be willing to share which exact Ownhammer one you use? PM me if you don't want to put it here publicly if you don't mind! Happy New Year!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top