Triple Recto Rev G vs "C Modded" Rev G

  • Thread starter Thread starter GJgo
  • Start date Start date
Beyond Black said:
Nobody’s ever hosted an ampfest with a bunch of dudes standing around monitors listening to clips for a reason…
Click to expand...



Yes, that’s exactly the reason, you nailed it.


And yea, they do. It’s called, literally any time someone records anything, be it a home recording or a professional studio. That’s literally exactly what they do, which happens a hell of alot more than a bunch of dudes hanging out at a bar with a bunch of amps doing literally nothing with them.
 
RaceU4her said:
the revG is glued in and sits better in the mix here, the C sounds a little nasally and lost some of the "recto". i probably would have guess the C was a mark iv or something
Click to expand...
Well, the real Rev C sound & felt like a Mark III and a Rev F ha a baby so...
 
Racerxrated said:
It's interesting though, that you say there's less gain with a C? Because, part of the C mod is switching out the gain pots to a much higher value, which adds a TON of gain from my memory of that mod I did. Presence pots, and gain pots on both channels are increased a bunch.
Click to expand...
When I had the real C next to my other Rectos, to my ear the C was less gained out / pissed off and more organic / raw. Not a ton, but it was there. Still, the feels on the real C were nothing like any other Recto. Way more IIC+ like. KILLER lead tone, which was a real shocker.
 
skoora said:
My goal is always recorded. If an amp delivers under a mic, my brain fills in the gaps for the room sound. I will say a recto is one of the hardest amp to record and get what’s in the room. Its low end frequencies rarely translate as easily as a Marshall or Fender does on a mic. You can have a literal Elephant in the room but hear a castrated warthog being swarmed by bees on the drive.
Click to expand...
I fully agree. For years I sucked at recording Rectos even when it was massive in the room. Not that I'm great now, however getting 2000-2003 V30s really did help a ton..
 
Racerxrated said:
This.

If all one wants to do is record, just get a decent modeler and be done with it. So much easier to use, just record direct with it. But, if you want to still feel a great tube amp as you play it, be able to try and tame a superlead at volume while you work the feedback, and then it hits you in the face like a sledgehammer when you start heavy riffing then the great ones are always worth the effort to own and try. Whether it's a Rev C, Wizard, C+, early Bogner/Diezel etc etc these rare and spendy amps DO offer things other amps just don't quite have.
Click to expand...
I agree. Listening to the digital amp & DI packs my recording engineer has while we're doing the album, honestly, if I didn't happen to already have all these amps as a source of pride I wouldn't bother with them for recording. The digital solutions are getting very good.
 
VESmedic said:
Ahhhh, the elusive “in the room tone”, the most selfish and useless tone in existence. It still blows my mind how much people care about this. Should an amp sound good playing by yourself in the room? Sure , of course. But Jesus, how hard is that to do? I could not give a damn about a tone in the room if I can’t get it to a track, the fuck use is it if you can’t hear it in a song?
Click to expand...
You'd make a great priest. Only your point of view is right, and damn to hell anyone who disagrees!
 
VESmedic said:
Yes, that’s exactly the reason, you nailed it.


And yea, they do. It’s called, literally any time someone records anything, be it a home recording or a professional studio. That’s literally exactly what they do, which happens a hell of alot more than a bunch of dudes hanging out at a bar with a bunch of amps doing literally nothing with them.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s what guys do, they hang out at a bar with a bunch of amps not gigging them. ?
Like Jim Marshall gave a fuck about how a NMV amp sounded under a mic in the 60s/70s….
 
skoora said:
It’s not all one way or the other but there’s reams of pages on this forum and any gear forum about chasing those sounds on those records made ??
Click to expand...
I guess, if dudes measure an amp by how it records and don't care how it actually sounds in the room, or in a live context then I get it. But, recording isn't a thing for me. I just do an occasional iPhone thing here and there. 2 inch tape way back in 89, and a ProTools demo 20 yrs ago.
A G Recto boosted is cool. But a C unboosted is a thing of awesomeness. Boosted even more deadly. Imo.
 
Beyond Black said:
Yeah, that’s what guys do, they hang out at a bar with a bunch of amps not gigging them. ?
Like Jim Marshall gave a fuck about how a NMV amp sounded under a mic in the 60s/70s….
Click to expand...


You’re right, he didn’t. But I’m not sure if you know this, but it’s not 1969 anymore, I know this may be a shock to you.


And honestly, yes, any “amp fest” I’ve ever been to is exactly that: a bar rented out for awhile for a bunch of dudes to stand around looking at amps listening to them and looking at them like “hmmmmmmmmm”….soo, yea, what amp fest are you referring to that isn’t this?
 
GJgo said:
You'd make a great priest. Only your point of view is right, and damn to hell anyone who disagrees!
Click to expand...


Also, you sure seemed to care about my point of view when you messaged me and asked me to listen to your bands mixes, and praised my guitar tones, or do you not remember that?
 
skoora said:
It’s not all one way or the other but there’s reams of pages on this forum and any gear forum about chasing those sounds on those records made ??
Click to expand...


Fucking exactly…and not one of peoples favorite tones is “the in the room” sound. It’s a sound of a damn 57 slammed up against the grill. But yet these dudes get mad when you say that, or wonder why their glorious “amp in the room” tone doesn’t sound like their favorite records. I guess it’s a REALLY hard concept to understand.

Everyone likes to have a good sounding amp in the rooom, but last time I checked, isn’t the end goal to write songs and make good music and have killer tones to listen to? If you wanna just jack off your guitar in your room all day, then by all means. But your opinion on anything related to guitar tone outside of a bedroom guitarist is gonna be worth just as much . I have nothing against a hobbyist or a bedroom guitarist in the least, before anyone decides to get sideways over that either.
 
It all starts with the room sound for me. It's funny how much can affect tone. Weather conditions, line voltage, cord length, mood, etc. If the tone isn't happening in the room I won't play as long and not be inspired to write anything.
 
GJgo said:
Well, the real Rev C sound & felt like a Mark III and a Rev F ha a baby so...
Click to expand...
GJgo said:
When I had the real C next to my other Rectos, to my ear the C was less gained out / pissed off and more organic / raw. Not a ton, but it was there. Still, the feels on the real C were nothing like any other Recto. Way more IIC+ like. KILLER lead tone, which was a real shocker.
Click to expand...
GJgo: said:
This particular amp was a phenomenal example of a G- @Beyond Black played it. That said, real Cs do have less gain on tap and are more organic so this fits. Real Cs also have less fizz, and really, that recto fizz is what helps it cut through the live mix.
Click to expand...



giphy.gif


I've owned 4 Rev Cs and still own 3 Rev Cs and a modified Rev C with 6 power tubes... aka prototype Rev C Triple Recto, and I've played 2 other Rev Cs. None of the ones I've owned/played are less gained compared to any other Recto version. Quite the opposite. You do need to use the right preamp tubes in these amps, Chinese12AX7C5 square getter, and properly selected.

I agree 100% with the MKIII + Rev F comparison. Less fizz, yep. The Rev C red channel modern is tighter, brighter, and way more cutting than any other Recto. Even vs the newest gen multi-watt Rectos. The main reason Mesa changed the original Rev C was to make it sound more different from the Mark series, cut the gain and change the feel of the amp. Maybe to be more like a SLO, who knows. But a Rev C and a Rev G red channel modern, will sound like completely different amps if the listener is blind-folded.

When I think organic and raw I think late 60s Marshall SLP 100W.
 
Last edited:
c+addict said:
It all starts with the room sound for me. It's funny how much can affect tone. Weather conditions, line voltage, cord length, mood, etc. If the tone isn't happening in the room I won't play as long and not be inspired to write anything.
Click to expand...


I agree with all of this too, no doubt.
 
Wizard of Ozz said:
giphy.gif


I've owned 4 Rev Cs and still own 3 Rev Cs and a modified Rev C with 6 power tubes... aka prototype Rev C Triple Recto, and I've played 2 other Rev Cs. None of the ones I've owned/played are less gained compared to any other Recto version. Quite the opposite. You do need to use the right preamp tubes in these amps, Chinese12AX7C5 square getter, and properly selected.

I agree 100% with the MKIII + Rev F comparison. Less fizz, yep. The Rev C red channel modern is tighter, brighter, and way more cutting than any other Recto. Even vs the newest gen multi-watt Rectos. The main reason Mesa changed the original Rev C was to make it sound more different from the Mark series, cut the gain and change the feel of the amp. Maybe to be more like a SLO, who knows. But a Rev C and a Rev G red channel modern, will sound like completely different amps if the listener is blind-folded.

When I think organic and raw I think late 60s Marshall SLP 100W.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I've only had / played 1 real rev c so not a big sample set. That said I have learned that 5 guys can listen to the same clip & hear or at least describe completely different things..
 
VESmedic said:
Also, you sure seemed to care about my point of view when you messaged me and asked me to listen to your bands mixes, and praised my guitar tones, or do you not remember that?
Click to expand...
I do! I don't recall that you ever got back to me after I sent them over though so I always figured that it was because you thought they sucked and were being kind. LOL

And yes, I have thought most of your mixed I've heard sounded great. There were a few that I thought sucked but I kept my mouth shut to be kind..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top