2 ch vs 3 ch dual rectifier questions

[Living_justice]

Hi botch, thanks mate, those songs are rough, and were recorded live in one take with no voxs, the set up was my bros line 6 head and my peavey valveking, but now we have a mark 4 , and a 2 channel dual recto for or sound, also back in c tuning so its heavyer, voxs and the songs have been spiced up a little bit to, south wales we are from,
we are at this minute recorded a 4 track demo fo promo use, on myspace, and signing deals, but the myspace web sit will be up soon,
the band name is, Voice of reason. Also there is a lot of double kick which is not on the recording, just cant hear it, number of or own songs are about 9, intotal which havnt been recorded. also if you click on it again theres 2 more songs on there now, with the same set up, enjoy my friend :lol:

 

[BENNY]

ttbaron, i like the single rect. though they don't have the tube rectifier, they still sound pretty good. but i personally would go for the recto-verb.

 

[Elpelotero]

Random hero, lol, what music you like fella? , :lol:

lol sorry, I didn't mean to be so offensive before, i'd just woken up when I typed it.

I like all kinds of music, but my main vices are progressive metal, straight up metal, and rock. I listen to blues, folk and *some* pop too.

Btw, strangely enough, i've been offered to trade my recto for a mint mark IV short head today.

don't do it. you can get a mark4 anywhere anyday. you'll have a tought time relocating a 92 recto.

 

[MrT-Man]

I have a '96 2-channel dual recto... I know it's only the early ones that are supposed to be really awesome, but anyone know if my amp would be pretty much identical to two of the three channels on a 3-channel recto, or would it still be somewhat better?

 

[BENNY]

somewhat different i would say. better is a matter of opinion. i would say it would sound like most 2 channel rectos. who knows. 2 of the same amps right next to eachother can sound different. same make same year. do you like ? that is what matters. if they were way better as some would say then i'd be able to sell them for more on e-bay like a MarkIIc+ right ?

 

[mrdylan]

Those who buy a mesa to sound amazing and just the way you want it to out of the box have no business buying one. Mesa owners are people who breath tweaking with tone and most of the time are never happy. My settings change from night to night .. show to show. I have a 3 channel dual rec and its anything but a WRECK. It does indeed have a lil fizzy sound. but its easily fixed with compression and outboard EQ. Mesa's are some of the hardest amps to dial in according to taste. But when you do. You find yourself playing for hours and hours non-stop.



I love my 3 ch DR

Lol this is exactly how I am I also find the sound changes daily. I have played both Duals and ended up going with a 3ch Triple as another poster mentioned. My sound is tight and heavy and can cut through anything.

I love my 3 Channel Triple. It is all personal taste more than anything. I think JCM800's are kinda crappy and prefer a JCM900 or DSL 100 which has started several arguements over the years.

What you like is not always what I like.

 

[Living_justice]

mark 4 you need :lol:, and read the posts fella, they answer all your questions, and get a mark 4
8) mark 2c+ is one of the best amps, dual are not the best amps,
the 3 channel i mean. :lol:

 

[David.W]

Does the heavy channel on the older 2 channel DR resemble in any way either of the heavy channels on the new 3 channel DR?

Yes.

I have a 96(?) 2 channel recto stacked on top of my 05 3 channel recto right now. Ive compared these amps all night as I may buy the 2 channel recto. Im using a standard recto cab and a Gibson Les Paul Custom straight into the amps.

The cleans on the 2 ch recto are thin and unvoiced, on the 3 ch recto its clear Mesa tried to voice it better and its pretty good for a high gain amp its actually usable and alot fuller sounding.

The distortion on the 2ch recto is nice, its smooth and warm, very easy to listen to, you can break straight into leads and back into rythm and the tone is consistant. I tried dialing many sounds and was very impressed with the tone, as you can imagine, its similar to its sibling 3ch recto.
However I was able to use my 3ch recto to reproduce the 2ch recto's sound using my second channel. The only difference to my ears was brightness, all this talk about mids and harshness was gone when I cut the mids below 10o'Clock. Also over use of the treble can add to the rash highs, but with some dialing and comparing it got close enough, I found the 3ch recto alot more sensitive to tweak. There is some fizz in the 3ch recto( in channels 2&3), but once that amp is turned up to meet the volume of a drummer its gone, pre-amp distortion has that bizzing high-end sound at low volumes.(triple rec, low volumes??)

Of course the 3ch has the luxory of a 3rd channel, which in my opinion isnt its strong point but it can really lay down some fire, which I was unable to reproduce in the 2ch recto . The 2ch recto just couldnt get 'that' offensive, its just to smooth. Im sure this is due to the midrange differences

Overall I found the 2ch recto great and of course I like its tone alot, its bass did seem tidy but I wouldnt say tighter (like the MKIV for example), It did seem to be missing midrange personality though. As I said, I was able to get so close with channel 2 on the 3ch recto that it became pointless. I will stick with my 3ch, because it is more versitile, on the full spectrum I am 100% convinced it is a broader amp capable of more tones once past the recto thunder.

Man ive been playing too long tonight!

 

[Elpelotero]

I have a '96 2-channel dual recto... I know it's only the early ones that are supposed to be really awesome, but anyone know if my amp would be pretty much identical to two of the three channels on a 3-channel recto, or would it still be somewhat better?

it won't be identical...if you read the post above mine, you'll see how he compared the amps and stated the differences. i would agree with some of that, except the part about losing harshness. i've never been able to kill the harshness.read some old topics and you;ll see more about this.

when i A/B'ed my rectos, i put every setting flat, at noon, and the volume loud enough to get power tube breakup. i don't remember exactly, but it was around 10o clock at least with all 4 tubes going, bold, and rectifier tubes. i played each amp for about 10 min. each and wrote down the description of the tone on paper. then i'd play the other. then i'd switch the tubes.

IMO the 2ch won every time, but i respect others opinions. i can see where the arguments for the 3ch make perfect sense. i also see where the arguments for the 2ch make sense. i guess it becomes a matter of taste, and if it weren't for this, we'd all have the same boring sounds.

 

[Elpelotero]

if they were way better as some would say then i'd be able to sell them for more on e-bay like a MarkIIc+ right ?

not for another 5 years, if you're lucky. people generally assume a recto is a recto is a recto. they all have the same name, so it's difficult for people to catch on.

the marks each had different names...and when you get metallica to play a C+, publicity can't get better than that now can it?

 

[BENNY]

5 years...i'll hold on to one then. i hope you're right, cause other than people on the board the general public sees them as lesser. i think it boils down to the application. i have a hard time believing that Randall Smith would be putting out a crappy amp for so many years. look at the stilletto. stage II came out after what 2 years ? i think if there was truly something wrong with 3ch dual it would have been discontinued by now. i like them with the Tradtional cab, not standard. it may be choice of cab. standard with stilletto. that i like.

 

[David.W]

I have a '96 2-channel dual recto... I know it's only the early ones that are supposed to be really awesome, but anyone know if my amp would be pretty much identical to two of the three channels on a 3-channel recto, or would it still be somewhat better?

it won't be identical...if you read the post above mine, you'll see how he compared the amps and stated the differences. i would agree with some of that, except the part about losing harshness. i've never been able to kill the harshness.read some old topics and you;ll see more about this.

when i A/B'ed my rectos, i put every setting flat, at noon, and the volume loud enough to get power tube breakup. i don't remember exactly, but it was around 10o clock at least with all 4 tubes going, bold, and rectifier tubes. i played each amp for about 10 min. each and wrote down the description of the tone on paper. then i'd play the other. then i'd switch the tubes.

IMO the 2ch won every time, but i respect others opinions. i can see where the arguments for the 3ch make perfect sense. i also see where the arguments for the 2ch make sense. i guess it becomes a matter of taste, and if it weren't for this, we'd all have the same boring sounds.

Like you say its taste. For me I found more potential in the 3ch recto, and I could get "close enough" to justify keeping it. Honestly, the audience wouldnt know the difference as they would be focused on the song or performance hopefully, so for me, that was close enough.

However, when you compared amps didnt you use the fabled forbidden Black Face of the 500? The attack more feirce than a pack of Canadian wolves lol!?




You should sell me one, no man is strong enough to bare 2 of them

 

[Living_justice]

your all wrong, 2 channel dual is the best amp, they should have just upgraded the cleans a little. :lol:

 

[mrdylan]

your all wrong, 2 channel dual is the best amp, they should have just upgraded the cleans a little. :lol:

Lol what ever.

 

[Elpelotero]

you're right, the audience wouldn't know. only us tone freaks would.

yes i compared it to the blackface.

i sold one to a bandmate, but he hasn't paid me in full yet, so it's till technically mine! =)

 

[RyanDM]

What about 2 channel single rectifiers, any good?

Absolutely. I have the series II single rectifier and couldn't be happier. I have also recently been running it with EL34s in it with great results.

 

[PolishSasquatch]

hmm, i dont see why everyone doesnt liek the cleans on the old 2channel duals. I personally love my cleans. very very fat and full. I can get some very warm and lustful jazzy sounds from it and shimmering blues. Its nto as shimmering as a fender, but...its a dual rec. I bought it for the brutal distortion

 

[PolishSasquatch]

hmm, i dont see why everyone doesnt liek the cleans on the old 2channel duals. I personally love my cleans. very very fat and full. I can get some very warm and lustful jazzy sounds from it and shimmering blues. Its nto as shimmering as a fender, but...its a dual rec. I bought it for the brutal distortion

 

[BENNY]

well my Pol friend that is just it. this thread intially started as someone asking if the channel 2 on the 2 channel was similar to one of the channels on the 3 channel. it has from them morphed into a debate and then to a "mine is bigger than yours" type thing. i keep coming back here only cause it is just plain funny. i've made the point before and i'll do it again, tone is subject to everyone. everyone is not the same. not only that but your 2 channel will sound different then my 2 channel, 1 because it is hand made and 2 casue i use a les paul custom shop with DR strings, monster cables into a 4x12 "traditonal" cab and have a different playing style and a different pick attack. all of these have factors on tones so everyone will be different. some say lucy liu is hot, some not. is she ? whos to say ? :lol:

 

[Guitarzan]

some say lucy liu is hot, some not. is she ? whos to say ? :lol:

Most Definitely!