Any 2ch users move to a Roadster?

[screamingdaisy]

Not sure why you keep your mid's so low, you should have them around 1 with the treble, mids will really fill out your sound as well.

The higher your mids the harder the response, the lower the more compressed.

I want a softer response with more compression on my cleans and lead.

 

[siggy14]

Yeah but your channel 4 is very low, the one channel you would want to jack them....

Not sure why you keep your mid's so low, you should have them around 1 with the treble, mids will really fill out your sound as well.

The higher your mids the harder the response, the lower the more compressed.

I want a softer response with more compression on my cleans and lead.

 

[screamingdaisy]

Yeah but your channel 4 is very low, the one channel you would want to jack them....

I just spend about an hour going back and forth. 11:00 gives more dynamic depth and a bit more clarity. 1:00 pops the mids more, but it clouds the detail and flattens out the response.

11:00 sounds kind of scooped when the volume is low, but once the amp is up at stage volume the V30s do their thing and it balances out better.

I find I can get better cut by leaning out the bass rather than adding to the midrange. Not that I want a whole lot of cut... the whole reason I like modern mode is because it sounds big and lays back in the mix.

 

[screamingdaisy]

"Tweed" mode is my favorite mode in the clean section. In my experience "Clean" mode itself sounds like drizzling $hits though (dull and bland to my ears> perhaps I'll try it again and dig it with some tweaking). I've really been trying to like "Brit" mode but feel its lacking a bit in the gain department. Overall I'm very happy with the amp though.

Brit mode kind of sucks. Maybe it'd work well for someone else, but to me it sounds less "Brit" and more like "Recto with less gain and bass".

On a side note, I have the mids on channel 4 up to 1:00. I was playing different songs than I did yesterday and I found I needed that harder edge.

I also finally got my OD working. I've been rotating through the ones I have trying to get something that worked and everything was coming up artificial sounding. I finally happened upon some settings that worked on a Maxon OD808 and it's finally meshing into the gain structure really well.

 

[YellowJacket]

So I tried a Roadster today. While I love all the modes of channels 1 and 2, 3 and 4 just didn't live up to my expectations whatsoever. I mean the amp is really good but I was just underwhelmed by it. Clean and tweed on channel 1 are awesome, and I like clean and brit on channel 2. Brit is undergained but definitely is the sort of voicing I'd have lots of use for. I wasn't a fan of raw mode and vintage was alright. I preferred modern for channels 3 and 4, but it just isn't good enough to justify dumping my Dual Rev F for two low gain modes I absolutely loved. I have to say, I totally agree with Yetti's assessment of the roadster. Great amp, but not for me.

The Electra Dyne, on the other hand . . . My brother and I spent about 2 hours trying just about every guitar on one. We both concluded it is the best amp we have played in a LOONNGGG time. It is absolutely brilliant with the gain trim switch set to clean and the volume up at 2:00 in all modes. Vintage Lo does a great crunch and Vintage high is great for soloing and super phat chording. ABSOLUTE LOVE!!!!

 

[b0nkersx]

Brit mode kind of sucks. Maybe it'd work well for someone else, but to me it sounds less "Brit" and more like "Recto with less gain and bass".

Brit is extremely challenging to dial in but with ballsy passives (using a Les Paul w/stock pups) it sounds great.

Try this:
Treble - 3:00
Mid - Dimed
Bass - 11:00
Gain - Dimed
Presence - 7:00-9:00
And add lots of volume, diode rectified, 50W. It's very zeppelin-y, especially with EL34s. This makes for a great Van Halen-esque shred sound too if you boost it (using fulltone ocd/maxon od808, prefer ocd with this mode).

 

[screamingdaisy]

So I tried a Roadster today. While I love all the modes of channels 1 and 2, 3 and 4 just didn't live up to my expectations whatsoever. I mean the amp is really good but I was just underwhelmed by it. Clean and tweed on channel 1 are awesome, and I like clean and brit on channel 2. Brit is undergained but definitely is the sort of voicing I'd have lots of use for. I wasn't a fan of raw mode and vintage was alright. I preferred modern for channels 3 and 4, but it just isn't good enough to justify dumping my Dual Rev F for two low gain modes I absolutely loved. I have to say, I totally agree with Yetti's assessment of the roadster. Great amp, but not for me.

I could see you not liking it. I think the shift in tonality of channels 3 and 4 are going in an opposite direction to the one you've been trying to go with your Rev F.

For myself it's worked out really well. I actually wanted something that has a little more of that modern Recto (Rev G and beyond) vibe. I also like the darker/smoother sound of the Roadster, so it's been win-win for me.

 

[screamingdaisy]

Brit mode kind of sucks. Maybe it'd work well for someone else, but to me it sounds less "Brit" and more like "Recto with less gain and bass".

Brit is extremely challenging to dial in but with ballsy passives (using a Les Paul w/stock pups) it sounds great.

Try this:
Treble - 3:00
Mid - Dimed
Bass - 11:00
Gain - Dimed
Presence - 7:00-9:00
And add lots of volume, diode rectified, 50W. It's very zeppelin-y, especially with EL34s. This makes for a great Van Halen-esque shred sound too if you boost it (using fulltone ocd/maxon od808, prefer ocd with this mode).

I'll give those a shot tomorrow. The big strike against Brit mode is that I really like Tweed mode...

 

[YellowJacket]

I could see you not liking it. I think the shift in tonality of channels 3 and 4 are going in an opposite direction to the one you've been trying to go with your Rev F.

For myself it's worked out really well. I actually wanted something that has a little more of that modern Recto (Rev G and beyond) vibe. I also like the darker/smoother sound of the Roadster, so it's been win-win for me.

EXACTLY! My cabs, tubes, speakers, and settings tend to make my Dual sound really 95% of the way to how the Electra Dyne sounds. It is that 5% that pisses me off. The fact that the 'Dyne basically is the sound in my head out of the box drives me crazy.

I'll give those a shot tomorrow. The big strike against Brit mode is that I really like Tweed mode...

Tweed AND Brit were AWESOME! They also both clean up well with the volume knob. *IF* I had a Roadster, I'd run channel 4 in modern, channel 3 in Raw for clean, and I'd use Brit for channel 2 and Tweed for channel 1.

 

[b0nkersx]

I'll give those a shot tomorrow. The big strike against Brit mode is that I really like Tweed mode...

Yeah Brit was hard for me to learn. Most people expect it to sound like a modded marshall or something and get disappointed and never bother with it again. You really need extra gain and volume for this mode to open up but you can get it from the treble and mid knobs.

Tweed is good too but I always feel like its either too fizzy or too dark on the high end for me. I can't seem to get the treble and presence set just right.

 

[screamingdaisy]

Tweed is good too but I always feel like its either too fizzy or too dark on the high end for me. I can't seem to get the treble and presence set just right.

I never really tried... it just sort of happened. I use low output pickups however and they tend to have more top end than a high output wind, so I don't know if that factors in or not...

 

[Yetti]

Play around with Modern in Channel 3, that channel had it all playing alone but when i wanted it in a band situation, i could just never get it to a spot that fit.
Try it out, the low end pretty contained to a point on that ch.

 

[jbird]

WOW! With how everybody talks, you'd think the 2 channel heads were better. Since I never work with anything aside from low to moderate volumes this is definitely interesting . . .

It has way more bottom end, so the tone is beefier and it doesn't need as much volume to fill out. My old one is brighter and a little more aggressive in the mids, but you need to drive it kind of hard before the cab/speakers do their thing and fill the sound out.

Anyway, I finally had a chance to turn it up for a short period of time today. I like the Roadster better. I mean, it has a real clean channel, which is a big plus... but I actually prefer the high gain as well. The darker tone produces a smoothness that I like.

Clean is a straight forward improvement. I mean... I have an amp with no real clean channel going up against an amp with a clean channel referenced from a Lonestar. I have channel one on tweed/50w/tube rectifier and dialled in for a Fender turned a little too loud kind of sound. Just enough gain to give it some character, but not so much that I can't chord without loosing definition. It sits in that just past the verge of breakup region really well. It also takes an overdrive like a champ, which gives me some alternate mid-gain tones. Channel 2 is set up on fat/100w/diode, and the idea is for a pristine yet warm clean kind of sound. It does this very well and the reverb is really nice.

I really love the flexibility of separate clean channels. I have no problem rolling my guitars volume off for cleans, but to be able to call up two alternative cleans like that is a pretty big bonus for me as I'm not always about the high gain.

Channel 3 is vintage/100w/tube rectified. I think I've been pretty vocal in that I don't feel that Rectifiers have a good lead tone... however I'm really impressed with this. My old Recto produced that thin, kind of wimpy lead tone that was workable but never really got my rocks off. Boosting it just made matters worse because it thinned it out even more. With it's extended bottom end this new Recto sounds thicker right out of the gate, and boosting it for more mids/sustain doesn't totally gut the bottom end out of it. Overall I'm extremely happy.

Channel 4 is modern/100w/diode. This is the one mode/channel I was really concerned about going in. I like how aggressive the old Recto is and I was worried about the Roadster's extra bottom end muddying things up as it has A LOT more bottom end than my old Recto... to the point where it almost feels like I'm being doubled by a bass guitar. I can reduce the bass right to zero and while it drops the bottom end, it doesn't remove the extended bottom end effect. Either way, after playing with this amp for a bit I'm not too concerned with it... while the bottom end sounds a bit loose and boomy at lower volumes it stiffens up as you increase the volume. I'd argue that this amp is actually tighter than my old Recto, even with all the extra bottom end it produces.

Oddly enough, channel 4/modern doesn't boost nearly as well as it did on my old Recto. Boosting my old Recto took it from sludgy to modern metal. Boosting this one doesn't work nearly as well... or maybe I just haven't spent enough time with it yet to work the settings out. Whatever it is the OD is putting an ugly layer and isn't blending as well as I'm used to (tried an OD808 and Fulldrive 2). They've been useful for tightening up the bottom end when playing at lower volumes, but at higher volumes they add a very boxy midrange to the overall sound that I don't like.

Overall, for my tastes I'd say it's an improvement in every channel. Factor in an improved effects loop, the ability to have tube/diode rectifiers per channel, a solo boost and reverb... and it equals a massive upgrade in gig-ability.

The only knock against the amp is that at low volumes there is a hollow phasing effect when the effects loop is in use. This phasing effect is most prominent in channel 4/modern and goes away as the volume goes up.

For reference, I've been running fairly generic Recto settings lately. The low mids on channel 3 is kind of muddy on it's own, but it works well with a mid heavy OD pushing it.

Channel 1 - Channel 2 - Channel 3 - Channel 4
G - 12:30 - G - 12:00 - G - 01:00 - G - 01:00
T - 12:00 - T - 01:15 - T - 12:00 - T - 01:00
M - 09:00 - M - 09:00 - M - 08:00 - M - 11:00
B - 11:00 - B - 11:00 - B - 12:30 - B - 10:00
P - 08:00 - P - 10:30 - P - 11:00 - P - 01:00
M - 10:00 - M - 10:30 - M - 11:30 - M - 09:30
 50w/tube - 100w/tube - 100w/tube - 100w/diode

Very close to the way I set mine up! 8)

 

[droptrd]

I agree with screamingdaisy on pretty much everything about the roadster. Great review BTW. The one thing I noticed is the feel. The amp in my experiance is very DRY compared to the 2ch rectos. Even the cleans whiles they sound awesome they dont feel and play as good as the cleans on my Tverb.

I thought about a trade for one a couple years ago with my stiletto. Swapped amps for a week with my buddy to see if we each liked the others amps. I had a rev G at the time for reference. The lack of feel was the main deciding factor. especially coming from a stiletto that have amazing feel and playability. The roadster had a nicer saturation (if you know what I mean) than my rev g but I just couldnt get it to play like my old 2 ch. I dont know.

I do agree that the roadster is the most advanced recto with the best tone and features. But it seriously lacks the mojo the old ones have IMO. I gig alot but rarely do I get off my lead ch. So for me a trade of playability for features and a bit more tone is not what I need.

The bottom end on the roadster is intoxicating. Its the widest sounding amp ive ever heard. Holds together well too. Makes everything else sound like an AM radio. I couldnt play my stiletto for weeks after that :lol:

Congrats on the NAD screamingdasiy!

 

[YellowJacket]

I thought about a trade for one a couple years ago with my stiletto. Swapped amps for a week with my buddy to see if we each liked the others amps. I had a rev G at the time for reference. The lack of feel was the main deciding factor. especially coming from a stiletto that have amazing feel and playability. The roadster had a nicer saturation (if you know what I mean) than my rev g but I just couldnt get it to play like my old 2 ch. I dont know.

EXACTLY. My Rev F is just crunchier and more aggressive. The cleans on the Rev F do not bounce, but they are really round and smooth.

I do agree that the roadster is the most advanced recto with the best tone and features. But it seriously lacks the mojo the old ones have IMO. I gig alot but rarely do I get off my lead ch. So for me a trade of playability for features and a bit more tone is not what I need.

The Roadster is basically a swiss army knife of an amp. I think it can do almost any style convincingly, but it doesn't suck balls like Line 6. Yes, I DO think it is flexible like a modeling amp but with the benefit of tube tone!

The bottom end on the roadster is intoxicating. Its the widest sounding amp ive ever heard. Holds together well too. Makes everything else sound like an AM radio. I couldnt play my stiletto for weeks after that :lol:

Hugely wide tone makes bedroom jamming fun but it pisses bass players off. I always roll back my bass when working in a band situation. I actually found my Rev F to be more bottom heavy than the old 3 channel duals. I like the Dual Reborn a lot and in terms of doing one thing exceptionally well, the Reborn excels massively at this.

 

[screamingdaisy]

I agree with screamingdaisy on pretty much everything about the roadster. Great review BTW. The one thing I noticed is the feel. The amp in my experiance is very DRY compared to the 2ch rectos. Even the cleans whiles they sound awesome they dont feel and play as good as the cleans on my Tverb.

I agree with the dry assessment. I think the dryness contributes to an overall tighter sound.... although the extra bottom end totally counters that by inducing a lot of sag that my Rev F doesn't have. The Rev F is a bit more spongy on the attack, but the response is much more immediate (if that makes sense?).

The only thing I'm still not 100% happy with is channel 4. I like the sound, but the lagging response is bugging me. I can get it to where I want using an OD, but if possible I'd like to get to the point where I don't need one.

That said, now that I'm getting used to the tonality of the amp and how to play it I'm starting to recognize the familiar tone blanketing response of JJ's preamp tubes. I suspect they're bleeding a lot of edge off my tone and are probably the reason I can't get channel 4 to be quite as "in your face" aggressive as I'd like.

The bottom end on the roadster is intoxicating. Its the widest sounding amp ive ever heard. Holds together well too. Makes everything else sound like an AM radio. I couldnt play my stiletto for weeks after that :lol:

I'm actually kind of surprised with how well it does hold together. I think the stiffer response (what I suspect you're referring to when you said "dry" above) is what ties it together.

 

[droptrd]

Yeah id suspect dark JJs wouldnt be the best choice for an already darker sounding amp 8)

 

[screamingdaisy]

Stuck a Tung-Sol in V1. Way more of an improvement than I expected. The mids opened right up with more clarity and aggression than they had previously. The bump to the mids has also brought the bottom end into better balance and opened up some of the boxiness I had in channel 3/vintage.

I'm actually very surprised... I expected a little improvement, but this is a lot. It's literally removed the proverbial JJ "blanket" off my tone.

Really fückin' stoked about this. :twisted:

 

[iceman]

Boosting this one doesn't work nearly as well... or maybe I just haven't spent enough time with it yet to work the settings out. Whatever it is the OD is putting an ugly layer and isn't blending as well as I'm used to (tried an OD808 and Fulldrive 2). They've been useful for tightening up the bottom end when playing at lower volumes, but at higher volumes they add a very boxy midrange to the overall sound that I don't like.

I agree about the boxy tone the 808 adds, I have one but rarely use it because of that. After I got the 808 I was wondering what the big deal was about them, nice to know maybe its just the roadster+808 combo that doesn't work well. Maybe I'll try another boost, like the Michael Angelo.

I did two things to take the "blanket" off the amp. I switched from an EMG81 to an 85 in the bridge position, it seemed to give it more harmonic response, clarity and bite (ok that wasn't an amp mod). I recently switched to EL34s and I don't think I'll go back to 6L6 in the roadster. The El34s really help tame the high end fizz and made it more aggressive in the mid range. I don't really notice the cleans taking much of hit (I was quite worried about that).

 

[screamingdaisy]

Cool. I have an axe loaded with an EMG81 that I haven't tried yet, as well as an 85 in a drawer somewhere. So far as boosting with an 808 goes, with EMGs I wouldn't bother. IMO they accomplish everything that people with passives are trying to accomplish via using a boost... more power, tighter sound. I like the 81 better because it's tighter and more percussive when playing metal... the 85 always seemed a bit too fat to me. Still, I'll give it a go again next string change as my tastes are always subject to change.

About the tubes, I have some EL34s so I'll give them a shot, but generally I prefer 6L6s in Rectos. The EL34s are cool, but they take away the razors edge that 6L6s have and that edgy harmonic grind is one of the major reasons I like Rectifiers.

I've never had an issue with high end fizz with any Recto. I found the key was to roll your guitar's tone knob down until the top end cleans up, then you're golden.