Brought my Rev. F Dual to Guitar Center today

[Anonymous]

So I picked up the Mark V yesterday at my local GC. Of course, it wasn't until after I got home that I realized they left many things out: the footswitch case, the documentation, the correct footswitch cable - they gave me the Roadster cable - and the correct cover - again, the Roadster. So I go back after calling them and, assuming they'll ignore my request to have this stuff ready for me and will have to find it, decide to bring my Dual in to put up against one of the new 3 ch models.

Of course I was right; they thought they had what was missing but it was AGAIN Roadster gear. So I told them I was going to mess around with their gear and they said that was fine. I get both amps and plugged them into a Recto cab one at a time. First, I set up the 3ch Dual and I have to say, it sounded pretty **** good! The last time I owned a Dual was with a Basson cab that I really couldn't stand. It was much tighter than I remembered, very punchy and the actual tone was pretty sweet!

Here are my settings:
Presence: off
Treble: 2:00
Mids: 2:30 - 3:30
Bass: noon
Gain: 2:00
Master: 10:30

Ch 3 Modern, diodes, bold

Once I get a good feel for it I plug in my Rev. F. After getting it set up for a while, I found that as I expected, it was better. With it, I found there to be a few more low mids that contributed to a thicker, heavier sound. Here's my settings:

Presence: off
Treble: 2:00
Mids: 11:30 - 12:30
Bass: 12:30
Gain: 2:00
Master: 11:00 (this is the equivalent to the 3ch at 10:30)

Ch 2, diodes, bold

For the actual comparison, there are a few things I'm going to take away. First, the 3 ch Rectifiers are AWESOME amps! They are a slightly different beast than the older Rectifiers, and I believe them to be easier to set up badly. They don't have the midrange voicing of the older Rectifiers, and as such - and this is to my taste - the mid knob needs to be set high for them to sound incredible.

Second, the difference in feel between the older and newer Rectifiers is negligible. Both of them will make you very, very happy!

Third, the difference in tone is not dramatic the way some people believe. Again, the Rev. F has more low midrange making for that really heavy Recto sound of the 90s, but the 3 ch keeps up! For recording, I'd take the Rev. F without much thought, but for a gig, the versatility of the 3 channels plus the solo boost can make for a tough choice. Furthermore, though I generally like the 2 ch better on recordings, Volbeat's "The Human Instrument" has one of the best Recto sounds going, and that is unmistakably a 3 ch!

Forth, and this has not so much to do with the comparison although I did come to the realization at that time, is that unless I played exclusively through a full stack of medium to hi powered speakers, I would not get a Triple again. I think the triple pushes the speakers too hard when the power tubes are working at optimum levels. The Dual pushes them just the right amount, so the sound may appear to be more focused and tighter.

I had the GC rep play on both while I messed with controls and listen. We both liked the Rev. F more, though we agreed neither is a bad choice! I suppose the take-away message here is that if you need the versatility of the 3 channels, you can feel good knowing that you've got one of the best amps going. I'll bet if I spent more time with the 3ch, I'd have it dialed in even closer. Hell, if I switched tubes out the differences in tone would be even smaller!

Oh, and the other take-away message is that you MUST learn the controls of the newer Recto before writing it off as lousy. It can be a steep learning curve because the tone stack comes before the gain stages. I also find that the presence control on both amps works to destroy tone. It adds fizz and since it comes so late in the signal path, will take away much of the tightness and definition of the amp. If you want more bite, always go for the treble control. If you need a little high end shimmer, use presence VERY sparingly.

 

[Elpelotero]

great post! The thing I always noticed when I did these comparisons is that the 2ch was always more "clear" and tight. But you ar right, the 3ch is nothing to write off as a poor amp.

 

[YellowJacket]

Third, the difference in tone is not dramatic the way some people believe. Again, the Rev. F has more low midrange making for that really heavy Recto sound of the 90s, but the 3 ch keeps up! For recording, I'd take the Rev. F without much thought, but for a gig, the versatility of the 3 channels plus the solo boost can make for a tough choice. Furthermore, though I generally like the 2 ch better on recordings, Volbeat's "The Human Instrument" has one of the best Recto sounds going, and that is unmistakably a 3 ch!

Exactly. There is very little difference. I think you can change the tone significantly, simply by swapping guitars or speaker cabs.

Great post, btw. Hey, how is the Dual doing, anyway? Did you figure out the tube problem?

 

[Anonymous]

Third, the difference in tone is not dramatic the way some people believe. Again, the Rev. F has more low midrange making for that really heavy Recto sound of the 90s, but the 3 ch keeps up! For recording, I'd take the Rev. F without much thought, but for a gig, the versatility of the 3 channels plus the solo boost can make for a tough choice. Furthermore, though I generally like the 2 ch better on recordings, Volbeat's "The Human Instrument" has one of the best Recto sounds going, and that is unmistakably a 3 ch!

Exactly. There is very little difference. I think you can change the tone significantly, simply by swapping guitars or speaker cabs.

Great post, btw. Hey, how is the Dual doing, anyway? Did you figure out the tube problem?

The Dual isn't being touched for a few more days actually. I'm doing a claim with FedEx to cover the damage the seller says happened during shipment; he said he had a tech look it over before selling it, but I'd be surprised if this problem happened during shipment because he packed it well. What I'm hoping will happen is that I get claims money from FedEx, and then it's something simple enough for me to fix myself. I opened it up the other day to check a few things out and I think I know what's wrong: there are ground leads coming off the tube sockets, and on the two problem tube slots, the ground seems to have broken at the solder joint. I'd be surprised if it were something else, but again, I want to wait for the claim just in case there's more.

As for 3ch vs 2ch, I see it as less significant than changing speakers, but more significant than changing tubes or pickups - most of the time at least.

 

[snave]

Very cool post. I was thrilled when I bought my first Dual Recto (3 channel), but now I'm happily riffing away on a Revision F. :twisted:

Also...I'd tend to agree than changing cabs or speakers should have a much bigger tonal impact than the 2-channel vs. 3-channel difference, FWIW.

 

[YellowJacket]

There is a story about my gear. I had a deposit on a Nomad 55 head at Mothers Music and I had bought a mini marshall valvestate 4 x 12. I had some work being done on my guitar and when I walked into the store, they had a nomad 100 combo and a used Dual Rectifier for cheaper than what the Nomad 55 was going for. I mean I was into punk and I LOVED the sound of the Nomad 55 with my Godin LG. Marshalls just sounded SOO muddy with it. So ya, I plugged in the Nomad 100 and tried it next to the Dual and LOVED the dual. So ya, I talked to my dad, got a bank loan, and picked me up a Dual. I got my deposit back from the Nomad since I bought the cab there too but the salesguy hated me ever since that day.

So ya, I was ripped off severely when they came out with the 3 channel heads. I'd LOVE one of those if only I could get it with the blackface like mine. Still, my amp sounds awesome, even with the hundreds of cabs I've tried with it. Anyway, there are about four things that I can't get over my gas for. 1) Marshall 1960ax (greenbacks ftw) 2) Strat 3) PRS 4) Marshall TSL100. (I'd get it modded and cut down to 50watts for sure, though)

 

[Boogiebabies]

Only Channel one has any gain before the tone stack. Two and Three are after like all older Recto's.
Also, the only true presence control on both amps is in Orange/Vintage modes. The Red/Modern uses an
extra Treble control voiced to mimic a presence circuit. I agree that post 2006 Recto's sound great in their own right,
but I believe Mesa strayed in the wrong direction after Revision F. From my memory, only the Rev. C has a normally functioning presence control.
As you referenced, everything after IMO was a buzzsaw.

 

[fluff191]

I just go straight for the ultimate Recto Orgy: My Rev E and 3 Channel Recto running at the same time!

Good write up!!