Dual Rectifier - are Pre-500s really that much better?

[adam79]

I'm thinking of buying a Dual Rectifier. I've read that the first 500 made (the Pre-500) are way better than any other Dual Rectifier. Is this true? Does it really sound that much better than the others? Also, are the new ones as good as the older ones from the 90s? When I say "older ones" I don't mean the Pre-500s, I'm curious if they started to make the DRs with cheaper parts as time passed.

Thanks,
-Adam

 

[Elpelotero]

Read my website in the signature.

 

[adam79]

Read my website in the signature.

yeah. i found your page when searching on google.. i also read that the two channel dual rectifier are much better than the three channel models. the lowest serial number i've been able to find is in the mid 5000 area. according to your page, all of the dual rectifiers being used for studio recordings between 92-93 were pre-500s, right?

 

[Elpelotero]

1993 already includes post 500, as does 1992 even.


Yes, most agree 2 channel rectos have better tone. There's been many discussions about this on the forum. Use the search feature and you'll find lots of discussions on the matter dating back several years.

 

[adam79]

1993 already includes post 500, as does 1992 even.


Yes, most agree 2 channel rectos have better tone. There's been many discussions about this on the forum. Use the search feature and you'll find lots of discussions on the matter dating back several years.

are all the 2 channel DRs, not including the pre-500s, just as good?

 

[pokerrules47]

the best way to answer that question is to listen to both amps and make your own decisions. Sure, websites like the boogie archives can tell you the technical details, however what sounds "good" to them, may or may not sound good to you. It's not like the newer rectifiers are garbage, they just sound different. It's not exactly a subtle difference, however it's not like one is a recto and the other isn't.

Also, liking something because everyone says it's what you should like isn't really thinking independently is it? You really need to evaluate them yourself. All of my purchases have been from trial and error. I've owned a lot of gear because other people told me that it was "the best" etc... and I had found myself disappointed more often than not.

Use your ears luke

 

[adam79]

the best way to answer that question is to listen to both amps and make your own decisions.

The only reason I'm asking is because I can see/play a 3 channel DR anytime I want.. It's hard to come by the 2-channel ones at the local stores; the only place I see them is on Ebay.

 

[mikey383]

If you want to get a pre-500, be prepared to fork out the dough. They're going for about $2500 when they are for sale, because of how hyped-up they are.

FWIW, just 4 years ago they were going for the same price as other 2 channel Duals. They've been hyped up so much in the last 4 years that the price they fetch has tripled.

 

[Silverwulf]

YMMV - That's the best answer I can give you. There's no right or wrong answer to this question. There's guys on the board that swear by their Revision C and D amps, and there's guys here who prefer later Revision G's like me. I've personally had 40+ Rectos now and I think (because it's hard to keep count) 4-5 of those have now been "Pre-500" models. When it's all said and done, my favorite were Revision G's. They have superior clean channels to the C and D, and I feel I can dial in the dirty sounds almost identical. Not to mention I like the way the sub-lows sit better in a mix. Others disagree, and that's fine. We all perceive tone differently. Revision G is what works best for me, that might not be the case for everyone.

One point most people will agree on is there's a definite difference between 2 and 3 channel Rectos. Again, your tonal preference would change which would suit you best.

 

[Elpelotero]

If you want to get a pre-500, be prepared to fork out the dough. They're going for about $2500 when they are for sale, because of how hyped-up they are.

FWIW, just 4 years ago they were going for the same price as other 2 channel Duals. They've been hyped up so much in the last 4 years that the price they fetch has tripled.

Depends where you look. The economy hit them hard. I haven't seen a pre500 go for over $2k in almost 2 years.

 

[Silverwulf]

Depends where you look. The economy hit them hard. I haven't seen a pre500 go for over $2k in almost 2 years.

Yep. My last 3 were sold for $1650, $1800, and $2200.

 

[YellowJacket]

Ok, so I just retrieved my dual and I pulled the amp off of the chassis. I discovered it is indeed a Revision F. (RF 1F) The serial number is 26** for those of you who are curious. I still have yet to try it with my new thiele 2x12 because the summer subletters left this place in a shambles and we are frantically trying to put it back together!

My own take on this discussion is that I love my head but I can get a great tone out of a 3 channel dual as well. Preference and all that. I'm sure there are those who like the new amps better than the old ones. Apples and Oranges.

 

[danvortex]

I own 3 different 2 channels DRs, a G a C and a D. To me they all sound good, they are all great amps, much better than the 3 channels version. But... i like the 2 pre-500 much better, to me there is a big difference, if you don't mind not having a real clean tone than go with a pre-500 if you can find one. D and C don't sound the same either, but it is a matter of taste, they sound much more alike than they do with a G. I prefer C but D is pretty close.
i'm thinking about selling my D to have a good cash down on a Mark V but i'm not sure yet.

 

[Geiri]

I used to have an old two channel recto, which I bought new in either '94 or '95. I sold it cause I just didn't like it.
Many years later I got the recto fever again, (this would be last year to be exact) and bought a brand spanking new three channel. Now that one I liked for some reason, channel 3 modern ch 2 vintage. That rocked my world for a bit until I got subjected to gas again. My thoughts on the three ch vs the old one were that the three channel was better voiced for my taste. Non of the fizz that annoyed me with the old one was there in the three ch one.

Hope this helps

 

[danvortex]

Now i'm surprised because one of the things i really don't like about the 3 channels version is how it is fizzy compaired to the 2 channels one. Proof that we don't all ear the same things. Bottom line, you've got to try it yourself to make your mind about an amp... Epelectro sold me his C because he liked his D better, i bought his C because i liked it better than the D i already had at the time... It all depends on how you use the amp, with what you play it (guitar, pedal, etc.) the kind of music you play, your playing, your taste, etc.

 

[Metaltastic]

I used to have an old two channel recto, which I bought new in either '94 or '95. I sold it cause I just didn't like it.
Many years later I got the recto fever again, (this would be last year to be exact) and bought a brand spanking new three channel. Now that one I liked for some reason, channel 3 modern ch 2 vintage. That rocked my world for a bit until I got subjected to gas again. My thoughts on the three ch vs the old one were that the three channel was better voiced for my taste. Non of the fizz that annoyed me with the old one was there in the three ch one.

Hope this helps

I have to agree - I owned a 2 ch. for a decent amount of time, and recorded a lot of stuff with it, and always I found that getting it to saturation levels I wanted for metal just brought in an excess of fizz, noticeably more than on most amps with similar amounts of saturation. And then I realized that every clip I'd heard of a 2 ch. model that had enough gain for my tastes (and was through a Recto cab) had that similar fizz, whereas I had heard multiple clips of 3 ch. models that didn't suffer from it (haven't had the chance to play one yet). It wasn't fizz that could be dialed out, as it was centered around 6k (the presence knob on 2 ch. models in modern mode centers more around 4k, and the treble knob 3k), and I would nominate that perhaps a fair amount of people feel the 3 ch. models are fizzier because they don't realize how powerful the presence knob is on channel 3. And I tried running my 2 ch. in Vintage mode, or using any of the channel cloning options, and for heavy recorded rhythm parts they all sounded too muffled, so it was a case of opposite extremes IMO.

 

[Elpelotero]

With rare amps, you often have little choice other than to buy one sight unseen and decide for yourself. If you don't like it, there will be someone else waiting in line to buy it and you don't lose money.

I've been fortunate to have some very rare amps (C+'s, pre500's) and I haven't lost money on any of them, save for maybe $100 or so.

The same concept applies to old marshalls, fenders, etc.


Your other option is to travel around and make friends with other Boogie Board members and test their amps. I've had many conversations with several members on the phone and have even shared beers with someone from Ohio (I'm in Florida!). These relationships allow me to discuss gear and we get insight on each other's amps.

Try to scope out guys in your area from the Boogie Board and ask to play their amps. 90% of them will be more than happy to share their love for boogie.

 

[Silverwulf]

If anyone is ever in the DC area and wants to plug into some amps, shoot me a PM and I'll let you know if I'm around. Lord only knows what I might have you could plug into at that time... :lol:

 

[fluff191]

I own a pre-500 Recto and a 3 Channel Recto, and love them both. They each do different things very well.

I would record with the Rev. E all day long, but the 3 Channel (Bias Mod, JJ tubes) has that honky mid-range thing going on and actually cuts through in a live band setting very well, and is what I use to haul around and load in and out of cars. The Rev. E. stays home.

To each his own I guess. Mixing a 2 Channel with a 3 Channel is what REALLY sounds good. Best of both worlds.

 

[Schulzy]

I own a 2007 3ch DR and have previously owned a 93 2ch DR with the small logo and attached power cord.

When i first picked up the 2ch i was in love... It had a tighter bttom end.. had a warmer sound didnt have that top end fizz to it... Although it had less gain and low end then the 3ch and didnt sound as thick.. I gigged and recorded with it for a while... But i just grew out of it.. I needed that really thick sound that the 3ch gave me.

I sold off the 2ch and retubed the 3ch with electro-harmonix preamp tubes... and now it absolutely kills the 2ch in everyway... It may have just been my taste in sound changing over time.