Early Recto Tone Test: #29 RF-C vs. #339 RF-D-Winner is...??

[Bullen]

Does anyone know how many revisions the recto´s went through before the introduction of the 3 ch version?

I have a 1996 Dual Recto, and I think it´s revision "N".

 

[Elpelotero]

C,D,F, G

check under the blue filter caps (look like batteries).

should say RF-G

 

[Kung-Fool]

I'll be comparing a Rev C and a Rev G Racktifier on Sunday.

 

[Russ]

Miguel would you mind showing us a pic of where to look? Maybe a pic that is backed off enough to ensure proper location with the area circled. I will be receiving mine shortly and would like to have a better idea before I even open her up.

 

[Elpelotero]

http://www.dotphoto.com/SAN1/68/89/5B/i68895BA1-5CCF-4636-86F0-8D334E02AB9C.jpg

where the red and blue wires meet the blue filter caps.

 

[Russ]

That will certainly help a lot once I get my hands on the amp. Thanks Miguel

 

[Elpelotero]

I'll be comparing a Rev C and a Rev G Racktifier on Sunday.

o man. wish i could be there. just make sure to make it as free of external variables as you can. and remember that Rev G will probably sound close to Rev D. Take the things I mentioned previously into account.

 

[Russ]

I was just rereading this. Are racktifier revision G the same circuit and transformer as revision G in a head?

How did that Rev C/ Rev G shootout go?

 

[bunyok23]

looking at the tremoverb schematics vs a dual rec, the presence pot value on the red channel is larger 4 to 1. so thats why owners complain about harshness on the red channel of a tremoverb.you have to cut it to 9 0clock at least to mimic a normal dual rec 2 channel.

 

[Elpelotero]

Russ, I would only imagine yes...

 

[siggy14]

I wouldnt say harsh, I would say it has alot more mids so it makes it sound fuller, so if you like that mid scooped sound well this wont work to well for you.

looking at the tremoverb schematics vs a dual rec, the presence pot value on the red channel is larger 4 to 1. so thats why owners complain about harshness on the red channel of a tremoverb.you have to cut it to 9 0clock at least to mimic a normal dual rec 2 channel.

 

[vitor gracie]

looking at the tremoverb schematics vs a dual rec, the presence pot value on the red channel is larger 4 to 1. so thats why owners complain about harshness on the red channel of a tremoverb.you have to cut it to 9 0clock at least to mimic a normal dual rec 2 channel.

You have answered the age old question.....for this I give you the COOL DUDE award! javascript:emoticon(':lol:')

I noticed an insane difference between my trem-o-verb and my old two channel head. Night and day in the cleans. You cannot dial out the highs on the clean channel with the T-O-V. It gets a little annoying. The head was clunkier sounding on the clean channel set the same way, but passable. Just this weekend I started taking notice of the highs and I was wondering if there is something I could do about 'em. They are REALLY bright!

But...I still love my T-O-V :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Russ]

**** Kung-Fool****

Still awaiting the results of the Rev C and Racktifier Rev G shootout. Please share...

 

[siggy14]

I dont think there was a revision C racktifier, I had the RF-D and I now have the G. I can tell you the D sounded like any other D rectifier and was a great sounding amp.

**** Kung-Fool****

Still awaiting the results of the Rev C and Racktifier Rev G shootout. Please share...

 

[Kung-Fool]

**** Kung-Fool****

Still awaiting the results of the Rev C and Racktifier Rev G shootout. Please share...

It was a rev C head and rev G racktifier. I believe I made a post about it some time back. I really need to get some new tubes in the rev C to make a fair comparison.

 

[Russ]

If you can with regards to tone and tightness...

Regardless of head or racktifier:

Compare Rev. F to C or D.

Compare Rev. G to C or D.

Compare Rev. F to G.


Lets get this out on the table from those that have done the comparisons first hand. We already have a comparison of C to D.