I don't like...

[tomprs]

...the dual rec Reborn!

I've been using a three-channel dual rec for years and I love it to death. As everyone praises the reborn though, I wanted to test it extensively and (maybe) make the choice to sell the old one to buy the reborn. Well, no way! The only + point of the reborn over the "classic" for me is that it's tighter sounding. Nothing a good tube screamer-type pedal can't do! I found it to be lacking bottom end, and that HUGE 3D sound I'm getting out of my "classic" dual recto. The reborn sounded dry and shrill to my hears and channel 3 is still unusable...all of this make it a no go for me. If I want a tighter sounding high gain amp I would definitely go for a diezel or a Mark V. I just wanted to share my views, and maybe be the only to prefer the older 3-Channel version of the Dual Rec to the Reborn

Cheers,

Tom.

 

[Shemham]

Nice to hear different views on this for a change.

Guess what? I dial the bass out even with the Reborn Rectifiers. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[Nick Lehman]

...the dual rec Reborn!

I've been using a three-channel dual rec for years and I love it to death. As everyone praises the reborn though, I wanted to test it extensively and (maybe) make the choice to sell the old one to buy the reborn. Well, no way! The only + point of the reborn over the "classic" for me is that it's tighter sounding. Nothing a good tube screamer-type pedal can't do! I found it to be lacking bottom end, and that HUGE 3D sound I'm getting out of my "classic" dual recto. The reborn sounded dry and shrill to my hears and channel 3 is still unusable...all of this make it a no go for me. If I want a tighter sounding high gain amp I would definitely go for a diezel or a Mark V. I just wanted to share my views, and maybe be the only to prefer the older 3-Channel version of the Dual Rec to the Reborn

Cheers,

Tom.

Have you ever played an old school 2 channel version?

 

[tomprs]

...the dual rec Reborn!

I've been using a three-channel dual rec for years and I love it to death. As everyone praises the reborn though, I wanted to test it extensively and (maybe) make the choice to sell the old one to buy the reborn. Well, no way! The only + point of the reborn over the "classic" for me is that it's tighter sounding. Nothing a good tube screamer-type pedal can't do! I found it to be lacking bottom end, and that HUGE 3D sound I'm getting out of my "classic" dual recto. The reborn sounded dry and shrill to my hears and channel 3 is still unusable...all of this make it a no go for me. If I want a tighter sounding high gain amp I would definitely go for a diezel or a Mark V. I just wanted to share my views, and maybe be the only to prefer the older 3-Channel version of the Dual Rec to the Reborn

Cheers,

Tom.

Have you ever played an old school 2 channel version?

Nope...

 

[bandit2013]

Just curious, how would you rate the Roadster if you had ever tired one? Before I decided on the Roadster, I did consider the Newborn but noticed it had similar ice pick tones as the Mark V (it does not sound as shrill as it did 2 years ago, but very bright in comparison to the Roadster or RA100).

 

[ryjan]

The huge Recto low end sounds good but is worthless if you are trying to get a good band mix or recording.

 

[afu]

The low end is more about feel. With an old 3 Channel, turning up the high a little bit and turning down the presence will shift the mid-band down and allow 650Hz to about 2kHz+ to come through just fine without blowing yer head off. Keeping the gain left of 1:00 will keep it from mushing up and becoming indistinct. If the gain goes any higher, the mids need to be turned up and/or the bass turned down a touch.

Channel 2's mid band is especially sensitive to the treble setting, because of the 500pf cap into the pot. Turning it up shoves the mid cut slope WAY over. Since the channel is dark and the presence is tame, the higher treble setting can allow a very tight and focused attack. Moderate treble and presence settings work really well, too. I can nail Hetfield in Modern on this channel.

Channel 3's mid slope is higher in dB than Channel 2. If its mid pot is at about 8:30-ish, it's very similar to Channel 2 at 11:00-ish. As long as the bass isn't turned up much higher than about 12:15, it can cut through with the treble at 12 to 1:30 and the Presence attenuating the peak. The presence and treble need to complement each other as opposites, unless one is trying to buzzsaw some Deaf Metal. Also, the bass to mid slope is much more gradual in Modern; a person can hear more of the low mids on this channel.

I've been experimenting a lot recently and comparing Duncan's Amp thingy to what I'm setting up. Lots o' fun.