Mesa Dual Racktifier Rev. F clip!!

[Nikevist1]

Mesa Dual Rackifier Rev. F Blackface clip. I think that this tone is my favorite of all time! What do you guys think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzF_N4SdFe4

 

[siggy14]

Not bad, My friend and I just recently went halves on a Rev F rackmount, we got it for a killer price.

 

[YellowJacket]

Awesome! The Rev F is a great sounding recto and it gets some crazy awesome harmonics with a boost in front.

 

[green_henry]

Very nice! I really like those 1-note fills -- cool

 

[LesPaul70]

What makes things interesting is that Teodor also has a Rev C clip, essentially the same song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EgasCEzans

I don't know how comparable those two samples are (settings & pedals used) but I do notice some basic characteristics of the two amps that I also observed when I compared an F Racktifier and a Rev C live. Both of them are relatively bright Rectifiers, compared to a G, but the C is markedly tighter than the F (and even brighter still). The F shares the fundamentally loose distortion character of the G but sounds much more aggressive than a G because it is brighter.
The C is both brighter and tighter than any later Recto. It was just designed that way.

 

[YellowJacket]

The Rev C really sounds like a different amp. The Rev F is basically a brighter and slightly tighter G by comparison.

 

[nakedzen]

Hey man! How would you compare the rev g blackface you traded with me for the Herbert to this rev f? (Still loving the tone btw)

 

[Silverwulf]

What makes things interesting is that Teodor also has a Rev C clip, essentially the same song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EgasCEzans

I don't know how comparable those two samples are (settings & pedals used) but I do notice some basic characteristics of the two amps that I also observed when I compared an F Racktifier and a Rev C live. Both of them are relatively bright Rectifiers, compared to a G, but the C is markedly tighter than the F (and even brighter still). The F shares the fundamentally loose distortion character of the G but sounds much more aggressive than a G because it is brighter.
The C is both brighter and tighter than any later Recto. It was just designed that way.

You can make any 2 channel Recto have the vibe from that Rev C clip. Get an EMG 81 loaded guitar, stick a Maxon OD808 in front and dime both the Tone and Output controls, keep your gain on the amp at a modest level, then dial your EQ to taste.

 

[PBGas]

Huge fan of that amp! Finding one of those in great condition is a treasure! Lucky folks that own one!

 

[LesPaul70]

Just returned from a long trip, slowly picking up (old) posts here, so bear with me...

You can make any 2 channel Recto have the vibe from that Rev C clip. Get an EMG 81 loaded guitar, stick a Maxon OD808 in front and dime both the Tone and Output controls, keep your gain on the amp at a modest level, then dial your EQ to taste.

That's sort of the point, isn't it? A C sounds like a later 2-channel plus an OD. A RevC basically has a built-in OD that is always on. :lol:

Of course I have no idea whether Teodor was actually using an OD on either or both videos.

 

[Silverwulf]

Just returned from a long trip, slowly picking up (old) posts here, so bear with me...

You can make any 2 channel Recto have the vibe from that Rev C clip. Get an EMG 81 loaded guitar, stick a Maxon OD808 in front and dime both the Tone and Output controls, keep your gain on the amp at a modest level, then dial your EQ to taste.

That's sort of the point, isn't it? A C sounds like a later 2-channel plus an OD. A RevC basically has a built-in OD that is always on. :lol:

Of course I have no idea whether Teodor was actually using an OD on either or both videos.

That Rev C video was an EMG 81 loaded guitar with a Maxon OD808 boosting the front. I was saying if you could use that into a Rev G or any other Rev and get the exact same tone.

As someone who has owned more 2 channels than he can count, as well as at one time having all 5 of the 2 channel Rev's to compare at once, I can say that you dial in the same tones on a Rev G as you can a C, but not vice versa. The Rev G is a better amp by far. It can get darker if you want it, it can get tighter if needed (by turning up the mids and presence), and the clean channel is superior.

The main difference in G and F is the F is a little brighter (not much) but the G has a better clean channel. Out of all the Rectos I've had, G and F are the ones that stayed.

 

[LesPaul70]

As someone who has owned more 2 channels than he can count, as well as at one time having all 5 of the 2 channel Rev's to compare at once, I can say that you dial in the same tones on a Rev G as you can a C, but not vice versa. The Rev G is a better amp by far. It can get darker if you want it, it can get tighter if needed (by turning up the mids and presence), and the clean channel is superior.

Not contesting your expertise or experience, by any means.

I just know that I currently have a C and a G, and I'll be darned if I can make either sound - or feel - like the other (without any help from external pedals). If I could, I would instantly sell the other. So far, no dice. But I keep trying...

Of course it could just be that I'm a moron and don't know how to dial in either amp... :lol:

 

[Silverwulf]

Not contesting your expertise or experience, by any means.

I just know that I currently have a C and a G, and I'll be darned if I can make either sound like the other (without any help from external pedals). If I could, I would instantly sell the other. So far, no dice. But I keep trying...

Of course it could just be that I'm a moron and don't know how to dial in either amp... :lol:

Haha, I'm sure you know how to dial in your amps just fine. I think your experience is what most people report. I don't think you can make a C sound like a G, but the G can do the C sound. You have to turn the presence and mids up more than you normally would, though.

The evolution of the Recto from C to G was really an attempt at getting both channels in check. It's the clean channel improvement that really stands out, even a massive improvement going from F to G. The C essentially doesn't have a true clean sound. It's a cheap imitation at best.

If I could only have 1 Recto, it would be a 2 channel Rev G. It's the most versatile of the lot (speakly strictly in terms of 2 channel models), and the clean channel is world's better than most give it credit for. Plus, I like it's base tone better than any of the Recto models released after it (3 channel model, Road King, Roadster, Reborn, etc).

 

[siggy14]

Not contesting your expertise or experience, by any means.

I just know that I currently have a C and a G, and I'll be darned if I can make either sound like the other (without any help from external pedals). If I could, I would instantly sell the other. So far, no dice. But I keep trying...

Of course it could just be that I'm a moron and don't know how to dial in either amp... :lol:

Haha, I'm sure you know how to dial in your amps just fine. I think your experience is what most people report. I don't think you can make a C sound like a G, but the G can do the C sound. You have to turn the presence and mids up more than you normally would, though.

The evolution of the Recto from C to G was really an attempt at getting both channels in check. It's the clean channel improvement that really stands out, even a massive improvement going from F to G. The C essentially doesn't have a true clean sound. It's a cheap imitation at best.

If I could only have 1 Recto, it would be a 2 channel Rev G. It's the most versatile of the lot (speakly strictly in terms of 2 channel models), and the clean channel is world's better than most give it credit for. Plus, I like it's base tone better than any of the Recto models released after it (3 channel model, Road King, Roadster, Reborn, etc).

I agree, you can get **** close with a Rev G to the Rev C but Cant get Rev C to have the loose bottom of Rev G but you can get it darker to mimic a Rev G. Of course they will never be exact, no two amplifiers sound the same because of different tubes or different speaker cabinets. Even if using the same cabinet you still have ear fatigue that will make them sound different when switching over.

My fav are the F's followed by the G's, I dont care for the clean channel on either so if it was my main gigging amp I would just get a Jazz 120 for my cleans.

 

[Silverwulf]

I agree, you can get **** close with a Rev G to the Rev C but Cant get Rev C to have the loose bottom of Rev G but you can get it darker to mimic a Rev G. Of course they will never be exact, no two amplifiers sound the same because of different tubes or different speaker cabinets. Even if using the same cabinet you still have ear fatigue that will make them sound different when switching over.

My fav are the F's followed by the G's, I dont care for the clean channel on either so if it was my main gigging amp I would just get a Jazz 120 for my cleans.

I'm with you. I'm glad you and Dave are digging that F you picked up! The F and G are the only ones that have stuck with me over the years. I need an actual clean channel, so the others weren't practical for me. I've really come to enjoy the clean sound of the G over time.

 

[LesPaul70]

I hear you...and I subscribe to what you are saying, to a point.

Yes, using the settings you suggest it is quite possible to imitate the C sound on a G, in a sense. But to me it's still not the same. Maybe it's more of a 'feel' thing than an actual sonic difference. The timbre can get awfully close but the distortion character of the C stays more focused and cohesive while the G is still looser (to my ears). This difference can be sort of negated if I add an OD in front of the G.

It's a similar kind of difference I find between my IIc+ and the IIc+ mode on my V. With some clever dialing-in and an EQ pedal in the loop, I can make the V sound like a dead ringer for my IIc+ - as long as I only strike a chord here and there. Once I start actually playing something, the difference becomes obvious. The V has a much tighter and more modern sound and feel, while the actual IIc+ has a more open, looser and more vintage-y character that I can't duplicate on the V.

Yeah, I really want to find an excuse to sell either the G or the C and get a RKII head instead but so far no success. :lol: The closest I've got thus far was actually when I used an EQ pedal in the loop to add some low-end thump to the C - it was timbrally almost an exact replica of my usual G sound. ...But still more focused and tighter.

Ok, maybe I'm being something of a perfectionist-a**ehole here, but believe me when I say that I really, really want that excuse to sell one of them...

 

[Silverwulf]

I think the IIC+ vs V in IIC+ Mode is a little different than comparing 2 channel Recto revisions. Either way, I say keep them both! 8)

 

[Nikevist1]

The rev.f is much brighter in my ears than rev.g. Also tighter sounding.. Rev.f is the most closest to a pre-500 sound than other 2-channel rectifiers and they used mark iii transformers on pre-500 and also rev.f amps.. that is what makes this era (1992-1993) rectifiers tighter sounding and more focused also! BTW if you guys are interested I am selling my dual rev.f rackifier now. Let me know if you would like to buy it!
And nakedzen i´m glad you still liking the amp

Hey man! How would you compare the rev g blackface you traded with me for the Herbert to this rev f? (Still loving the tone btw)