Opinions on a Pre 500 Dual Rectifier

[adam79]

Hey. I'm thinking about buying a Pre 500 Dual Rectifier. The serial number is R-0030. Here's the link to pictures of the amp: http://s273.photobucket.com/albums/jj209/adam_l79/pre500/ . Are these amps really that much better than the Duals they put out now?

Thanks,
-Adam
[email protected]

 

[Platypus]

I would buy it and see for yourself if it's reasonably priced... but yes the general consensus is that they are superior.

Worst case you flip it and easily make your $ back.

 

[Elpelotero]

welcome to the board!

That amp is absolutely mint for being 16 years old. I had this amp's older brother, #29, and I can definitely tell you that yes it will sound superior to the new rectifier amps (of any kind). A lot tighter, more clarity, more usable gain, smoother, organic, etc.

The only cons about this amp are that the clean channel is going to be pretty bad and that it might be a tad on the bright side because of the particular revision this specific amp is. However, just turn the presence pot down when you get it and there should be no problem. Unless you like a bright amp.

BTW, going price on these is between 1800-2200+

 

[Botch]

I've got R0050 so I'm guessing this will be the same revision as mine. You should jump on this amp. I can testify that this amp sounds WAY better than the newer models, and like Elpelotero said, if you're not bothered about cleans you're good to go. Although you wont have great cleans you can get amazing sounds out of the orange channel. Go for it! Another bonus is that this amp will go up and up in value.

 

[Silverwulf]

My own personal opinion is that tone is subjective and there's a lot of Pre-500 fan boy hype around these parts for them... :wink: I personally prefer Rev F and G over anything below 500. You'd just have to try it and see what you like best.

 

[lookslikemeband]

My own personal opinion is that tone is subjective and there's a lot of Pre-500 fan boy hype around these parts for them... :wink: I personally prefer Rev F and G over anything below 500. You'd just have to try it and see what you like best.

True. But if I ever sell my pre-500, you'd better believe I'd advertise it as such! :lol:

 

[Silverwulf]

True. But if I ever sell my pre-500, you'd better believe I'd advertise it as such! :lol:

Oh definitely...take advantage of the hype... 8)

 

[Fwdftw]

price is teh question?

 

[danvortex]

I'm the owner of DR406(1992 revD) and DR11950(1998 2 channels revG), we share our rehersal room with another band and one of their guitar players uses a new 3 channels. The 2 channels definitly sound better than the 3 channels. To me the pre-500 is better than my rev G, it has some special qualities that are rare in an amp. I got it for 2000$ and would not sell it even if i was offered 3000$.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm really curious to try one to see what all the hype is about. I'd never own one though, the clean just wouldn't satisfy my needs.

 

[Elpelotero]

I'm the owner of DR406(1992 revD) and DR11950(1998 2 channels revG), we share our rehersal room with another band and one of their guitar players uses a new 3 channels. The 2 channels definitly sound better than the 3 channels. To me the pre-500 is better than my rev G, it has some special qualities that are rare in an amp. I got it for 2000$ and would not sell it even if i was offered 3000$.

Everyone's ears are different, but to YOUR EARS, what do you find to be the distinguishing factors?

And what does the other dude say?! lol

 

[mikey383]

I had the opportunity to buy a pre500 (#290 IIRC) on ebay a few years ago and passed it up. I just couldn't justify spending the money, since I already had a '96. I'm kicking myself in the a** now, because it went for less than $900.

Stupid me. :roll:

 

[adam79]

i'm getting a great deal on it.. it's just that i have to trust that he'll send me the amp after i paypal him the money.. if i didn't have to deal with trust issues, especially on the internet, i would have the amp by now.. he wouldn't put it on a ebay private auction for me, but if he's legit, I assume he's avoiding the ebay fees..

I'm looking for a replacement for my '77 Marshall JMP 2204. Mainly cuz I love fenders, but the JMP Marshall's don't distort single coils well.. I could always install a hot rails pickup..

thanks for the help,
-adam

 

[Boogiebabies]

My own personal opinion is that tone is subjective and there's a lot of Pre-500 fan boy hype around these parts for them... :wink: I personally prefer Rev F and G over anything below 500. You'd just have to try it and see what you like best.

You and GearMonkey must be in contact. Another hater joins the fray.

Let's just face it. The early amps have gain and drive like no other. It's a very simple notion and easy to hear. They are not grunged out flubby amps like the later revisions.

 

[danvortex]

Well, all the other guys in my band also like the two 2 channels DRs over the new 3 channels we have in our practice room. And they also all like the pre-500 better. What i like about the pre-500 is that the amp has a meaner metal tone, it is tighter and it has more attack on the picking. It is definitly brighter but it can be adjusted to taste. I get a better metal tone with the pre-500 at less extreme settings compared to how i have to set my revG. Even the OD i use in front has all the settings lower with the pre-500. When playing the pre-500 i feel more directly connected to the amp, the response of the amp has just something special. But i will agree that it sounds a bit different from the revG and it is possible someone would like revG's darker tone better. I can make a difference between taste and the quality of an amp, to me the pre-500 is definitly a better amp but if you like revG 's tone better than don't spend the extra money. To me it comes to the fact that it is not sure you will like an amp better than another even if it is a better amp, the tone is a bit different so you will deceide what you like the most. A friend of mine has a Bogner Uberschall that he loves, before bying it he tried my revG and deceided he would go with the Bogner. After he got his amp i got my pre-500, he tried it and liked it so much that he deceided he wanted one, he found DR25 and bought it, to him all the little improvements from revG to revD were the ****...

 

[Elpelotero]

nice review there

 

[Silverwulf]

You and GearMonkey must be in contact. Another hater joins the fray.

Let's just face it. The early amps have gain and drive like no other. It's a very simple notion and easy to hear. They are not grunged out flubby amps like the later revisions.

For starters, I have no clue who GearMonkey is. Secondly, the fact that you call someone a "hater" because they have a different opinion than you regarding a matter that is completely subjective is ridiculous. I'm sorry that you think your opinion is right and everyone who disagrees is wrong.

You must have missed the memo that tone is subjective. I'll make sure you get a copy...:wink:

 

[Almost Human Guitarist]

My own personal opinion is that tone is subjective and there's a lot of Pre-500 fan boy hype around these parts for them... :wink: I personally prefer Rev F and G over anything below 500. You'd just have to try it and see what you like best.

You and GearMonkey must be in contact. Another hater joins the fray.

Let's just face it. The early amps have gain and drive like no other. It's a very simple notion and easy to hear. They are not grunged out flubby amps like the later revisions.

That has got to be one of the most immature and unintelligent responses about tone I've ever heard. So, he's a hater because he thinks a different revision of an amp sounds better than what you do? WTF is that? He says he "personally prefers". Not A is better than B. So please explain to all of us how that makes him a hater. I as well have heard the different versions of said amps and wouldn't buy one becuase I don't like the clean tones on the older amps. The hype is based on a number. Hell, I don't even like Rectos at ALL so there.

 

[Botch]

Let's play nice boys, we're only talking about amps, not the war in Iraq!

 

[siggy14]

I agree with silverwolf, just as I agree with Gearmonkey. First off I love my G as much as I love my C tone, yes different, but they both have there own greatness to them.

Revision C I like so much better for soloing, it is a more agressive amp, I would never say it has more gain, just tighter and more agressive and more ideal for soloing.

Revision G is a great rythem amp, i can dial it in close enough to the C that in a live situation 99% of the people would not be able to tell the difference.

Second when it comes to gearmonkey, I agreed with him, as a pre 500 owner i feel nothing wrong with saying any of the early rectifiers were special. If you want to be specific the Revision E's are probaly more rare then the C's or D's.

When it comes down to it, any of the early rectifiers with different revisions, old trannies where special and deserve that title, better then current, I would say not, just more rare.

Tone is very subjective, to say one is better then the other is just crazy. Nothing wrong however with having a preference of which one you prefer.

You and GearMonkey must be in contact. Another hater joins the fray.

Let's just face it. The early amps have gain and drive like no other. It's a very simple notion and easy to hear. They are not grunged out flubby amps like the later revisions.

For starters, I have no clue who GearMonkey is. Secondly, the fact that you call someone a "hater" because they have a different opinion than you regarding a matter that is completely subjective is ridiculous. I'm sorry that you think your opinion is right and everyone who disagrees is wrong.

You must have missed the memo that tone is subjective. I'll make sure you get a copy...:wink: