Rec Pre/2:100 vs Triple Rect Head

[B@SZ]

Hi everybody, I dont know what to do, I want a full recto sound! but I dont know what is better, I already own a Rec Pre and a Mesa 4X12 cab, and a friend of mine is selling me either a 2:100 or a Triple Rectifier Head for barely the same price, What would be your choice?

 

[PUBH]

I have personally never been a fan of the Triples (too much headroom for me? i dunno). Since you already got the Rec Pre, I'd shoot for the 2:100. Pair it up with the Rec Pre and you pretty much have a rackmount Dual Rectifier.

I have a Rec Pre and 2:100 and I love the combo. Sounds great and I love it! They work very well together.

But that's just my thoughts... since you know the seller, perhaps you could have the opportunity to try out both and see which setup you like more?

 

[again with this]

how do you mean Triple and 2:100 for about the same price?

Get the 2:100 and another cab and you will have monster Recto tone.

 

[B@SZ]

Yeah he is selling me any of those for a very low price, I think Ill try the 2:100, does it really has that recto tone?

 

[PUBH]

Yes!

If you pair the 2:100 with the Recto Pre and hook it up, you will have Rectifier tone. It is how it was made! Just make sure you hook it up right. (with the poweramp and cab, use the "Live Outs" and hook the "Modern" jack on the pre with the "Modern" jack on the poweramp, and set the voicing to "Live Bright", and you'll be set)

And like any Mesa, it may take you awhile to dial in the tone you're after... but you'll eventually find it... and it will definitely be recto!

 

[Octavarius]

A Recto Preamp + a Recto 2:100 would basically be a pure Dual Rectifier in rack form when you use the dedicated inputs on the 2:100. I'd go for the Dual, as the Triple need to be turned LOUD to reach the same sweet spot.. plus I like racks.

You also have the ability to go true stereo with effects! It's like having a stereo Dual Rectifier head in a rack!

 

[desertcj]

Wouldn't the Recto Pre and Stereo 2:100 be a Quadruple Rectifier since it is 100 watts per side. I can see if you put a reactive load on one side and used just one channel it would be more along the lines of a dual rec. If you run a Mesa 4x12 in stereo you would be running 100 Watts per side. if you run the triple rec mono it would be 150 watts or 75 watts per side.

I still vote for the 2:100 and a Reactive Load. That way you have a dual rec that you could always turn into a quad rec by using the other side. You should be able to run 4 cabs off it with out even breaking a sweat.

 

[Octavarius]

Wouldn't the Recto Pre and Stereo 2:100 be a Quadruple Rectifier since it is 100 watts per side. I can see if you put a reactive load on one side and used just one channel it would be more along the lines of a dual rec. If you run a Mesa 4x12 in stereo you would be running 100 Watts per side. if you run the triple rec mono it would be 150 watts or 75 watts per side.

I still vote for the 2:100 and a Reactive Load. That way you have a dual rec that you could always turn into a quad rec by using the other side. You should be able to run 4 cabs off it with out even breaking a sweat.

The Dual/Triple thing is not determined by the wattage, it's determined by the number of rectifier tubes in the power circuit. (e.g. Single has one, Dual has two, Triple has three). So it's still going to be a Dual Rectifier, since it'll still have two rectifier tubes, despite the fact that it puts out twice as much power as a standard Dual Rectifier head.

 

[desertcj]

So, based on that the 2:100 is a No Rec since it has no rectifier tubes??? and I think the power would have more of an affect on the sweet spot than number of rectifier tubes.

Most people I know dont run there rectos in tube rec mode anyways.

 

[Octavarius]

So, based on that the 2:100 is a No Rec since it has no rectifier tubes??? and I think the power would have more of an affect on the sweet spot than number of rectifier tubes.

Most people I know dont run there rectos in tube rec mode anyways.

That's actually true. It has no rectifier tubes. Hm.. I'd still say it's closest to a Dual Rectifier, 'cause it's made exactly after the Dual Rectifier's power circuitry. It'll be generally like having a Dual Rec in diode mode.

True, about the sweet spot, but it's still four power tubes per channel. The sweet spot doesn't really change, since they are completely independent of each other. It's not like it has 8 tubes in a power section. It's simply two channels. Sure, it's louder, but the power tube saturation effect will be the same.
It's just like if you had two Dual Rectifier heads running next to each other. Would the sweet spot on those amps change at all? No. Will it be louder? Yes.

 

[desertcj]

well the problem with that is to turn it down to non ear piercing levels you get away from that sweet spot. If i had a 2:100 i would run a reactive load on one side and use only 100 watts unless i was somewhere i could use all that power.

 

[Octavarius]

well the problem with that is to turn it down to non ear piercing levels you get away from that sweet spot. If i had a 2:100 i would run a reactive load on one side and use only 100 watts unless i was somewhere i could use all that power.

That's true. A dummy load is not really necessary. By turning the Master on one channel completely down and the Presence all the way up, both channels share the load of one. That enables you to only run one side of the power amp.

Not sure that the volume of two 100 watt amps equals the volume of a 200 watt amp, though. :? I've read the equations for calculating that, but I don't remember anything of it..