Recto pre/2:100 anyone?

[CJG]

How does this setup compare with a "real" dual recto head, tonewise? I know the differences that You can read about - it only has two channels etc etc, but how does it SOUND? Does it bark at You like a real head? :roll: :?:
Just want to hear a very honest opinion since I'm thinking about getting this as separate live-rig!

CJG

 

[soundpurist]

One thing for sure i does sound exactly like the head. First you should try that setting in the store if it's possible.

If you cannot try go and listen to the "samhill"'s clips,(Mark use a line mixer for the effects, that's why it sound so good)

http://www.thesamhillband.com/

I would say (IMO) that the recto pre is maybe a little less "gainy" and "bassy" but what i prefer is the brutality you can get from headroom of the 2:100. Those days i decrease the gain and i boost the master volume, for the rhythm i would say that it sound more agressive than a dual rectifier head (IMO).

See, i say what i think, it's not an absolute truth. To be objective, it depend on too many factors. The main thing is that i play with Bill Lawrence L-600 and L-500 pickups, make my amp crunch like no other! Before i said i got less bass i assumed you don't have Bill Lawrence pups cause with those pups i don't miss the bass at all in my setting.

Which cab you got? Now i play with a standard straight cab but i would prefer the G75's over the V30 since i got more power (before i owned a solo head 50). I'm not telling to swap your cab(s) but for a recto pre/2:100 i think to have a standard cab give the little difference that help.

Another important thing, if you want a live setting are you going to put 100% wet digital effects? Which processor? Or is it gonna be analog pedal? For my part i'm building a wet/dry/wet rig with a sound's sculpture's switchblade...till that moment i play 100%dry!:twisted:

From what i hear from your clips, you need a lot of gain for the lead. Like this i would say that maybe you gonna need to put a little more gain(maybe not) than your setting on a head. I know it's hard to find a store with the recto pre/2:100 demo but it's the best way to see if you gonna like it.

Don't be fooled by what i say, you can achieve about the same sound with this setting just the knob won't be at same same place.

I gave you all those point of view cause some people who want the best would prefer to go with an older model to get a better distortion, maybe with a racktifier or a 2 channels head. You cannot be wrong, it's a rectifier made by MESA!

BTW nice playing on your clips! :wink:

Edited: I wish i could play like this good phrasing...man, just turn your song progressive and you could compete with Dream theater! Seriously, i like the way you play.

 

[CJG]

Soundpurist - THANKS for that informative reply and BIG thanks for Your comments on my playing!! MUCH appreciated!!
The clips You heard was a Road King, (but I mostly play regular rectos live) and the guitars were Peavey Wolfgangs with stock pickups.

It all sounds interesting as You describe it. I usually have the bass pretty low, so I'm sure there will be enough anyway.
FX-wise I only use a Morely wah on the front and then I have a TC G-Force in the loop for some delays on leads + chorus/compression on cleans. I run it all "wet", but I have all FX switched off during rhythm playing. My cabs are Stiletto/Traditional cabs - I like those a lot!!

I have a close connection to the distributor who store all Mesas i Sweden, so trying the setup shouldn't be a problem for me, but I still wanted to hear some views on it.

Big thanks

CJG

 

[soundpurist]

Cool! Then you should have very good result with the G-force between the preamp and the 2:100 while you leave headroom for being able to use the solo(perhaps since you switch off effects with the rhythm, you're maybe better to add somekind of router for a true bypass). I guess you know that the Solo(footswitch) switch the 2:100 (and recto pre) on the vintage mode. Very important: ask the seller to connect the footswitch when you'll try the recto pre/2:100. So if you set the volumes (ouput and solo) equal you got some kind of third channel (not exactly cause you share same EQ and presence on modern and vintage mode).

If you could try the G-force at the same time, you will get a better idea. I just heard it was very transparent,better than the G-major (that i owned in the past, don't know about the G-force...).

 

[again with this]

How does this setup compare with a "real" dual recto head, tonewise? I know the differences that You can read about - it only has two channels etc etc, but how does it SOUND? Does it bark at You like a real head? :roll: :?:
Just want to hear a very honest opinion since I'm thinking about getting this as separate live-rig!

CJG

sounds awesome. That's my setup. However, I don't use the "Recto inputs" on the 2:100. I feel there is better control of the volume having the knobs on the power amp active.

 

[CJG]

Thanks guys for Your replies! Much appreciated!!

Take care
CJG

 

[screamingdaisy]

The Recto Pre - 2:100 is an awesome setup that sounds really similar to the head. The vintage and modern modes have been tweeked slightly, and the clean channel is an improvement over the standard Dual Rectifiers.

The thing is is that it's really, really f*cking heavy. My rack was a 6U with the preamp, power amp, power conditioner, and Korg tuner and it was one heavy *** *****. I eventually sold it for this reason.

IMO, the extra weight is only worth it if you can actually play in stereo with some trick delays or the like. If you're going to be playing in mono and/or without stereo effects then save your back and get the head.

 

[AshMan]

i wanna put my 2 cents in and say that i have the pre and the power amp and they r far superior then the solo heads. the versatility of the is amazing only downside is no reverb but i prefer a vintage spring reverb unit but i deff don't have the dough for that so for now a boss pedal will have to do lol

 

[V!N]

Hi lads, lurker here making his first post ! There's just so much information on here already that all my questions so far have been answered with the search function.

But this thread raises an important question for me as I might be on the look-out for some Mesa pieces in about a year.

Owners of the Recto pre + 2:100, when you say your units sound excatly the same or far superior to the heads. What heads are you talking about then ?
pre-500 DR's ? Dual channel duals and tripples ? Tripple channel dual and tripples ?

thanks !

V!N

 

[V!N]

By the way, I borrowed a rack recently with a Mesa 20/20 amp in it. The previous time I borrowed that rack, it had a Marshall 50/50 in it that I had to run about 3/4 full open.
The Mesa 20/20 is louder, fuller, punchier, sparklier, livelier and anything else .. and I couldn't get it passed 1/4 !!!

Any of you tried the Recto pre with a 20/20 ? I always play miced with a PA and monitors (sometimes in-ear) so I don't need an enormous amount of power.

 

[soundpurist]

By the way, I borrowed a rack recently with a Mesa 20/20 amp in it. The previous time I borrowed that rack, it had a Marshall 50/50 in it that I had to run about 3/4 full open.
The Mesa 20/20 is louder, fuller, punchier, sparklier, livelier and anything else .. and I couldn't get it passed 1/4 !!!

Any of you tried the Recto pre with a 20/20 ? I always play miced with a PA and monitors (sometimes in-ear) so I don't need an enormous amount of power.

It might be cool in a roadking 2X12 (stereo 3/4 cab!!!) 8)

 

[kmoed]

By the way, I borrowed a rack recently with a Mesa 20/20 amp in it. The previous time I borrowed that rack, it had a Marshall 50/50 in it that I had to run about 3/4 full open.
The Mesa 20/20 is louder, fuller, punchier, sparklier, livelier and anything else .. and I couldn't get it passed 1/4 !!!

Any of you tried the Recto pre with a 20/20 ? I always play miced with a PA and monitors (sometimes in-ear) so I don't need an enormous amount of power.

I use it with the 20/20. Its a killer setup that wont break your back. I've never had any problems at all with volume restrictions. Never had it past 12:00, its dam loud for a little unit. Only disadvantage is no kind of voicings like you get in the 2:100 / 2:90. But if you are happy with the sound coming straight out of the preamp, the 20/20 compliments it very well.

 

[disassembled]

There is a mod to reduce some midrange in the 20/20 which balances the tone out. I did it to mine and it's documented on the yahoo group for the triaxis preamp if you're interested.

I agree with the descriptions about the 20/20 it is really an awesome power amp.

Greg

 

[CoG]

Any of you tried the Recto pre with a 20/20 ? I always play miced with a PA and monitors (sometimes in-ear) so I don't need an enormous amount of power.

That's my rig. Initially I wasn't thrilled because the mid 'punch' in the 20/20 seemed to override the rec pre's voicings a little, but then I started jamming with it and it's great. I thought about doing the mod disassembled mentioned, but my 20/20 is new and I don't want the mod bad enough to void the remaining warranty.

+1 on the 20/20 being LOUD. Mesa must use those JCM800-style watts. I have one occasional project where it's too loud unless I use only one channel into a 1x12 (girl drummer... :roll

 

[V!N]

What do you lads think your Recto pre sounds the most like:

- pre 500 DR
- later 2 channel DR/TR
- current 3 channel DR/TR


The more and more I read about the 20/20, the more I think this is one of the best poweramps in the world. I only used it in a borrowed rig for a rehearsal and three gigs, but I liked it a lot !
I used it in combination with a Marshall JMP-1 and honestly didn't find it very mid-peaky. I suppose it's different when hooked to a mesa pre.

 

[CoG]

I couldn't say-- I haven't used a DR head very extensively. I have heard other people say that the RP has better definition but less low-end muscle than a head.

I think there's a real market for lower-wattage tube poweramps given the proliferation of preamps and massive fx processors. Really, there's the 20/20, the Marshall equivalent, and...?

The 20/20 is probably the best but there's not a whole ton of competition, either!

 

[123thefirst]

The major differences that haven't been commented on yet are that with the Recto Pre/2:100 setup you'll miss the tube rectifier possiblility you would get with a Recto. Maybe the Recto Pre makes up for that difference with its emulation circuitry? I can't comment on that.

However, the Recto Pre's clean channel is not the Recto's clean channel. The Pre's clean channel is derived from the Road King series I. That's a very large improvement over the Recto in most people's opinions. You can get a very, very nice Fender Twin-like slap, all manner of vintage clean, semi-clean , threshold clean and somewhat dirty tones from that channel alone.

 

[V!N]

the Recto Pre's clean channel is not the Recto's clean channel. The Pre's clean channel is derived from the Road King series I. That's a very large improvement over the Recto in most people's opinions. You can get a very, very nice Fender Twin-like slap, all manner of vintage clean, semi-clean , threshold clean and somewhat dirty tones from that channel alone.

Now that's actually great news if you ask me !

So did they improve on the distorted tones as well ? Or are those as fizzy as the 3 ch. DR's and TR's ?

 

[V!N]

Please help a bro out here ! The only way for me to try a Rectro Pre is to buy one.
I could really do with some words from somebody who as actually heard how the Recto Pre compares to the Rectifier heads.

 

[CoG]

Hey man--

Search for posts by samhill, he's a pro who used the RP/2:100 combination extensively but I don't know how much he's around these days, and maybe pm soundpurist.