Rectoverb 25 Combo vs Roadster Combo
- Thread starter screamingdaisy
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
I wish I had $4000 bones to lay down for a H&K Triamp. The flexibility is phenomenal. The Tubemeisters have some similarities, but that Triamp is just..... WOW.
Between your choices, I think it comes down to whether you need the extra options on the second amp. If one is to fill in the sound of the other, the options probably aren't as important. The other deciding factor would be EL84 vs 6L6.
For the sake of your back, a head and cab would probably be better. Even being big and burly right now doesn't mean you will be later if you're lifting heavy items regularly. I went from jogging, Krav Maga, and 50 - 60 hour work weeks to a wheelchair, if I can get out of bed. The punishment I put my body through for more than 30 years didn't help things any. Most people won't have as dramatic a disability as I, but the wear and tear adds up and contributes to my problems. I know it seems silly when you're able-bodied, but prevention is the best cure.
Between your choices, I think it comes down to whether you need the extra options on the second amp. If one is to fill in the sound of the other, the options probably aren't as important. The other deciding factor would be EL84 vs 6L6.
For the sake of your back, a head and cab would probably be better. Even being big and burly right now doesn't mean you will be later if you're lifting heavy items regularly. I went from jogging, Krav Maga, and 50 - 60 hour work weeks to a wheelchair, if I can get out of bed. The punishment I put my body through for more than 30 years didn't help things any. Most people won't have as dramatic a disability as I, but the wear and tear adds up and contributes to my problems. I know it seems silly when you're able-bodied, but prevention is the best cure.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
Just toying around with a few things.... mixing and matching the Roadster, 2 Ch Recto and Electra Dyne.
I seem to get my best results when two separate preamps are involved. Slaving the Roadster into either the ED or 2ch preamp is clearer, yet also flatter and more 1 dimensional than using a Y-splitter out front.
Conversely, using a Y-splitter into the front end of both preamps produces more depth and character at the cost of a bit of clarity.
Roadster + ED was by far the thickest sounding as the ED helps fill in around the Roadsters midrange, but it was a bit more difficult to work with at times because the two amps respond differently to volume rolloff and effects. Chorus in particular could get muddy.
Roadster + 2ch was not quite as thick as both amps are basically hitting the same frequency range, but it's a little more 3D than getting all the sound from a single source. This mix was a little easier to work with as both amps basically respond identically to volume rolloff and effects.
I'm going to try this experiment again in a day or two to see if I get similar results.
At this point I'm really leaning towards a second Roadster. After this first experiment I prefer the sound of two Rectos (dual Rectos, lol), but I'd like the added functionality of being able to mute each amp independently, having two switching effects loops (stereo delays), and the possibly of having a solo function on both amps.
I seem to get my best results when two separate preamps are involved. Slaving the Roadster into either the ED or 2ch preamp is clearer, yet also flatter and more 1 dimensional than using a Y-splitter out front.
Conversely, using a Y-splitter into the front end of both preamps produces more depth and character at the cost of a bit of clarity.
Roadster + ED was by far the thickest sounding as the ED helps fill in around the Roadsters midrange, but it was a bit more difficult to work with at times because the two amps respond differently to volume rolloff and effects. Chorus in particular could get muddy.
Roadster + 2ch was not quite as thick as both amps are basically hitting the same frequency range, but it's a little more 3D than getting all the sound from a single source. This mix was a little easier to work with as both amps basically respond identically to volume rolloff and effects.
I'm going to try this experiment again in a day or two to see if I get similar results.
At this point I'm really leaning towards a second Roadster. After this first experiment I prefer the sound of two Rectos (dual Rectos, lol), but I'd like the added functionality of being able to mute each amp independently, having two switching effects loops (stereo delays), and the possibly of having a solo function on both amps.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
Here's a few blurry photos to help give some idea of what I have going on. I'm using the POG as a Y-Splitter.
For today's testing I ran the 2ch into the ED's speaker.
For today's testing I ran the 2ch into the ED's speaker.
YellowJacket
Well-known member
Can you post your crunch settings? I am borrowing a Mark V right now and I've love to check it out!
It's this very thing I find so terribly irritating about Marshall amps. No matter how I hit the strings, the same sound comes out. I actually like it when the pick attack translates into varied tones because this allows for expressive playing (in theory).
screamingdaisy said:
Obviously having two, complementary tones will yield the most thick and huge result tonewise. Is it possible to EQ the 'Dyne' in such a way that it responds in a more useable way to the volume pot? i.e. more like the roadster.
If you want a more tonally 'balanced' rig that co-operates better live, you can always use different tubes / speakers / settings with the Dual Roadster arrangement.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
YellowJacket said:
In the Mark V manual, page 44, Workhorse channel 2 with the gain full up and with this general shape on the graphic EQ:
http://www.mesaboogie.com/media/Amplitudes/2015/March/JP%20Mark%20Five%2025%20Proto%20Play%20Through/MarkFive25-JP-CRUNCH.png
Keep in mind that I'm running vintage output PAFs and tend to not run my volume on full unless I'm soloing. If you're using hotter pickups you might need to back the gain down a bit.
I don't know. I'm going to have to play around some more. Part of the problem is that both amps behave different at different volume levels... kind of complicates things.
This has been creeping into the back of my mind too. For this testing the ED and 2ch have been going through an MC90 while the Roadster is V30s. So far I like the pairing.
Either way, I'm going to back-burner this project for a few weeks. I'm in no rush and want to play around with some concepts before I commit.
YellowJacket
Well-known member
screamingdaisy said:
Ya! My pickups are pretty much at the other end of the spectrum.
This kind of slipped my mind but it is really true. The Electra Dyne essentially becomes a different amp at higher volume levels. It's kind of frustrating =-/ The Mark V is probably the most consistent amp I've played across different volumes while the Electra Dyne is about the least.
Ya totally. You could do a v30 / c90 in one cab and a G12H-75 Creamback and a G12M-65 Creamback in the other. The Recto voiced amp tends to sound a bit odd with only a c90 because of the dip in the upper mids that amp has. Just my opinion trying to record the c90 in my v30 & c90 2 x 12 cab I have.
Run 6L6s in one with EL-34s in the other and if you dial in different tones on each amp, it should work fantastically. The best thing to do would be to have one amp emphasize mids with a clearer tone while the other is grittier with more highs and lows.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
So, I'm watching Soundgarden's Lollapalooza performance from last year looking to see what tidbits I can glean about mixing a Recto and ED. He does some of the same things I do... Low-ish gain and rides the volume a lot so I figured there had to be something there to learn.
Interestingly, I'm halfway through and neither amp has left the red channel that I've seen (Red for Kim Thayil is Blues mode). Clean(ish) through mean is guitar volume. Leads are a mix of straight amp, boosted with an OD, and/or treble boosted with a cocked wah.
There was a few times where they'd change songs and I'd be stuck trying to figure out why them amps suddenly sounded so much thicker/heavier, then it dawned on me that they use C#\drop C. When he switched guitars the Guild S-300 (Super Distortions) provided a surprising increase in drive vs the S-100's PAF type pickups.
Moral of the story... dial both amps to sound great together and never change channels. :lol:
It's kind of cool to see the variety of sounds he's getting despite never changing channels.
Interestingly, I'm halfway through and neither amp has left the red channel that I've seen (Red for Kim Thayil is Blues mode). Clean(ish) through mean is guitar volume. Leads are a mix of straight amp, boosted with an OD, and/or treble boosted with a cocked wah.
There was a few times where they'd change songs and I'd be stuck trying to figure out why them amps suddenly sounded so much thicker/heavier, then it dawned on me that they use C#\drop C. When he switched guitars the Guild S-300 (Super Distortions) provided a surprising increase in drive vs the S-100's PAF type pickups.
Moral of the story... dial both amps to sound great together and never change channels. :lol:
It's kind of cool to see the variety of sounds he's getting despite never changing channels.
YellowJacket
Well-known member
That Lollapalooza 2014 performance! Talk about a TIME PUNCH!
Given that we're basically back in the 80s -minus the mullets- it was pretty shocking to listen to Soundgarden again. My initial reaction was "wow that singer sucks, this music writing sucks, the guitarist sucks" followed by "This is really COOL and DIFFERENT." Been listening to so much technical and precise music lately that sometimes the 'art' side of things gets a bit lost. That is A LOT of very different and quite surprising tones to get from a guitar.
I am shocked at everything that can be gotten from a single channel tube amp. Is it possible that we're simply spoiled with all of our channel switching glory? Have we forgotten what tube amps are actually capable of?
Given that we're basically back in the 80s -minus the mullets- it was pretty shocking to listen to Soundgarden again. My initial reaction was "wow that singer sucks, this music writing sucks, the guitarist sucks" followed by "This is really COOL and DIFFERENT." Been listening to so much technical and precise music lately that sometimes the 'art' side of things gets a bit lost. That is A LOT of very different and quite surprising tones to get from a guitar.
I am shocked at everything that can be gotten from a single channel tube amp. Is it possible that we're simply spoiled with all of our channel switching glory? Have we forgotten what tube amps are actually capable of?
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
YellowJacket said:
I don't think the problem is channel switching, I think it more a simple lack of opportunity. Soundgarden was together for 7 years before Badmotorfinger and it was 10 years before Superunknown. Further, they were supported by a community of fans and venues that encouraged loud ass rock and roll, and they were doing it with other bands that shared both members and ideas. That equals a lot of opportunity to try things out, to push the boundaries, to get bored with old ideas and try new things.
Combine that with people sitting at home and playing their guitar in solitude, spending hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars trying to dial in the perfect guitar sound when the details of that guitar sound will be totally obliterated the second you added drums and bass. Even the ones who are fortunate enough to drive the piss out of their tube amps will be limited due to the lack of interaction with other instrumentation. They're less likely to experiment with certain sounds because they have no one holding down the foundation, so they're limiting themselves to using sounds that sound good in isolation.
YellowJacket
Well-known member
Hmmm. I totally agree, it seems that many serious guitar players are interested in creating the sorts of 'pretty' detailed and produced tones that are commonly found on records. There was a guy on the west coast who I met while doing my masters. He was also a composer and a guitarist, and his equipment tastes were unlike anything I'd ever seen. He had this vintage, no name, oldschool guitar and I have no idea what the brand was. He had it tuned C, G, D, so the lower strings were like a Cello. The amp was this terrible solid state combo and he had the reverb maxed, the result of which created these crazy awesome soundscapes. You almost wouldn't believe that it was a guitar!
Listening to Kim Thayil play almost reminded me of a far more 'tame' version of this guy. It's this gritty, sloppy, thin sort of playing, at least on the surface. Almost like he doesn't even care about his phrasing. But you pay attention to his playing and it is obvious that everything is very controlled and intentional. He has chops and he used them to create something that was -at the time- incredibly unique. When you listen to the evolution of 'guitar tone' it is still quite obvious that the 'grunge' thing is a bit of an anomaly in this otherwise consistent evolution of produced, layered studio tones.
Not along ago, someone posted a video of this guy boosting a high end tube amp with a Metal Zone pedal. The EQ was dimed and the gain was on zero. It took the usual hifi, clear, tight, detailed tone and transformed it into this savage, howling, inhumanly wide wall of sound. Predictably, someone commented saying it sounded like 'poo'.
The first tone I chased was the mid focused, crunchy, punk rock roar that was commonly found with a Marshall and a Les Paul. Well, I got that with the Electra Dyne, and then promptly went looking for an aggressive, heavy, and musical metal tone. That's found using a Super Strat and modern passive pickups through a Mark V. The Bare Knuckle Juggernauts are fantastic pickups and the low mid focused / hollow mid characteristic as well as the 'purring' top end really mates well with the more vintage Mark V to create a modern, polished, aggressive tone.
After watching Thayil, what I'm doing seems kind of boring and mainstream, and I thought I was being unique getting a poorly adopted and discontinued Mesa amp!
Listening to Kim Thayil play almost reminded me of a far more 'tame' version of this guy. It's this gritty, sloppy, thin sort of playing, at least on the surface. Almost like he doesn't even care about his phrasing. But you pay attention to his playing and it is obvious that everything is very controlled and intentional. He has chops and he used them to create something that was -at the time- incredibly unique. When you listen to the evolution of 'guitar tone' it is still quite obvious that the 'grunge' thing is a bit of an anomaly in this otherwise consistent evolution of produced, layered studio tones.
Not along ago, someone posted a video of this guy boosting a high end tube amp with a Metal Zone pedal. The EQ was dimed and the gain was on zero. It took the usual hifi, clear, tight, detailed tone and transformed it into this savage, howling, inhumanly wide wall of sound. Predictably, someone commented saying it sounded like 'poo'.
The first tone I chased was the mid focused, crunchy, punk rock roar that was commonly found with a Marshall and a Les Paul. Well, I got that with the Electra Dyne, and then promptly went looking for an aggressive, heavy, and musical metal tone. That's found using a Super Strat and modern passive pickups through a Mark V. The Bare Knuckle Juggernauts are fantastic pickups and the low mid focused / hollow mid characteristic as well as the 'purring' top end really mates well with the more vintage Mark V to create a modern, polished, aggressive tone.
After watching Thayil, what I'm doing seems kind of boring and mainstream, and I thought I was being unique getting a poorly adopted and discontinued Mesa amp!
YellowJacket said:
I almost said the same thing, yesterday. People seem to chase sounds that were manipulated with external equipment after being passed through a microphone and layered. It's a lot of tails to chase. I've done it, so I can't really bash people for it. I would "ballpark" it and not even try to be exact, but it's the same frustration.
I think the promise of multichannel amps was being able to have 2 or 3 amps in one box. Then it was to have 2 or 3 amps that were switchable. Then it became the Swiss Army Knife promise when Line 6 and Digitech were taking off. Now that option paralysis has set in, companies are saying, "Here's a one channel amp that is awesome. You don't need 70 amps in one box." Their behemoth, multichannel offerings are packing in tons of features at this point to woo the people who want tons of options.
When it comes to being multichannel, the thing with the Recto that gets me, in comparison to, say, a JVM, is that the switching in the JVM combines the tubes in different ways to produce the sounds; It actually is several amps in one box (with midi control). A Recto mainly uses filtering to swap between amounts of gain and the basic character of the tone never changes since the core of the signal path never changes for any individual channel. It's still a great amp line and I prefer the tone to most Marshalls, but I think any future Road King/Roadster revision should address some of that.
YellowJacket
Well-known member
afu said:
Guitar is unique in that players are often so absolutely obsessed over tone. The thing that solved it for me was starting to record and work with mic positions. When I play live, I place the mic, and I let my fingers do the talking. (Which usually works) So much of tone is in the player and whenever I get gas, I practice more!!
Options and flexibility is great for those who need it. The miraculous thing about the Electra Dyne is that in theory, you can really do 95% of your playing on Vintage Lo right from clean to crunch. Then Vintage Hi just adds more compression for solos or you can even use a boost as well!!
Hmm. This is always an odd thing. Do you voice an amp to be tonally consistent or do you truly create two, three, or four separate voices? The Clean tone on the Electra Dyne is definitely different from the Crunch tones and they do have discrete signal paths. I think the fact that the Recto and Mark V both have consistent voices is a design consideration to keep things sounding unified in some way. The Electra Dyne proves that Mesa can create an amp that has unique circuits.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
YellowJacket said:
In terms of pop-rock, yes. In terms of rock, I don't think they were an anomaly at all. On one end of the spectrum you have bands like Black Sabbath and the Sex Pistols, and on the other you have Queens of the Stoneage and Mastodon. Where grunge was an anomaly was that Soundgarden, Nirvana and Alice in Chains were given a budget that allowed them to sound like they recorded somewhere other than in someone's garage, and as a result moved on to have tremendous mainstream success.
I think the danger of the internet is the focus on isolated guitar tracks. Awhile ago someone on another forum posted the isolated guitar tracks of Hotel California and someone else pointed out that if this were a video of someone demoing their gear on YouTube he'd have 10 pages of "your guitar is too thin/bright" and "this tone sucks".
When I first started out I thought distortion came from pedals and amps were made by Fender, Peavey and Marshall. Where I lived country guys used Fender and rock guys used Marshall... and Peavey was what you used if you couldn't afford a Fender or a Marshall. :lol: So, I wanted a Marshall (and owned a Peavey). When I wanted to upgrade the guy at the store tried to sell me on an AVT into a 4x10, but fortunately I couldn't afford it and didn't get it. Instead, I started researching amps on the internet and some early guitar forums had just started up. The guys there suggested I think of bands that had a sound I liked and research what gear they're using. The common trend was Mesa/Boogie. Most actually used Marks but I was too dumb to know any better and wound up with a Dual Rectifier.
Since then I've been on a push-pull of desire... I grew up on 70s rock (my parents hated 80s music), but I desire a modern tonality. I tried using vintage/boutique gear for awhile but fought with it constantly as it typically gave me a fat, 70s rock sound that lacked the punch and aggression of modern voiced amps. Eventually I settled with using a Recto turned up loud with the gain dialled back and rode my volume/tone controls like it was an old school amp (I prefer gain to go up and down in a smooth taper rather than sound like I'm switching channels). The ED was pretty enticing (fat 70s with the ability to palm mute), but as much as I liked it I could never quite get it right.
After watching Thayil I added chorus back onto my pedalboard. I've also started using effects more, am more willing to use an overdrive and I've been embracing mud in a way I wouldn't before. I use to focus on keeping a sharp palm mute, now I'm more focused on having overall thickness and letting my palm mutes mud up a bit as a consequence. Or - to put it another way - I'm trying to focus on the quality of the overall sound rather than how my guitar sounds when palm muting in isolation.
afu said:
I'm not at all good at reading and interpreting diagrams and can't get into the kind of detail you can, but I think they did start doing this with the Roadster, then the RK II. So far as I understand it, with the Roadster they started separating out the clean signal path to give it the "Lonestar circuit". This is a trend they continued through the Mk V, ED, TA and RA series amps and was adopted into the Multi-Watt Rectos.
The TA even has two inputs (V1A and V1B) for channel 1 (Normal and Brilliant) with a separate input and gain stage for channel 2.
Of interest to me is the Multi-Watt's Raw mode. Mesa advertised that they made improvements to it, but I have no idea what they are.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
screamingdaisy said:
On a side note (or back on topic, depending on how you want to look at it), as a consequence of trying to make this Recto/ED thing work I've happened upon some settings that make the ED sound really great on its own. At one point the two separate amps coalesced into a single unified sound, and that's when I found it. It just so happens that both amps still sound good individually, although the combined sound is outstanding.
This combined with using a volume pedal in the loop so that I can get it to sound right at less than earth shattering volumes and my new found willingness to accept that an OD can be used on rhythm I think the ED will be able to cover the variety of sounds I want while in a combo format.
So, the Roadster combo is off the table and I'm keeping the Electa-Dyne.
I may still consider the RoV 25 combo because it's small and lightweight.
I have considered getting an ED when the money tree starts growing again.... and/or a Mark V 25.
I understand a desire to keep the sound a certain way and, really, most of the amps from the past were done that way, barring multi-input designs, but those weren't switchable. I seem to recall Mesa marketing several of their amps as an all-in-1 sort of thing to attract people in the last decade. The Rectifiers touts all the voicing and modes, which work and do make some changes, but not in the way I was lead to believe from the marketing. I love my amp; it was just a mild disappointment a couple of years ago. Now that tube swapping circuits are being designed into other amps, it would be really sweet to have it in the same amp as the Rectifier sound.
I'm also interested and don't know the details. I LOVE my Raw mode tones with Treble turned up a little. It's how I cop early Led Zep, Day Tripper, and The Wind Cries Mary types of things. Even for some metal and really heavy rock, the tone never gets buried until after 3:00 on the Gain. I use it more than Vintage and about as often as Modern.
Screaming Daisy, I like Peaveys (some of them). No shame there. I'm glad you're nailing down a preference with your current rig.
Given To Fly
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2013
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 0
screamingdaisy said:
Congratulations! Its always nice when the gear you already own gives you the new tones you want/need. 8)
I still think a dual Roadster setup is good idea, but its just one of many good ideas mentioned in this thread.
screamingdaisy
Well-known member
One of the consequences of finding better sounds in the ED is that the Recto started sounding a little dull and boxy, which forced me to scrap what I was doing and find better sounds in the Recto.
Being able to play the two amps off each other is kind of nice. When one sounds bad the other makes it obvious, and when my ears get too fatigued from too much EQing I can give up for awhile and use the one that sounds better.
Being able to play the two amps off each other is kind of nice. When one sounds bad the other makes it obvious, and when my ears get too fatigued from too much EQing I can give up for awhile and use the one that sounds better.
screamingdaisy said:
This is basically what I am doing: I have a Tremoverb 2x12 combo and a Multi-Watt Dual Rectifier set up as a stereo rig.
Super basic stereo rig:
You make this happen by taking the fx send of one amp and splitting the signal so that it gets fed into the fx returns of both amps. I used a stereo flanger pedal for this (I never actually turned on the flange, effect, it just made a good ad hoc splitter box.
This setup basically slaves both power amps to which ever preamp you've made master. So if you know you always want the Roadster to generate your tones, this is simple. There's no reason not to use other stereo effects in the loop.
The only con of this configuration is that rewiring it is a pain in the butt. If you want to use the 2 channel recto to drive the system or want to run the in parallel instead of stereo you're going to have to get behind the amps to decide what is plugged into what.
Less basic stereo rig:
Get an A/B/Y cable and plug the fx send of the Roadster in the A input and the fx send of the 2 channel recto into the B input. Use the pedal to toggle which one drives you stereo fx loop.
Now you can drive your stereo rig with the Roadster -or- the 2 channel rectfier. I used this setup with both amps for a long time.
Current setup
I picked up a Boss ES-8 switcher, and got this setup working with both of my amps, then I added a Mark V:25 head as well and switch between all three amps, including channel switching.
The configuration is a little more exotic, but the ES-8 was designed to allow you to switch in or out multiple pedal loops in different ordres. This normally looks like:
Loop 1: ES-8 loop 1 output -> pedal 1 input, pedal 1 output -> ES-8 loop 1 input
Loop 2: ES-8 loop 2 output -> pedal 2 input, pedal 2 output -> ES-8 loop 2 input
I decided to put a couple of amps in those two spots instead of pedals:
Loop 1: ES-8 loop 1 output -> Roadster guitar input, Roadster fx send -> ES-8 loop 1 input
Loop 2: ES-8 loop 2 output -> 2 channel recto guitar input, 2 channel recto fx send -> ES-8 loop 2 input
Mixing and matching
With the a/b/y setup I used to have configurations where I wanted both amps running in parallel, like Kim Thayil does. I had footcontrollers for my Road King II, my full sized Mark V, and the A/B/Y switch and would pedal dance like crazy to get things working.
To do both amps in parallel I'd just turn off the fx loops of each amp.
I have some notes about using my Electra Dyne in these configurations and can get to that later.
I hope some of this was useful. I have a photo of my own current rig, using my Tremoverb, my Dual Rectifier, and my Mark V:25 head here https://flic.kr/p/ACVEG9. I use the ES-8 to control which amp is driving the two speaker cabinets and handling switching, and can basically select any one of the following in a single click:
1. Mark V Channel 1
2. Mark V Channel 2
3. Tremoverb Channel 1
4. Tremoverb Channel 2
5. Dual Rectifier Channel 1
6. Dual Rectifier Channel 2
7. Dual Rectifier Channel 3
It's great for recording.
-Daniel
Dreamtheaterrules
Well-known member
That's pretty slick, D! I could do that with my V25 and Mini Rec, but would have to think about how to do it with the TA15, since it has no loop.
Similar threads
