Roadking I and II big difference with the clean?

[waxnsteel]

I have a RK1. The cleans are on the dark side in terms of tone (and I've had it for months and experimented with different cabs/settings/guitars).

If you will need to do funk cleans, forget the RK1. I have not tried the RK2 so I can't compare. The reverb on the RK1 is pretty good.

This is not to say that the cleans on the RK1 totally and always suck. It depends on the application/song and what tone you're trying to get. I like the cleans on mine for jazz stuff.

RHCP clean funk? Forget about the RK1...

I think it pulls off funk cleans, if you run ch 1 at 120 watts bold and the others at 30/50 watts, however, running disparate wattages for me makes the solo feature almost useless. I do find myself playing the amp that way more often, though.

 

[waxnsteel]

I have a RK1. The cleans are on the dark side in terms of tone (and I've had it for months and experimented with different cabs/settings/guitars).

If you will need to do funk cleans, forget the RK1. I have not tried the RK2 so I can't compare. The reverb on the RK1 is pretty good.

This is not to say that the cleans on the RK1 totally and always suck. It depends on the application/song and what tone you're trying to get. I like the cleans on mine for jazz stuff.

RHCP clean funk? Forget about the RK1...

I think it pulls off funk cleans, if you run ch 1 at 120 watts bold and the others at 30/50 watts, however, running disparate wattages for me makes the solo feature almost useless. I do find myself playing the amp that way more often, though.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Well, IMHO, and my ears, the RK I cleans suck when compared to the RK II -- which has the LSC cleans. If compared to traditional Recto cleans, then yes they are quite good. But lets keep things in context, and this is not meant to offend any current owners of the RK I...the cleans on the RK II are light years better than the RK I, and I would pay the additional $500 for the better cleans and reverb (no way the reverb on the RK I is the same as the RK II -- if you think so, then a visit to an E.N.T is in order, with an emphasis on the "E"). Just my .02

 

[Boogiebabies]

Well, IMHO, and my ears, the RK I cleans suck when compared to the RK II -- which has the LSC cleans. If compared to traditional Recto cleans, then yes they are quite good. But lets keep things in context, and this is not meant to offend any current owners of the RK I...the cleans on the RK II are light years better than the RK I, and I would pay the additional $500 for the better cleans and reverb (no way the reverb on the RK I is the same as the RK II -- if you think so, then a visit to an E.N.T is in order, with an emphasis on the "E"). Just my .02

I totally agree. The RK II has the best cleans of any of my Mesa's and I have owned an RK 1, II and now have the II version II. Now if the vintage and modern channels were tightened up a bit, it would be the perfect amp.
I use a BB preamp and it does an amazing job at firming up the gain channels and making Ch.2 brit insane.

 

[waxnsteel]

Well, IMHO, and my ears, the RK I cleans suck when compared to the RK II -- which has the LSC cleans. If compared to traditional Recto cleans, then yes they are quite good. But lets keep things in context, and this is not meant to offend any current owners of the RK I...the cleans on the RK II are light years better than the RK I, and I would pay the additional $500 for the better cleans and reverb (no way the reverb on the RK I is the same as the RK II -- if you think so, then a visit to an E.N.T is in order, with an emphasis on the "E"). Just my .02

I wan't offended until you suggested there was something wrong with my ears.

I have never heard a RK II. For all I know, I may like it better. I never said that I did hear one, or that either was better or what I like better. All I suggested was that if he could, play and listen for himself. If you honestly think that what you like is the gold standard, then start your little cult. The rest of us will use our ears.

Your behavior is typical of a guy who would list what he has "on order" in his signature line. This isn't a cock measuring contest.

 

[edgarallanpoe]

I wan't offended until you suggested there was something wrong with my ears.

I have never heard a RK II. For all I know, I may like it better. I never said that I did hear one, or that either was better or what I like better. All I suggested was that if he could, play and listen for himself. If you honestly think that what you like is the gold standard, then start your little cult. The rest of us will use our ears.

Your behavior is typical of a guy who would list what he has "on order" in his signature line. This isn't a cock measuring contest.

+1

My band plays funk tunes and I have no complaints about the RKI cleans. I have found that 99.99999999% of a crowd at a gig could give two shits about what amp is being used. LOL!! The tones on stage are completely different than the tones the crowd hears after the sound guy mics, and processes the sound from my amp.

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Well, IMHO, and my ears, the RK I cleans suck when compared to the RK II -- which has the LSC cleans. If compared to traditional Recto cleans, then yes they are quite good. But lets keep things in context, and this is not meant to offend any current owners of the RK I...the cleans on the RK II are light years better than the RK I, and I would pay the additional $500 for the better cleans and reverb (no way the reverb on the RK I is the same as the RK II -- if you think so, then a visit to an E.N.T is in order, with an emphasis on the "E"). Just my .02

I wan't offended until you suggested there was something wrong with my ears.

I have never heard a RK II. For all I know, I may like it better. I never said that I did hear one, or that either was better or what I like better. All I suggested was that if he could, play and listen for himself. If you honestly think that what you like is the gold standard, then start your little cult. The rest of us will use our ears.

Your behavior is typical of a guy who would list what he has "on order" in his signature line. This isn't a cock measuring contest.

My My My, Apologies all around..as I did not mean to offend. I was not responding directly to your post...but to the one that stated that his friend had a RK II and he A/B'd it with the RKI and didn't find much diff between the cleans/reverb......if that was the case, then he needs to check his ears....

Whether or not you like the sound is one thing....but if you haven't played or heard something, then you can't make an opinion....(again this is not towards you, but to those who assert the cleans on the RK I are not far off of the Rk II and have not played one).

And yes, mine is bigger :wink:

 

[edgarallanpoe]

My My My, Apologies all around..as I did not mean to offend. I was not responding directly to your post...but to the one that stated that his friend had a RK II and he A/B'd it with the RKI and didn't find much diff between the cleans/reverb......if that was the case, then he needs to check his ears....

I stand by what I said, and my ears are fine thank you. We aren't the only people who thought this. A buddy of mine is a studio musician in LA. When the RKII came out he immediately went to check it out and decided that it wasn't worth the extra $$$ to upgrade. This is a guy who make his living playing the guitar.

And yes, mine is bigger

Doubt it. :lol: :twisted:

 

[JAZZGEAR]

My My My, Apologies all around..as I did not mean to offend. I was not responding directly to your post...but to the one that stated that his friend had a RK II and he A/B'd it with the RKI and didn't find much diff between the cleans/reverb......if that was the case, then he needs to check his ears....

I stand by what I said, and my ears are fine thank you. We aren't the only people who thought this. A buddy of mine is a studio musician in LA. When the RKII came out he immediately went to check it out and decided that it wasn't worth the extra $$$ to upgrade. This is a guy who make his living playing the guitar.

And yes, mine is bigger

Doubt it. :lol: :twisted:

Duh? No Sh1t!!, If a RK III came out next year with a significantly improved channel I would not upgrade either - no matter how much improved....based on the expense of the initial purchase.

You have completely changed the focus of the original post. The question was not would current owners of the RK I upgrade to the RK II for the improvement in the cleans alone. No fool would do that after spending close to $3K on an amp.

But, if you're in the market for a RK....then if a great clean channel is important to you (as stated by the original poster), then yes he should go for the RK II because the clean channel on the RK II is worth the additional $500 premium.

 

[cant play pool with a rop]

I think its cool when dudes list amps on order. For me it makes things more interesting. I used to have a Roadking1 and played the 2 and own a Roadster.In my opinion the RK2 cleans sounded better with a closed back cab(V30s) then the RK1 clean with open back(C-90s)!!! RK2 cleans open back C-90 is far superior hands down. The reverb in the RK2 is also much better and pleasing.I would expect it to be much better considering its the RK2. Some dudes may love the RK1s cleans and thats ALL that matters, that sound may be THEIR sound which a RK2 may not improve...I personally LOVE the RK2s cleans.

 

[edgarallanpoe]

Duh? No Sh1t!!, If a RK III came out next year with a significantly improved channel I would not upgrade either - no matter how much improved....based on the expense of the initial purchase.

You have completely changed the focus of the original post. The question was not would current owners of the RK I upgrade to the RK II for the improvement in the cleans alone. No fool would do that after spending close to $3K on an amp.

But, if you're in the market for a RK....then if a great clean channel is important to you (as stated by the original poster), then yes he should go for the RK II because the clean channel on the RK II is worth the additional $500 premium.

Do you make your living playing the guitar? He does.

Sorry, I should have know better than to try to make a point. You know everything, we can close the thread now. :roll:

 

[JAZZGEAR]

Duh? No Sh1t!!, If a RK III came out next year with a significantly improved channel I would not upgrade either - no matter how much improved....based on the expense of the initial purchase.

You have completely changed the focus of the original post. The question was not would current owners of the RK I upgrade to the RK II for the improvement in the cleans alone. No fool would do that after spending close to $3K on an amp.

But, if you're in the market for a RK....then if a great clean channel is important to you (as stated by the original poster), then yes he should go for the RK II because the clean channel on the RK II is worth the additional $500 premium.

Do you make your living playing the guitar? He does.

Sorry, I should have know better than to try to make a point. You know everything, we can close the thread now. :roll: