Which Rectifier for me? Confusion inside - help needed!

[ACHIEVEIT]

Hi guys,
i think it is time to get me a Rec. However, where i live there is only one mesa dealer who doesn't even have the models for demo. So i must gather all info i can. With the recto i am after that kind of sounds:
1) Killswitch Engage - Alive or just breathing album (classic huh?)
2) Saosin . check their link http://www.myspace.com/saosin . I particularly like the track Seven Years. If you listen to the whole track, around halfway there is a part where only the guitar is heard. It is raw, low-mid growly and just a little bit fizzy - it sounds like a dual?
3) As i lay dying - frail words collapse type of sound (but i am mostly interested in the first two)

When i visited the uk i finally managed to test a Dual Rec but i wasn't that impressed to be honest after twisting the knobs for more than an hour. But i hope it has to do with the fact that i couldn't crank it past 1.5, i didn't use a boost at all and the pickups were stock prs (i don't know which model). I didn't like that it was not tight at all and it had this fuzzy/fizzy quality to the sound in big proportions. However, i was able to hear the low mids growling which is what i liked. To be clear, what i like in the rect sound is its rawness and low-mid growl. What i don't like is the loose bottom end and the extreme fizziness. Besides, i have an Engl powerball which has a very tight and compressed sound so it is not what i am going after. With that in mind, even after hours reading the forum i can't decide which model would be best for me. The options:

-Dual Rect. 3 channel: It should be what the bands i listed actually used but i got a little afraid of the looseness and fizziness after testing it.
-Dual Rect. 2 channel (early models preferably): I read over over how the early 2 channels' were more raw, tight and aggressive. I also read somewhere that they were better for rhythm (which is what i want the recto for) but i also read that they have more upper-mids (not what i am after). So, everyone says it is better than the 3-ch. but does it have the qualities i am after?
-Roadster - pretty much the mesa amp KSE used recently. But i couldn't find in any thread how it compares to the dual for the style i want it. I read it is smoother and darker with less balls. Any comments?
-Trem-O-Verb - i read it is tighter and more aggressive than a dual and closer to the older 2-ch.'s. Again, would it fit my needs?

To defend the 2 ch a bit more, i really liked 4x12er's netmusicians.org clip http://netmusicians.org/?section=id&value=2904 . I know it is blended with a Cobra and uber but i think i hear the chunky, raw, growl and just a tad buzzy qualities that i am after. So, any idea which one would be best for me? Thanks a lot guys

 

[jdurso]

-Dual Rect. 3 channel: It should be what the bands i listed actually used but i got a little afraid of the looseness and fizziness after testing it.
-Dual Rect. 2 channel (early models preferably): I read over over how the early 2 channels' were more raw, tight and aggressive. I also read somewhere that they were better for rhythm (which is what i want the recto for) but i also read that they have more upper-mids (not what i am after). So, everyone says it is better than the 3-ch. but does it have the qualities i am after?
-Roadster - pretty much the mesa amp KSE used recently. But i couldn't find in any thread how it compares to the dual for the style i want it. I read it is smoother and darker with less balls. Any comments?
-Trem-O-Verb - i read it is tighter and more aggressive than a dual and closer to the older 2-ch.'s. Again, would it fit my needs?

I am defenitely getting the KSE rhythm sound through my Roadster with a little help from my OCD overdrive and a lot of help from my new Mills cab. DO NOT under estimate the power of the right cabinet. It can totally change the way you eq the amp and will most definitely deligate how mcuh bass you can dial in... Mesa and VHT cabs are fantastic at keeping the low end nice and tight and punchy. i definitely think my Mills cab is the best cab out there in terms of capturing the low end you dial in on the amp and projecting it with depth and power. Thats not to say a Mesa cab can't do the same, i just feel the Mills does it better. My point is a lot of the character your looking for will reside in what cab you pair your amp with.

As for which amp... do you intend to use cleans much if at all? If not, get a 2 channel Triple Rectifier and dont look back. The extra headroom and pure power from that amp are amazing. The Roadster is definitely not a slouch but comes off much smoother than your 3 channel Dual Rectos which can amke them sound less aggressive without using an OD infront or an eq in the loop. But unless you need a good clean, go with the 2 channel Triple you won't be sorry. Pair that with a Mesa Stiletto cab, a VHT Fat Bottom or even better a Mills Afterburner cab, and you'll be brutal heavy heaven.

BTW, I've owned all of those amps and while I like my current Roadster the best, thats only because its the best all in one package out there. You can get the amazing cleans, sweet mid gain and brutal high gain (with a little help). If I wasn't looking for that much versatility and just wanted the most aggressive high gain ic ould find, I'd go back to the 2 Channel Triple Recto.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Thanks for the quick response.
No i don't intend to use cleans much (if not at all). My main concern is a high-gain sound (i define mid-gain as something a JCM would produce - so not what i am after). So, you think a 2ch Triple would be better than a 2ch Dual for my purpose? I read somewhere that Triples are not as tight as Duals because of the extra headroom (you have to Really crank them to get tight). Since you owned them all, can you give me a little insight on the current produced Duals, the Tremoverb and why a 2 ch. Dual/Triple would be better for what i want? I mean, what are its sound qualities compared to the others that make it stand out for what i want?

Thanks a lot jdurso

 

[jdurso]

Thanks for the quick response.
No i don't intend to use cleans much (if not at all). My main concern is a high-gain sound (i define mid-gain as something a JCM would produce - so not what i am after). So, you think a 2ch Triple would be better than a 2ch Dual for my purpose? I read somewhere that Triples are not as tight as Duals because of the extra headroom (you have to Really crank them to get tight). Since you owned them all, can you give me a little insight on the current produced Duals, the Tremoverb and why a 2 ch. Dual/Triple would be better for what i want? I mean, what are its sound qualities compared to the others that make it stand out for what i want?

Thanks a lot jdurso

I find the opposite true when comparing the TR and the DR. While the increased headroom means your tubes breakup later, i find it helps keep the amp cleaner and creates a much more aggressive high gain. When I say cleaner I mean less compressed, less mush, more open and a hell of a lot more aggresive. To me the Triple Recto is the firebreather of the family of Rectos. Now this is not to say its going to sound good at bedroom levels as its not meant to be... but at practice/band volumes the amp slays for brutal high gain.

As for the 2 channel vs 3 channel models, I find like most of us here, the 3 channel amps have a lot more fizz. The 2 channels just seem to be a bit smoother but not in a dark way (well the tremoverb and roadster are a bit darker). Also it always seems to me the 2 channels are easier to dial in because your not fighting the fizz and the bass has a much fuller quality to it. The biggest reason in the end is the supressed fizz and instead of fizz you get this nice sizzle thats not over bearing. That sizzle is the Recto sound and the 2 channels have just the right amount.... this is why to me the Recto is a rhythm machine and the 2 channels do it best.

Now the tremoverb is a great amp, legendery in fact. But i find the high gain a lot smoother and a bit darker which for the sound your going for I think it'd be harder to get the really brutal tones. The cleans and mid gain however are divine and makes that amp sing for leads and cluesier stuff.

So in the end i still stick to my original statement that the 2 channel triple recto is the most brutal recto, maybe most brutal Mesa in the family. By all means though if you find a 2 channel DR for the right price you will not be disappointed.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Ok, i think we are going somewhere!

I like the slight sizzle of the recto family but not the extreme fizziness so that gives many points to the 2 ch. About the triple 2ch, when you say it produces a cleaner, less compressed sound you mean it is more raw and organic? I think i would like that.

How about the mid voicing in the 2-ch.'s? Do they have the low-mid growl going on or are their mids voiced higher?

Thanks a lot, i learn a lot

 

[Elpelotero]

www.TheBoogieArchives.com

 

[Elpelotero]

Tremoverb is essentially a 2ch RevF/G but with better cleans. Think old heavy Incubus sounds.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Thanks elpelotero

i have already done my homework. . However, the clips section doesn't work so i cannot compare the 2ch and 3ch about the growl/raw/fizzy sound

 

[Elpelotero]

ya, I haven't updated the site since summer....But just take everyone's word for it when they talk about the fizziness thing. It's just mush and not pleasant. One hits you in the throat, the other saws off your ears with highs.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Thanks man, i think i am going hunting..

 

[jdurso]

Ok, i think we are going somewhere!

I like the slight sizzle of the recto family but not the extreme fizziness so that gives many points to the 2 ch. About the triple 2ch, when you say it produces a cleaner, less compressed sound you mean it is more raw and organic? I think i would like that.

How about the mid voicing in the 2-ch.'s? Do they have the low-mid growl going on or are their mids voiced higher?

Thanks a lot, i learn a lot

Yeah when i say cleaner i mean a more raw/organic sounding. With moderate settings the gain doesnt get mushy or compressed sounding as I find with the 3 channel models, and obviously it'll sound less compressed than the 2 channel dual. Both the 2 channel DR and TR have that raw, organic type tone without all the crazy fizz... the biggest difference in my eyes is that increased headroom, which gets you more of a grinding, powerful distortion as opposed to something a little more crunchy if that makes sense.

 

[jdurso]

Tremoverb is essentially a 2ch RevF/G but with better cleans. Think old heavy Incubus sounds.

Except its a little darker sounding than other RevF/Gs I've heard.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Thanks guys,

so i think i am going for the 2 ch Dual or Triple (whatever i can get a good deal in europe). Any idea about the voicing of the mids in the 2 ch's? thanks a lot

 

[jdurso]

Thanks guys,

so i think i am going for the 2 ch Dual or Triple (whatever i can get a good deal in europe). Any idea about the voicing of the mids in the 2 ch's? thanks a lot

Rectos in general have a scooped feel to them. They are voiced with an emphasis on the lower mids, hence the extended low end of a recto when compared to say a marshall or mark iv. Thats also the reason they're not a lead player type amp... that lack lack of upper mids really hurts leads pop and "sing". But to me if you're into the recto tone, you're most likely a rhythm player. With that said, i think the lack of the super-fizz really lets the mids open up a little more than with your 3 channel rectos. Not that they're any less scooped, but the lack of fizz and the right setting on the mid knob, and you'll get a nice thump and some smooth recto leads.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

So mids are voiced low but because there is less fizziness you can crank them a bit but without inflicting fizziness to the sound, right? I can still keep them low or scoop them and get that low mid growl right?

 

[jdurso]

So mids are voiced low but because there is less fizziness you can crank them a bit but without inflicting fizziness to the sound, right? I can still keep them low or scoop them and get that low mid growl right?

Og yeah the growl is still there, especially if you pair it with the right cab. that I can't emphasize enough because pairing it with a cab that has scooped sounding speakers or a cab that can't handle the rectos low end, can ruin your sound. This is why recto cabs have V30s in the... the v30s have strong mids, hence cominasating for the rectos lack of mids in a way. Another important part is the cab's design... not all 6 sided boxes are created equal. Mesa and VHT cabs are incredible and handling the lows and keeping them tight yet big... even better is the Mills cabs, as their design, with the interior ported baffle, kills fre standing waves making the low end super tight, very big , very round and punchy, yet crystal clear. Whatever cab you pair it with make sure you try out a bunch until you find the right cab for you... obviously i'm alays going to suggest a Mills cab with a recto but there are many great cabs out there.

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Right now i have a Marshall 2x12 open with 1 Vintage 30 and one G12H Heritage. The fact that it is open and 2x12 (and it is Marshall ) doesn't really help the low end come with clarity BUT money is tight these days and a new cab will have to wait unfortunately.. I'll check the Mills cabs. So, i think my recto quest is over

Thanks a lot jdurso and elpelotero. Your help is deeply appreciated

 

[Elpelotero]

+1 to all the advice given here so far.

 

[gaco]

I traded a Marshall 900 series for a DR back in 2001. I ran it beside a Marshall 2203, mainly only high gain distortion. It sounded awesome! I had a very loud bass player at the time so I started thinking,( for $100. more I can get a TR ). Wish I had kept the DR!

 

[ACHIEVEIT]

Why are you saying that? Anything to do with tightness?