Recto Lovers - what would you buy now?

easstudios said:
Multi Watt or old Tremoverb combo are the best options now that won’t cost a bomb.

I love a Rev F but the prices don’t really make sense when you can just get a MW. Rev G is solid too if the price is good - I’d just say a MW is no worse of an amp and you’ll get more features and newer components.

I don’t really see the point in a Rev C/<500 Rectifier, they sound cool in their own right but it’s more of a party trick to me and not really the rectifier sound I most associate with. Cool for bragging rights/collector quality
Click to expand...
Fs are still better/more organic sounding than the MW. As much as people seem to want to make them out to be equals; they are not. MWs are nice sounding, don’t get me wrong…and Mesa seems to have been trying to go for an F tone with the MW; but there are still differences. I’d take a MW over any 3 channel….but I’d take an F or any G triple over the MW.

When it comes to a Rev C and your comments, haha until you play one I wouldn’t bag on it. It can be dialed in darker to get a grunge thing if you want; but if you want something that sounds fucking incredible in a way that doesn’t make me miss ANY C+ I’ve owned, it has that too. The power section rivals a Triple or SLO; boosted its as tight as a Mark and can be dialed in to sound like a modded Marshall with a shit ton of tight thunderous lows. Yes it can even get the wall of sound thing as you can Dime the bass and no mud.
People who bag on rare expensive things usually have one thing in common….they’ve never heard, seen or know anyone who owns said expensive rare thing.
 
Last edited:
Get a G and send it to Mesa for the C mod. I did that to my Triple and it came back a much better amp imo. It’s now tighter, and the low end is much more usable. I’m pretty sure it added some aggression to the mids also, but it’s hard to say now, since it’s been a few years since I’ve had it done. It’s a beast of an amp though.
 
Is the original 3 channel (non-multi-watt) no good?

I had one and it really put me off of Rectos. Since then I've always wanted to get an older 2 channel, hoping it would be better than the 3 channel. Maybe I just need to buy a multi-watt?
 
ZEEGLER said:
Is the original 3 channel (non-multi-watt) no good?

I had one and it really put me off of Rectos. Since then I've always wanted to get an older 2 channel, hoping it would be better than the 3 channel. Maybe I just need to buy a multi-watt?
Click to expand...
Talking about all the things people dislike about Rectifiers (loose bottom end and fizz), it has the most of it. But be aware, there where revisions of the non-MW 3 channels as well, so there is a possibility that some of them sound better.
 
ZEEGLER said:
Is the original 3 channel (non-multi-watt) no good?

I had one and it really put me off of Rectos. Since then I've always wanted to get an older 2 channel, hoping it would be better than the 3 channel. Maybe I just need to buy a multi-watt?
Click to expand...
Those are the bottom of the barrel. I wouldn't buy one unless it was under $800.
 
Rex Rocker said:
Same question, except a bit more specific:

Which would be the Recto that fits these characteristics better? Scooped lower mids, BIG sub lows, and aggressive and bright highs and high-mids?
Click to expand...
Because you said BIG, really, any Triple. F or early small logo G is best, followed by MW, followed by all others.
 
Racerxrated said:
Fs are still better/more organic sounding than the MW. As much as people seem to want to make them out to be equals; they are not. MWs are nice sounding, don’t get me wrong…and Mesa seems to have been trying to go for an F tone with the MW; but there are still differences. I’d take a MW over any 3 channel….but I’d take an F or any G triple over the MW.

When it comes to a Rev C and your comments, haha until you play one I wouldn’t bag on it. It can be dialed in darker to get a grunge thing if you want; but if you want something that sounds fucking incredible in a way that doesn’t make me miss ANY C+ I’ve owned, it has that too. The power section rivals a Triple or SLO; boosted its as tight as a Mark and can be dialed in to sound like a modded Marshall with a shit ton of tight thunderous lows. Yes it can even get the wall of sound thing as you can Dime the bass and no mud.
People who bag on rare expensive things usually have one thing in common….they’ve never heard, seen or know anyone who owns said expensive rare thing.
Click to expand...
Off topic question: Did you ever measure the plate voltage one your RevC??? Mine does run at a lower voltage around 420-430 Volts but it is a EU version. I realized that its PT does not have the wiring for 230 volts but only 240 volts resulting in an overall lower plate voltage. My RevF has both wiring and is wired for 230 volts resulting in about 450 volt PV.
Comparing pictures of EU RevC, I found another example were the PT was missing the 230 volt tap. In both cases, the PT had the correct Schumacher Serial Number that was used in all early export Rectos.
 
BesaMoogie said:
Off topic question: Did you ever measure the plate voltage one your RevC??? Mine does run at a lower voltage around 420-430 Volts but it is a EU version. I realized that its PT does not have the wiring for 230 volts but only 240 volts resulting in an overall lower plate voltage. My RevF has both wiring and is wired for 230 volts resulting in about 450 volt PV.
Comparing pictures of EU RevC, I found another example were the PT was missing the 230 volt tap. In both cases, the PT had the correct Schumacher Serial Number that was used in all early export Rectos.
Click to expand...
Mine is 470v. That’s not too far off my 72 SuperTrem…which is at 490.
 
BesaMoogie said:
Talking about all the things people dislike about Rectifiers (loose bottom end and fizz), it has the most of it. But be aware, there where revisions of the non-MW 3 channels as well, so there is a possibility that some of them sound better.
Click to expand...
GJgo said:
Those are the bottom of the barrel. I wouldn't buy one unless it was under $800.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much what I figured. That amp sounded like a hot mess. I was leery of getting a multi-watt because they look like the 3 channel I had. I rarely ever see a 2 channel up for sale, and when I do they are super expensive. I'll have to keep my eyes open for a multi-watt 3 channel.
 
Yeah at this point the MW would be your safest and best bet. Some of them will have stock 440/ruby tubes and the newer units will have stock 445/jj power tubes. Some people will say there isn't a difference because the tone is in the preamp ect,,,,, but IMO it is worth trying for yourself. I like mine better with the 445 in 50w mode for high gain(the in-between slots in a triple, not the inner nor outer pairs). Mine has 420 in the outers, 445 in the tweeners, and 440 for the inners. Sounds glorious like that at 150w in vintage modes!
 
Rex Rocker said:
Same question, except a bit more specific:

Which would be the Recto that fits these characteristics better? Scooped lower mids, BIG sub lows, and aggressive and bright highs and high-mids?
Click to expand...
All Recto’s other than the Badlander have tons of low mids IME. That’s just part of their thick/meaty sound. The Rev C has a little less maybe, but still a lot. My C does have a little less richness in quality in the low mids vs other Rev’s, but physically still lots of it eq wise I think (for those that think more functionally vs tonally). For most extended low end it would be my C again and the Rev F Triple, but they still won’t have sublows like my Beta. The brightest recto with the most uppermids is by far the Badlander (it’s debatably its own thing rather than a recto). Within Recto’s it would be the Rev C then D, but again it’s still a darker sounding amp. Recto’s aren’t about bright uppermid grind. That’s where my modded & stock Marshall’s & SLO shine
 
Last edited:
easstudios said:
Multi Watt or old Tremoverb combo are the best options now that won’t cost a bomb.

I love a Rev F but the prices don’t really make sense when you can just get a MW. Rev G is solid too if the price is good - I’d just say a MW is no worse of an amp and you’ll get more features and newer components.

I don’t really see the point in a Rev C/<500 Rectifier, they sound cool in their own right but it’s more of a party trick to me and not really the rectifier sound I most associate with. Cool for bragging rights/collector quality
Click to expand...
I respectfully completely disagree. Those Rev C & D Recto’s are on another level in sounding more raw, more alive/responsive, tonally complex and with a more liquid/connected feel as good (or debatably better) than my c+ and the Rev C in particular moves much more air and punchy than other versions. In the room it’s obvious enough where a deaf person would notice due to the physical punch part of it. Just not in the cards for later versions IME. To me this is like saying from concentrate orange juice is no worse than fresh squeezed, the fresh squeezed is just an expensive party trick and once you blend it in a smoothie who knows the difference anyway, but for me at least I like to optimize what I can afford to
 
Last edited:
Don't overlook the Roadster. They can be had for super reasonable money and they have a lot of killer modes found on the other amps. Setting up one of the gain channels for the vintage high gain sound and the other for the no negative feedback modern mode gives me pretty much everything I want from a rectifier and you can still have a nice clean channel and a bonus crunch setting. Its a LOT of amp for $1500 or so.

I also have a Badlander but I think its a rectifier in name only. It doesn't have the gain or low end traditionally associated with a rectifier. Its a great amp but not what I think when I hear Rectifier.
 
Racerxrated said:
Fs are still better/more organic sounding than the MW. As much as people seem to want to make them out to be equals; they are not. MWs are nice sounding, don’t get me wrong…and Mesa seems to have been trying to go for an F tone with the MW; but there are still differences. I’d take a MW over any 3 channel….but I’d take an F or any G triple over the MW.

When it comes to a Rev C and your comments, haha until you play one I wouldn’t bag on it. It can be dialed in darker to get a grunge thing if you want; but if you want something that sounds fucking incredible in a way that doesn’t make me miss ANY C+ I’ve owned, it has that too. The power section rivals a Triple or SLO; boosted its as tight as a Mark and can be dialed in to sound like a modded Marshall with a shit ton of tight thunderous lows. Yes it can even get the wall of sound thing as you can Dime the bass and no mud.
People who bag on rare expensive things usually have one thing in common….they’ve never heard, seen or know anyone who owns said expensive rare thing.
Click to expand...
Agreed on the first paragraph 100%. To be honest, I didn’t believe you either on the Rev C till I had one myself, so I was definitely in the camp of it’s because I hadn’t tried one yet haha, but I knew for myself it was for real with the first few powerchords. To be nitpicky though, I found its power section quite a bit more powerful than my SLO, but still not having the bigness or efficiency of my Triple, but very impressive still for a 4 powertube amp. With both boosted, my iic+ hrg also is imo still tighter & firmer/harder, but it’s close-ish. Either way it’s my favorite amp I’ve had for my taste. I’ve got other amps that are arguably as good or better, but I’m a sucker for throaty growl/roar on powerchords and very few amps can touch the orange ch of the C or other early Rec’s in that dept
 
Last edited:
BSRIAudio said:
Don't overlook the Roadster. They can be had for super reasonable money and they have a lot of killer modes found on the other amps. Setting up one of the gain channels for the vintage high gain sound and the other for the no negative feedback modern mode gives me pretty much everything I want from a rectifier and you can still have a nice clean channel and a bonus crunch setting. Its a LOT of amp for $1500 or so.

I also have a Badlander but I think its a rectifier in name only. It doesn't have the gain or low end traditionally associated with a rectifier. Its a great amp but not what I think when I hear Rectifier.
Click to expand...
Roadsters can be nice too. My tech though said they are some of the hardest/most annoying amps to work on though, so there’s that

I have a Badlander too. I agree, but it still has that throaty growl and texture to the notes that IME only Recto’s have, but yes not as thick/meaty or gainy as other rectos. To me it’s sorta like a Recto 800/2203 haha, but more modernized also
 
braintheory said:
Roadsters can be nice too. My tech though said they are some of the hardest/most annoying amps to work on though, so there’s that

I have a Badlander too. I agree, but it still has that throaty growl and texture to the notes that IME only Recto’s have, but yes not as thick/meaty or gainy as other rectos. To me it’s sorta like a Recto 800/2203 haha, but more modernized also
Click to expand...
The Badlander has the recto grind, but without the big low end going on, it's tight. I think it's more suited for downtuning.
 
I have a MW and Badlander. I use the Badlander in my band, it's a simpler amp that I plug straight into, the mids sit in a great spot, the DI out is convenient. I don't have to fuck with it much at all. Just does the thing and gets me through the gig, plus mine is the rack chassis so I leave it racked and it can' get bumped around without worry. The MW sounds great too but doesn't have the mids without a boost, always benefits of low and high pass filters, and it's one of those amps that one day will sound fantastic, the next day with the same settings I have to tweak something a bit. Just needs a little more TLC to sit right where I want it. Badlander more or less sounds like they tried to make an amp that sounds like if you blended a Recto and 2203 in the studio. It doesn't totally sound like either one, but has both flavors swirled in to some degree. They traded the extended lows and highs of the Recto for more midrange push, but it's not as biting as a 2203 either, kinda more all around balanced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top