Are we just, not gonna talk about the Rev F Dual rec Reissue or???

skoora said:
What’s funny is I remember when they first came out and have memories of trying them in Daddy’s Junky Music in Boston. Was not impressed. Felt they were bloated and had too soft an attack. No idea what revision I was demoing but they were hot off the presses when I did. At that time I was a total Marshall guy and the Rec’s were just the complete opposite of that type of feel and sound. What’s weird is Boogie made them to be an 80’s style hard rock amp but that was the last kind of sound is was actually capable of…90’s music turnaround turned their mis-step into a happy accident.
Click to expand...
It was probably set on spongy and tube rectification and no one know, how to dial them in 😄
 
Racerxrated said:
With Mesas, whether it's a Mark or Recto, I don't think it's age since a 2B, or C+ has that great vintage thing going on, as does an F or earlier Recto...yet the Mark IIIs and later or Gs and later, they are both just a year removed from the great tones yet they sound more generic/sterile to me than the earlier versions...but they are all 30+ yrs old. Gotta be some different parts.
Click to expand...
This is what’s fun about tone . I like mark 3s best and like Rev d better than c because the C is too Marshall for me . Wild stuff
 
skoora said:
What’s funny is I remember when they first came out and have memories of trying them in Daddy’s Junky Music in Boston. Was not impressed. Felt they were bloated and had too soft an attack. No idea what revision I was demoing but they were hot off the presses when I did. At that time I was a total Marshall guy and the Rec’s were just the complete opposite of that type of feel and sound. What’s weird is Boogie made them to be an 80’s style hard rock amp but that was the last kind of sound is was actually capable of…90’s music turnaround turned their mis-step into a happy accident.
Click to expand...

Nah, that was on purpose. The prototypes and Rev C were for the 80's rock. Each revision after that was more and more geared towards the way music was shifting. That's why there's so few Rev C-E. They went from Rev C to Rev F in around a year, and Rev G maybe a year later.
 
Candiria said:
Nah, that was on purpose. The prototypes and Rev C were for the 80's rock. Each revision after that was more and more geared towards the way music was shifting. That's why there's so few Rev C-E. They went from Rev C to Rev F in around a year, and Rev G maybe a year later.
Click to expand...
Some say it was also a compromise for improving the green mode, which is the one mode that seemed to actually improve with revisions (green sucked on the C & D I had)

I personally wouldn’t choose too often my Rev C for ‘80’s rock vs my vintage Marshall’s, ‘80’s SLO and few others I have. The Rev C is still ultimately a very thick/fat, low mid heavy amp. The descriptions guys give can just be misleading since it’s tighter and more aggressive in the upper frequencies than the revisions after, but it’s not a Marshall or SLO in that regard when AB’ed IME, really not even close, but my personal favorite high gain amp for what I like
 
Last edited:
braintheory said:
Some say it was also a compromise for improving the green mode, which is the one mode that seemed to actually improve with revisions (green sucked on the C & D I had)

I personally wouldn’t choose too often my Rev C for ‘80’s rock vs my vintage Marshall’s, ‘80’s SLO and few others I have. The Rev C is still ultimately a very thick/fat, low mid heavy amp. The descriptions guys give can just be misleading since it’s tighter and more aggressive in the upper frequencies than the revisions after, but it’s not a Marshall or SLO in that regard when AB’ed IME, really not even close, but my personal favorite high gain amp for what I like
Click to expand...
Yes, C and D had no real clean channel. The word is that Mesa users kind of were picky about having cleans on their amps coming from the Mark series.
 
braintheory said:
Some say it was also a compromise for improving the green mode, which is the one mode that seemed to actually improve with revisions (green sucked on the C & D I had)

I personally wouldn’t choose too often my Rev C for ‘80’s rock vs my vintage Marshall’s, ‘80’s SLO and few others I have. The Rev C is still ultimately a very thick/fat, low mid heavy amp. The descriptions guys give can just be misleading since it’s tighter and more aggressive in the upper frequencies than the revisions after, but it’s not a Marshall or SLO in that regard when AB’ed IME, really not even close, but my personal favorite high gain amp for what I like
Click to expand...
Agree 100%, the C may be the tightest and most aggressively voiced Recto in the upper frequencies , but it’s hardly Marshall like. It’s still 100% Recto through and through.
 
Candiria said:
Nah, that was on purpose. The prototypes and Rev C were for the 80's rock. Each revision after that was more and more geared towards the way music was shifting. That's why there's so few Rev C-E. They went from Rev C to Rev F in around a year, and Rev G maybe a year later.
Click to expand...
Unless someone who was at Boogie at the time says that I don’t buy it. An amp company like them isn’t changing an amp that fast with a “hip” ear to the ground on the changing scene. Considering it wasn’t really until the mid 90’s that the recto sound was becoming established in popular rock. Marshall still dominated through the early 90’s (and technically all through the period because they were then, still cheaper and more made). The fact that it took until the 90’s for Boogie to release their 80’s rock amp says it all. The revisions were just them tweaking the design to their tastes, not following the ”word on the street” 😂
 
skoora said:
Unless someone who was at Boogie at the time says that I don’t buy it. An amp company like them isn’t changing an amp that fast with a “hip” ear to the ground on the changing scene. Considering it wasn’t really until the mid 90’s that the recto sound was becoming established in popular rock. Marshall still dominated through the early 90’s (and technically all through the period because they were then, still cheaper and more made). The fact that it took until the 90’s for Boogie to release their 80’s rock amp says it all. The revisions were just them tweaking the design to their tastes, not following the ”word on the street” 😂
Click to expand...
This sounds more likely to me. These opinions on the Rev C (like it being an ‘80’s amp and others) seem to come from guys that haven’t tried a Rev C (or D). It’s still the recto flavor, just a lot better. It’s not a bright, uppermiddy amp or a Marshall-y amp or surgically tight (but much tighter than later Rev’s). I think it just is to Recto’s what a c+ is to marks and what a Vibroverb is to ‘60’s blackfaces
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top