How well does the mesa 2:100 compare to the 2:90

[Orionsbelt456]

Just looking to see if anybody has tried both and feedback on them. Ive only had the 2:90 and will have a 2:100 mid next week.

 

[moltenmetalburn]

2:90 is like the mark series power section, 2:100 is a rectifier power section. Same differences apply.

 

[gtr31]

With the 2 100 you will only have to replace the windows

The 290 go buy some drywall to
Fill the holes

Joking aside the 290
Is the loudest thing I have possibly ever
Heard

 

[Orionsbelt456]

Right on. I read a lot about both but just curious about clarity differences, tightness differences, and overal color

 

[Tone Monster]

Not sure if this helps....I owned a triaxis and a 2:90 and a rectifier all simultaneously. I tried the Tri thru the rectifier loop a couple of times and it sucked moose cunt. Mesa says themselves The 2:100 is the exact power section of the Rectifier so.....

The Triaxis thru the 2:90 slayed although thru the Strategy 400 was even better.

 

[Orionsbelt456]

Hope thats not the case with running my axe 2 through it. I heard the 2:100 is suppose to have more balls and be tighter but i dunno

 

[paulyc]

Where does the Simul Class 295 fit into this hierarchy ? I just picked one up couple weeks ago for $200, has a dead A channel, going to fix it tonight.

 

[Orionsbelt456]

Not sure as ive never tried one. I bet they are sweet amps though!

 

[phil b]

The 295 is a closer match to the Strategy 400 than the 2:90 or the 2-100. I have owned all of them at one point in time and like was said earlier the 2:100 is a straight Recto power section. I also ran an Axe FX thru the 2:100. Lots of power with big bottom end. The Axe had enough e.q'ing going on to keep things nice and tight. If I remember it had a "Modern" switch on it which reduced negative feedback. Sound wise I preferred that mode better as it did have a more modern sound to it, and used a 1/4 shorting cable with it to keep it on that mode. Also had a presence control which would introduce some brightness and at extreme setting would bring the fizz. Again, using the Axe there are enough E.Q. options to smooth out whatever issues you might dislike. The 2:90 was definitely a tighter amp but the 2:100 had a bit more growl to it. Happy NAD and enjoy it!

 

[psychodave]

Not sure if this helps....I owned a triaxis and a 2:90 and a rectifier all simultaneously. I tried the Tri thru the rectifier loop a couple of times and it sucked moose cunt. Mesa says themselves The 2:100 is the exact power section of the Rectifier so.....

The Triaxis thru the 2:90 slayed although thru the Strategy 400 was even better.

I use a Triaxis into a Strategy 400 that has added depth pots for both channels. Plus I'm using a custom boogie stereo 5 band rack EQ, so I bypass the EQ on the Triaxis. The sound is massive at all volumes.

 

[paulyc]

Dave, you are truly psycho ! (in a good way ;-) ) with all that gear. Can you please tell me what value pots and other components were used for the depth mod ? I want to get this done on my 295 (got it fixed last night, shorted blocking cap on the A channel, quick fix). I'll be using the 295 with an Axe FX II and for W/D/W with my CCV. Thanks !