Mes Rev F? rev G? HUH!?

  • Thread starter Thread starter VESmedic
  • Start date Start date
V

VESmedic

Well-known member
Uhh...sorry for the noob type question, but what exactly is a rev G or rev F rectifier and whats the difference?
 
I cant find it now, but basically years ago i asked the same question over on the mesa forum and someone posted a link to a site that explained the history and differences between the revisions and the average values at that time - it was outdated though.

i cant find that linked page anywhere. maybe someone else knows of one or can break it down easier :)
 
glpg80":2iyxiqym said:
I cant find it now, but basically years ago i asked the same question over on the mesa forum and someone posted a link to a site that explained the history and differences between the revisions and the average values at that time - it was outdated though.

i cant find that linked page anywhere. maybe someone else knows of one or can break it down easier :)
Click to expand...



Thanks man. I was trying to find the link as well before I asked a noob "google the freakin question you moron" type question!!! :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:
 
Interesting stuff....The cash these Pre 500 rectos are fetching, is it worth it? Is the sound night and day that much better?
 
The "Pre-500" is a ballpark estimate. The Mark 3 trannies made it into several amps after 500. Mine is #635 and has them.

They DO sound different than the later amps.
 
Still unmistakably recto tone I assume though or no?
 
Yes. The ones with the Mark 3 trannies have been described as more organic, rich, less buzzy. I have gigged with my Bogner Ecstasy for the last 10 years, and a few months ago I plugged into my Rev F and was just FLOORED. It was massive, punchy, rich, organic, dripping with tone, fat mids, and killer 'aunch' as Michael Wilton from Queensryche would say.

Great amp for both rhythm and lead (some will tell you Rectos aren't lead players amps). Don't believe them.
 
I've played TONS, and owned TONS of rectos, never played one with the Mark III Trannies.....however, of the ones I've owned/played....those new 2010 Reborn Rectos were the best IMHO (The Triple Recto version)
 
The Mark III trannys were used THROUGH #1300. Rev. A & B Rectos were prototypes and never released. The Rev. C & D amps had huge amounts of low end with terrible clean channels. The rest of the revisions were basically variations on the clean channel until the final Rev. G (the regular production 2 Channel Recto) when they got their dedicated Recto transformers from Schumacher. Having owned an early version (Rev. E) and currently own a regular Rev. G, the differences are almost un-noticable. The Rev. E has a slightly heavier feel and more presence, but that's about it.

All of that "Pre-500" hype is B.S. and just a wives tale.

Good examples of early (Rev. C or D) Rectifiers can be heard on Alice In Chains' "Dirt" record and on Soundgarden's "Superunknown".
 
Interesting...For some reason, I always thought only the pre500 had the III transformers.
 
Nope. Over at the Boogie Board we spent alot of time gathering info and asking people to check their S/N's.

Some Dude on this forum has a Recto that is in the high 1200's and his has the Mark III trannys. :thumbsup:

The myth of the 'Pre-500' came from George Lynch, who used to check the S/N's of Rectos before he played them.
 
I have #654 and it has the MK III trannies along with the Rev F boards.
 
I just picked up a Rev G and am waiting for it to ship, but I think I'm also going to get a Rev F and compare it and off whatever one is better. I'd like to get a Rev E but I heard the clean channel is just awful.
 
mason5182":2zahtiub said:
Interesting...For some reason, I always thought only the pre500 had the III transformers.
Click to expand...

That was the original assumption. A number of years back a bunch of dudes on the Boogie forum really nerded it up and started sharing information about each other's amps. Pre-500 became pre-1000, then pre-2000. I remember the Mark III trannies lasting until somewhere around 2200... but I could be incorrect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top