Mesa Ebay auction - Is this price even realistic these days?

[Erock]

wow, pretty amazed to see how much these pre 500's are going for, especially with the world economy the way it is. That and considering the newest rectos sound pretty damn good IMO. Guess if you're a collector though, and have the cash, why not.

 

[Shiny_Surface]

Collector fodder, easier to cash in on those types although no one seemed to bite on it.

 

[nighttrain69]

Only worth it if it was in a "smoke free studio"

What if someone smoked a pole in the same room as the amp?

Groupie or man on man?

 

[Big Rich]

if anyone here has a blackface recto in decent condition they wana sell hit me up through pm

 

[CaseyCor]

After paying $650 for my Single Rec, shit like this is hilarious. I don't care if it's new, old, a Blackface, a Revision C, or whatever other bullshit they want to say. It's not, and never will be worth that much.

 

[RJF]

Ya I got my older 2 channel Dual Rec for $960.00 with all the factory bling and it's dead mint

It might not be pre 500 but like I care for over 2K less than that guys price...

I paid $1150 for my drop dead mint Triple Rec 2 channel...

Both are so mint they could be in a museum...

I got both amps for way less than that amp and I couldn't be happier with them.

Yeah, but both your rectos appear to be newer revision G amps. Giving up a grand for a "G" is a decent deal for the seller.

Revision F and earlier are the "hot" amps, with the lower the serial, the better.

I paid $1000 for my revision F #212X about a year ago. I run two KT88's and two KT66's in mine and love it.

 

[Moshaholic]

Someone actually bought it???

Hmm... I wonder if this is a ploy to drive up the market... very easily done with a couple of ebay accounts...

 

[AmpliFIRE]

Someone actually bought it???

Hmm... I wonder if this is a ploy to drive up the market... very easily done with a couple of ebay accounts...

nah...it's re-listed with a $2200 starting price

 

[Moshaholic]

Ya I got my older 2 channel Dual Rec for $960.00 with all the factory bling and it's dead mint

It might not be pre 500 but like I care for over 2K less than that guys price...

I paid $1150 for my drop dead mint Triple Rec 2 channel...

Both are so mint they could be in a museum...

I got both amps for way less than that amp and I couldn't be happier with them.

Yeah, but both your rectos appear to be newer revision G amps. Giving up a grand for a "G" is a decent deal for the seller.

Revision F and earlier are the "hot" amps, with the lower the serial, the better.

I paid $1000 for my revision F #212X about a year ago. I run two KT88's and two KT66's in mine and love it.

FWIW...

Hot amps?... If you buy into the hype...

While there is a diff to some extent and I know it's cool to have a low serial# it's all over hype IMO

I had 20+ Rectos (mostly 2 channels across all years in the 90's including 4-5 rack mounts rectos) including a dead mint Rev F# 124 I bought in 2004

I paid a grand for it and thought my 1999 Tremoverb killed it and it had nothing on my rack rectos... While there is a slight difference I could barly if at all notice it and to me it's mostly hype to drive up prices... I sold #124 Rev F to a guy from this forum back in 2004... Daina whats his name I'm thinking... he prolly still has it as he was a mesa nut!

Again I have had a Rev F #124 and it's long gone don't miss it at all and I was not convinced that it was some beyond magical amp over REV G's or my rackmounts (which were all G circuits) or my two 1999 tremoverbs... After I change the tubes to what I like, match it up with the right cabs, hit the front end with an OD-9 and EMG's, REV A,B,C,D,E,F,G,X,Y,Z... It just really does not matter to me personally...

I bought these last rectos I own looking for years 1998-2000 on purpose.

G.

 

[Big Rich]

what was the difference in tone from the rack head ???? ive always heard the rack ones sound better but i dono it never made sense to me why

 

[Moshaholic]

what was the difference in tone from the rack head ???? ive always heard the rack ones sound better but i dono it never made sense to me why

The urban legend is that mesa had to work a little harder and neater fit fill all the guts in a small foot print and there fore because of the greater attention to detail they sound better...

I don't know if I buy that 100%, but I do know that I had a few 2 channel heads that no matter what I did tube wise always seemed to be a little lack luster-ish and other 2 channel heads I had just ripped no matter what was in em...

With that said all of the racktifiers I owned seemd to never dissapoint at all so there might be truth to the urban legend... who knows for sure ???

My earlier statements are more related to the big bux being asked for these amps and I think some people believe in magic pixie dust a little more than they should...

Heck I saw that Jerry P. had modded a Rev F so someone out there thought it must have not been the be all tone of rectifers I'm guessing... Actually i almost bought it after it was modded and sold by the person who had it moded...

G.

 

[Big Rich]

i could see that making sense about the rack heads....but its true who the hell knows for sure

and i kind of agree about the pre 500 BS im sure there is a difference but it cant be that big of a difference

i agree more on how the first 1500 or watever rectos made with the mark 3 trannies would sound better, but i feel the pre 500 thing is more of a collectors piece than a grail tone amp

 

[some dude]

Wtf is up with low serials anyway??? I think it's wayyy overpriced.

im no mesa expert, and dont quote me on this, but i believe the transformers of the earlier models use some of the mesa mark series transformers that are sought after.

Revision C through F (up so somewhere around SN 2200) used the same transformer that was used in the Mark III.

Rev F (post 2200) and G used the Mark IV transformer.

The whole Pre-500 was an internet myth that built up around a comment Paul Gilbert made after his early Dual Recto was destroyed. He tried to find a replacement and found that the tone had changed. He made an offhand comment about the first 500 being different, and this created a myth around those amps being a holy grail of tone. Some falsely attributed the 'pre-500' thing to those amps having a Mark III tranny in it. It's since been discovered that the first 2200 or so Rectos had the Mark III tranny in it.

It should be noted that it's actually the Rev G Dual Recto and the Trem-O-Verb that made the Recto famous, and those are the amps you typically hear on 90s recordings.

My own experience (I currently own a low ser# Ref F) is that the earlier ones are a bit more open and a bit crunchier while the later ones are a bit darker, thicker, and have more of that over the top harmonic saturation. I don't feel that the Rev F is any better than a G, just different.

Further.... $2800 is rediculous. Recto #5 was up for around $2400 recently, and apparantly it didn't sell for cash since someone up above traded a guitar for it.

 

[Big Rich]

i think your getting paul gilbert confused with george lynch, but i believe that is the story


don dokken threw a beer at georges amp cuz he was playing too loud and he fucked up the amp and wasted a beer

he was a stupid drunken asshole that don dokken

 

[EXPcustom]

Wtf is up with low serials anyway??? I think it's wayyy overpriced.

im no mesa expert, and dont quote me on this, but i believe the transformers of the earlier models use some of the mesa mark series transformers that are sought after.

Revision C through F (up so somewhere around SN 2200) used the same transformer that was used in the Mark III.

Rev F (post 2200) and G used the Mark IV transformer.

The whole Pre-500 was an internet myth that built up around a comment Paul Gilbert made after his early Dual Recto was destroyed. He tried to find a replacement and found that the tone had changed. He made an offhand comment about the first 500 being different, and this created a myth around those amps being a holy grail of tone. Some falsely attributed the 'pre-500' thing to those amps having a Mark III tranny in it. It's since been discovered that the first 2200 or so Rectos had the Mark III tranny in it.

It should be noted that it's actually the Rev G Dual Recto and the Trem-O-Verb that made the Recto famous, and those are the amps you typically hear on 90s recordings.

My own experience (I currently own a low ser# Ref F) is that the earlier ones are a bit more open and a bit crunchier while the later ones are a bit darker, thicker, and have more of that over the top harmonic saturation. I don't feel that the Rev F is any better than a G, just different.

Further.... $2800 is rediculous. Recto #5 was up for around $2400 recently, and apparantly it didn't sell for cash since someone up above traded a guitar for it.

Most of those Rev Cs were on 90's recordings from Dirt to Candlebox

Rev G suck and had the shitty effects loop.

Also I know of a early Rev F for sale locally for 800 bucks made in 94.

Linky:

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/pen/msg/2028902929.html

 

[some dude]

Most of those Rev Cs were on 90's recordings from Dirt to Candlebox

Rev G suck and had the shitty effects loop.

So says the man who'll have a Rev C up for sale in a couple of months....

... and thus we see why the myth perpetuates itself.

I'd also be interested to know how everyone and his dog recorded with a Rev C considering there were only a little over 500 of them made...

Also I know of a early Rev F for sale locally for 800 bucks made in 94.

Early Rev Fs were made in 1992. Late Rev Fs were 1993/1994. The G was released in 1994. Although early Rectos are said to have been used on Dirt (quite possible), it wasn't until Soundgarden and Korn were seen using Rectos in 2003/2004 that it really started to take off. By then the initial units would've been sold and most early buyers would've been recieving Rev F and Rev G.

Anyway, my point isn't to argue that the Rev C, F or G are better than any other revision, although I will argue that the G is the stereotypical Recto sound while the Rev C through F is atypical. Nor do I want to be drawn into some thoretical argument about the ultimate tone ever when tone is a subjective opinion that varies from person to person. My point is that they're all slightly different (some more different than others), but at the end of the day they're all still Rectifiers and no one is going to confuse them for anything else. Further, my point is that people should research the reasons behind the hype (or lack thereof) and make a decision on which amp is for them based on what their goals are rather than some off hand comment made by George Lynch way back in the day.

 

[EXPcustom]

Most of those Rev Cs were on 90's recordings from Dirt to Candlebox

Rev G suck and had the shitty effects loop.

So says the man who'll have a Rev C up for sale in a couple of months....

... and thus we see why the myth perpetuates itself.

I'd also be interested to know how everyone and his dog recorded with a Rev C considering there were only a little over 500 of them made...

Also I know of a early Rev F for sale locally for 800 bucks made in 94.

Early Rev Fs were made in 1992. Late Rev Fs were 1993/1994. The G was released in 1994. Although early Rectos are said to have been used on Dirt (quite possible), it wasn't until Soundgarden and Korn were seen using Rectos in 2003/2004 that it really started to take off. By then the initial units would've been sold and most early buyers would've been recieving Rev F and Rev G.

Anyway, my point isn't to argue that the Rev C, F or G are better than any other revision, although I will argue that the G is the stereotypical Recto sound while the Rev C through F is atypical. Nor do I want to be drawn into some thoretical argument about the ultimate tone ever when tone is a subjective opinion that varies from person to person. My point is that they're all slightly different (some more different than others), but at the end of the day they're all still Rectifiers and no one is going to confuse them for anything else. Further, my point is that people should research the reasons behind the hype (or lack thereof) and make a decision on which amp is for them based on what their goals are rather than some off hand comment made by George Lynch way back in the day.

The guy says its serial is under 2000 and the board says Rev F, he claims he got it in 94. You can contact him directly and argue about production and revisions, I am ust going by info he has on the amp.

I had a Rev G rackto and it was a great sounding amp, I sold it because the effects loop was unusable for the effects I wanted to run with the amp.

The dual rectos really took off in popularity back in late 93 and 94. Mesa was sending its early units to artists so that is why most of them were heard on the early recordings even Tool had used early rectos, not sure if they were Rev C but they did have small logos. Even Soundgarden was using Rectos back in 94. Even Korn used them back in the 90's by 2003 the recto was old news.

Not selling my Rev C anytime soon, its going into the "Tone Library" because you are right there is no best tones only different ones so I want to have them all.

 

[SQUAREHEAD]

Mike Bendinelli from Mesa told me the ones under 550 or so are the magic
ones that were built by hand and also had the MK III Trannies.

Why would he say that as a Mesa Manager if it wasn't true??!!

 

[some dude]

Mike Bendinelli from Mesa told me the ones under 550 or so are the magic
ones that were built by hand and also had the MK III Trannies.

Why would he say that as a Mesa Manager if it wasn't true??!!

Rev C (R0005)

Rev F (R001292)