NAD: Mesa Rectifier Connoisseurs

[fretout]

Nice score but it sounds thin compared to the unboosted Rev F and Multiwatt.

Yep. It is not nearly as thick, bass heavy, with way less lower mids in the voice. The orange channel is different as well. Not as clean.

The “classic” recorded Recto sound most are familiar with came from some Rev Fs and mostly the Rev G. These have that lower mid, bass heavy, low mid voicing... the modern Rectifier sound.

The Rev C is held in high regard for its clearer, more present, and tight tone. You really do not need to boost it... which is hard to imagine with a Rectifier.

If you had to choose only one between them, which one would you keep and why?

Tough question:

If people hear the a Rev C in person they will be shocked. Looks like a Recto... sounds like a Mark + Recto hybrid.

Nice score man! Welcome back to the Pre-500 Club.

Yeah, I’ve always said that I’m pretty sure the Rect Rev. Cs and Ds behave/respond so similar to the Mark Series Amos was because they were built with whatever remaining Mark III Trannys Mesa had left over, until they ran out, which was at the end of the Rev. Ds (IIRC). There were a few exceptions (repairs, custom builds that ran overtime, ect.), so you can find some really rare exceptions, but they’re out there. When Mesa stopped using the Mark III Trannys, the Rectifier line became noticeably darker, more focused on lower mids, and became the main Recto tone we know today.

 

[fretout]

At least part of the difference can be imitated by running the presence really high on a later revision Recto. As the Recto guru NewWorldMan said, you can dial in a Rev G to sound like a Rev C but not the other way around.

I respectfully disagree with this assessment. You can run a Revision D slightly higher and get it to sound identical to a C, so that is true. But all revisions above Rev. D are voiced differently and utilize some different components that would be a more of a decisive “line in the sand”, and no matter how high you run your treble/presence on my Revision G, it does not get anywhere near my Revision C or D.

Disclaimer: I haven’t tried a Revision F next to a Revision G, to see if higher presence settings get similar tones (I’ve played both extensively, just not side by side at the same time), but Revision Gs have a whole lower mid thing going on that the “small faceplates” can’t touch, and vice versa. Same model, but different tones.

I would compare the differences like this. Revisions E, F, and G are like beating a zombie with a baseball bat. Revisions C and D are like beating a zombie with a baseball bat with nails driven through the end, ala Negan. Both are killer. Both are great. One has a bit more attack, and is more cutting.

 

[RedB4Black]

Nice! Not sure how I missed this thread before. That Rev C sounds best in the clips to me.

 

[SBlue]

Nice one!!!
I think these are already classics. And with the chrome chassis and black face, some of the coolest looking amps built!
Congrats on the purchase!

 

[Metal1977]

Nice score but it sounds thin compared to the unboosted Rev F and Multiwatt.

Yep. It is not nearly as thick, bass heavy, with way less lower mids in the voice. The orange channel is different as well. Not as clean.

The “classic” recorded Recto sound most are familiar with came from some Rev Fs and mostly the Rev G. These have that lower mid, bass heavy, low mid voicing... the modern Rectifier sound.

The Rev C is held in high regard for its clearer, more present, and tight tone. You really do not need to boost it... which is hard to imagine with a Rectifier.

If you had to choose only one between them, which one would you keep and why?

Tough question:

If people hear the a Rev C in person they will be shocked. Looks like a Recto... sounds like a Mark + Recto hybrid.

Nice score man! Welcome back to the Pre-500 Club.

Yeah, I’ve always said that I’m pretty sure the Rect Rev. Cs and Ds behave/respond so similar to the Mark Series Amos was because they were built with whatever remaining Mark III Trannys Mesa had left over, until they ran out, which was at the end of the Rev. Ds (IIRC). There were a few exceptions (repairs, custom builds that ran overtime, ect.), so you can find some really rare exceptions, but they’re out there. When Mesa stopped using the Mark III Trannys, the Rectifier line became noticeably darker, more focused on lower mids, and became the main Recto tone we know today.

The Rev C & D behave/respond like the Mark series because of the circuit, not the trannys. My old Rev C had a blown transformer that Mesa changed for a later Rev G tranny. Compared my C & D many times side by side, no difference except the Rev C was a lot brighter like it should be.

Mesa didn't ran out of the remaining Mark III trannys after Rev D, my Rev F had the famous old transformer and it didn't feel and sound like the C & D.

The truth is, Mesa had problems with their old Mark III transformers in the rectos back in the days and they ask Schumacher to make a more reliable transformer for them with almost identical specs. I was told by my tech that the later Rev G tranny in the Rev C had an extra tap that my Rev D didn't have. Maybe it has something to do with what Mesa ask, who knows.

 

[phil b]

I'm sure i've told this story before but way back when before I got my Rev.C, I had the opportunity to demo a bunch of different Rectos with only 2 having serial #'s over 500. We spent hours at Boogies satellite location in Rockaway NY demoing every Recto in the place. We used the same cab for every head. I was surprised initially that a few sounded quite different from the bunch. To make a fair comparison we pulled the tubes from the best sounding head and used them in all of them. There were 4 people in the room including myself. 2 guys owned recording studios and the other guy was Mark Snyder, so it was nice to have a bunch of ears that could pick out minute details.

After an all day affair the consensus was pretty clear. There were 2 heads that for some reason really stood out, 2 that sounded identical in all settings and the rest had minor differences. Shame we didnt record it but there were no cell phones (ACK!} and this wasnt really any official test by any means. I was just lucky enough that these heads were there and I got to pick the one I liked best. Boogie was very accommodating. Out of all the Boogie stuff i've had thru the years, I still own that Recto, a modded Mark IV and 2 diamond plate cabs( one being a prototype for the plating and the other being a demo cab). Good times!












9

 

[fretout]

Nice score but it sounds thin compared to the unboosted Rev F and Multiwatt.

Yep. It is not nearly as thick, bass heavy, with way less lower mids in the voice. The orange channel is different as well. Not as clean.

The “classic” recorded Recto sound most are familiar with came from some Rev Fs and mostly the Rev G. These have that lower mid, bass heavy, low mid voicing... the modern Rectifier sound.

The Rev C is held in high regard for its clearer, more present, and tight tone. You really do not need to boost it... which is hard to imagine with a Rectifier.

If you had to choose only one between them, which one would you keep and why?

Tough question:

If people hear the a Rev C in person they will be shocked. Looks like a Recto... sounds like a Mark + Recto hybrid.

Nice score man! Welcome back to the Pre-500 Club.

Yeah, I’ve always said that I’m pretty sure the Rect Rev. Cs and Ds behave/respond so similar to the Mark Series Amos was because they were built with whatever remaining Mark III Trannys Mesa had left over, until they ran out, which was at the end of the Rev. Ds (IIRC). There were a few exceptions (repairs, custom builds that ran overtime, ect.), so you can find some really rare exceptions, but they’re out there. When Mesa stopped using the Mark III Trannys, the Rectifier line became noticeably darker, more focused on lower mids, and became the main Recto tone we know today.

The Rev C & D behave/respond like the Mark series because of the circuit, not the trannys. My old Rev C had a blown transformer that Mesa changed for a later Rev G tranny. Compared my C & D many times side by side, no difference except the Rev C was a lot brighter like it should be.

Mesa didn't ran out of the remaining Mark III trannys after Rev D, my Rev F had the famous old transformer and it didn't feel and sound like the C & D.

The truth is, Mesa had problems with their old Mark III transformers in the rectos back in the days and they ask Schumacher to make a more reliable transformer for them with almost identical specs. I was told by my tech that the later Rev G tranny in the Rev C had an extra tap that my Rev D didn't have. Maybe it has something to do with what Mesa ask, who knows.

Because of the circuit? Which part? I don’t see many similarities, but these aren’t schematics either...

Mark III:


Pre-500:

 

[Metal1977]

Yeah, I’ve always said that I’m pretty sure the Rect Rev. Cs and Ds behave/respond so similar to the Mark Series Amos was because they were built with whatever remaining Mark III Trannys Mesa had left over, until they ran out, which was at the end of the Rev. Ds (IIRC). There were a few exceptions (repairs, custom builds that ran overtime, ect.), so you can find some really rare exceptions, but they’re out there. When Mesa stopped using the Mark III Trannys, the Rectifier line became noticeably darker, more focused on lower mids, and became the main Recto tone we know today.

Because of the circuit? Which part? I don’t see many similarities, but these aren’t schematics either...

My point is, the progressive change in feel and tone of the rectos over the first years happened because of some tweaks they made to their circuit boards (revisions), not because they ran out of the remaining Mark III transformers. Urban legends that's all, nothing special about those Mark III Trannys.

Rev G

 

[NewWorldMan]

I’ve been in a room with a Rev. C, D, F and G...it was fun.

Like these?



Few gear conversations on forums are more polarizing than discussions among Recto revisions. Put that Rev C on Channel 1, Vintage High Gain cloned to Modern. That's where it's true magic lies.

 

[311boogieman]

nice

enjoy