SLO vs. the ripoff Rev C Dual Recto- Have you actually played them both?
- Thread starter GJgo
- Start date
Smashedguitaris⸸
Hack
Possibly it is an age thing. I wasn't a fan of Slo. I think the people that think slo is best put their age, and same thing with recto, i bet we see a trend. not saying that there aren't older people that prefer recto.
You’ve missed the point but anyway
While they don’t sound alike, on paper they are pretty much exact
90% of amps you use are more similar than different and reading a schematic w show that
So if your statement of Does a recto sound like and SLO then no you are correct they sound different
But is the design the same , on the old ones virtually yes
I’m not missing a thing here man, it’s just exhausting listening to things like this that don’t matter. This thread was about tonality , not about schematics.
PurityS.L.G
Well-known member
Tell that to Daniel Johns of Silverchair LOL Dude was 18 when he started using and touring with SLO's. In fact back when I was teen, he was the reason I saved up for my first used beat to shit Soldano (HR50). I was too impatient and poor to score a used SLO
You do make an interesting point though. I think it could apply more toward boutique brands though. I still see young kids chasing down JCM800's which is an old classic.
DanTravis62
Well-known member
I've played both.
I prefer the SLO sound for leads, in fact it's one of my favorite lead sounds of all time.
I just don't care for rectos, which I know is going to be unpopular. In general though...The earlier the revision the better the recto sounds. I've played a couple rev C's, and while I get the appeal, I can't play through them without driving myself nuts every time I palm mute.
So I guess in summary, I prefer the SLO but only for lead playing.
I prefer the SLO sound for leads, in fact it's one of my favorite lead sounds of all time.
I just don't care for rectos, which I know is going to be unpopular. In general though...The earlier the revision the better the recto sounds. I've played a couple rev C's, and while I get the appeal, I can't play through them without driving myself nuts every time I palm mute.
So I guess in summary, I prefer the SLO but only for lead playing.
GJgo
Well-known member
Engineers passed every class in college except for Pragmatism 101.
cliffc8488
Active member
I didn't read the whole thread. There are two primary things that make a Recto sound different than an SLO:
1. The input gain pot. On a Recto it's 250K, on an SLO it 500K. This reduces the gain of the Recto and shifts the frequency emphasis. The bright cap on the gain pot is also a different value. Schematics you find on the internet will often show the gain pot as being 1M but those schematics are wrong (intentionally perhaps).
2. The Recto has a "treble rolloff" network on the tone stack. It's a simple R-C network to ground off the treble pot wiper. The network is switched in/out depending upon the mode. In normal mode the network is switched out and the Presence pot acts as a traditional presence pot. In modern mode the power amp has no negative feedback and the Presence pot varies the resistance in the treble rolloff network.
There are other subtle differences like tube rectifiers, different voltages, etc. but, overall, the Recto is a blatant copy of an SLO.
1. The input gain pot. On a Recto it's 250K, on an SLO it 500K. This reduces the gain of the Recto and shifts the frequency emphasis. The bright cap on the gain pot is also a different value. Schematics you find on the internet will often show the gain pot as being 1M but those schematics are wrong (intentionally perhaps).
2. The Recto has a "treble rolloff" network on the tone stack. It's a simple R-C network to ground off the treble pot wiper. The network is switched in/out depending upon the mode. In normal mode the network is switched out and the Presence pot acts as a traditional presence pot. In modern mode the power amp has no negative feedback and the Presence pot varies the resistance in the treble rolloff network.
There are other subtle differences like tube rectifiers, different voltages, etc. but, overall, the Recto is a blatant copy of an SLO.
Jack Luminous
Well-known member
You're making too much sense, especially around here. We've already been told that "This thread was about tonality , not about schematics.".
I don’t know why you all continue to argue about this or mock others who actually own or have owned these amps and know THIS genre of music….I’ll say it again, name ONE record that has the SLO on it for heavy rhythm tones.,.. I’ll wait… because surely, since the pots and capacitors and resistors and the PREAMP ( because lord knows we only play through preamps and that’s all that matters) of the recto are EXACTLY the same as the recto, then surely they should sound EXACTLY the same and be used and revered JUST as much as rectos, which are all over some of the biggest records of the last 30 years in ALL kinds of genres of music….forget the tones of the amps, let’s argue about capacitors and talk about in THEORY they should sound EXACTLY the same, so basically they are like, the same amp.
Just saw a Toyota Camry today…. It’s basically the same thing as my Silverado. Which is basically the same thing as the Lamborghini I saw the other day. I mean, they both have 4 wheels, and minor tweaks to the engine and number of cylinders…. But like in theory, they are the same thing!
se7en
Active member
Johns never played an SLO. He toured with two HR100's (one set clean, one dirty) and used an HR XL model in the studio.
Tell that to Daniel Johns of Silverchair LOL Dude was 18 when he started using and touring with SLO's. In fact back when I was teen, he was the reason I saved up for my first used beat to shit Soldano (HR50). I was too impatient and poor to score a used SLO
Jack Luminous
Well-known member
JulesDB
New member
I have the SLO, the Recto, 5150 and two 5153 (6L6 and EL34) and i must say that the blue channel of the 5153 6L6 is the most similar to lead channel of the SLO.
That said, all the 3 amps above sound different. Small changes in the layout could do huge difference in sound. In fact I tried the preamp of the DR in the return of the Soldano and you know what? It doesnt sound as the SLO.
That said, all the 3 amps above sound different. Small changes in the layout could do huge difference in sound. In fact I tried the preamp of the DR in the return of the Soldano and you know what? It doesnt sound as the SLO.
cliffc8488
Active member
The reason the DR preamp doesn't sound the same into the return of the SLO is two-fold:
1. The preamp is different as I explained above.
2. The SLO return is BEFORE the tone stack.
Those two things are far more influential than layout differences. Layout doesn't substantially effect the sound of an amp. It will cause minor changes in frequency response but those changes are overshadowed by different component values or the inclusion of a treble roll-off filter.
cliffc8488
Active member
They aren't the same. There are a couple differences as I explained earlier that make a pronounced difference in the sound. However, aside from those couple differences the circuits are almost identical. This isn't a bad thing. Many amps are derived from other amps. The first Marshalls were basically copies of a Bassman. The AC30 is the basis for a host of other amps (Orange, Matchless, Bad Cat, etc.).
GJgo
Well-known member
Smith continuing to revise the Recto revs was because the Rev C sounded nothing like the SLO, so he needed to make it softer & more bloated till he got it right with the G!
For years now I've had the hypothesis that Soldano wasn't pissed about the design being "copied", since everyone copies circuit designs. I think he's pissed that the Recto was wildly successful and the SLO, which in his mind is far superior, was not.
For years now I've had the hypothesis that Soldano wasn't pissed about the design being "copied", since everyone copies circuit designs. I think he's pissed that the Recto was wildly successful and the SLO, which in his mind is far superior, was not.
cardinal
Well-known member
I had them both an thought they were very different. The SLO was a nice enough amp and the Rev C was a holy-shit-this-is-metal amp.
But I've also had an AC30HW2, AC30HW60, a Matchless DC30, and a Morgan Dual 40. In theory the top boost channel of all of those should have been pretty darn similar but the DC30 sounded like nails on a chalk board, the Morgan sounded like a high gain amp, the HW2 was lean and chimey, and the HW60 was a thick, fat, lovely beast of an amp. But the schematics of all of them looked so similar.
blackba
Well-known member
I think you are right on the money at Mike being mainly upset about the rectos selling like hot cakes and him not making a dime from those sales.Smith continuing to revise the Recto revs was because the Rev C sounded nothing like the SLO, so he needed to make it softer & more bloated till he got it right with the G!
For years now I've had the hypothesis that Soldano wasn't pissed about the design being "copied", since everyone copies circuit designs. I think he's pissed that the Recto was wildly successful and the SLO, which in his mind is far superior, was not.