Rectifier RevF vs. Racktifier RevG Clips

which one do you like better?

  • RectoA

    Votes: 12 50.0%
  • RectoB

    Votes: 12 50.0%

  • Total voters
    24

Lasse Lammert

HCAF Blitzkrieg
Feb 12, 2009
8,409
40
48
www.lasselammert.com
Yo...just brought Greg's very nice Rackto home and reamped the first comparison clip.

Racktifier: '99 RevG upgraded with Mercury Magnetics transformers. premium selected Sovtek tubes in the poweramp, mesa and sovtek in preamp

Rectifier: '93 RevF, JJ in poweramp TAD (china) in preamp

apparently the bias differs quite a bit, so this is not a perfect comparison....
The Volume one the Recto was at 9:00 and at the Rackto at 9:30...still the Recto was QUITE a bit louder....so I normalized the tracks for better comparison...I'd loved to try them both with the same bias and the same tubes, but I haven't had the time yet.

except for the master vol all knobs were at noon

RectoA
RectoB

I like both..one sounds more open and organic, the other one a bit darker and more saturated....I can't say wich one I like better, what do yous think?
 
A) is more open but b) is tighter and has less annoying fizz. Therefore a) sounds better on open chords, but I like b) better on the single-notes.

I put my vote to b).
 
A= revF
B= revG

B sound too muddy for my taste
A sound like my go to rectifier tone (oldschool vibe like Vader tone:headbang:)

Just my 2cents
 
B is the sound that made me sell my 2 ch. Dual, that's the fizz I was referring to when people asked why (maybe now it's perhaps becoming clear why I sold the amp, even if it may not bother you as much?) A is even worse I'm afraid, which is why I think it's the Rev F :erk:

On that note, my 2 ch. was a Rev G; it said R1G or whatever in the spot on the main board, it has the parallel FX loop, and the large logo - but it was apparently from the beginning of the Rev G. line, when they were still using leftover chassis (chassises? :lol: ), so mine had the different speaker output jack labeling arrangement, as well as an attached power cord (info on all these differences can be found here). However, I assumed it still had the same sound as any other Revision G (the revision that lasted until the 3 ch. Rectos in '01), but my good bud Mikeal-Ange (AKA analgrinder333 :D), whom I sold my amp to, discovered that apparently mine had the older transformers from previous revisions (Schumacher I think). Even if this is the case, though, I still feel like that can't be the only (or even the main) factor that contributed to the difference in sound (especially fizz), however slight (but undeniable), between the Rev. G's and earlier models...hmm...

And that above logic is why I also doubt Greg's old Rackto would sound particularly different than my old Rev G, maybe the more efficient electrical flow from the better transformers making it slightly more dynamic and 3D (as well as tightening it up), but tonally I doubt there'd be much difference

EDIT: Fuck, for some reason TheBoogieArchives.com seems to be down, so I can't link to the article on 2 ch. Dual Revision differences - oh well, I've read it many many times, you can take my word for it :D
 
They both sound ok to me but I have heard way better tones from you.

I think I don't like them that much because the guitar is out of tune. :lol:
 
They both sound ok to me but I have heard way better tones from you.

I think I don't like them that much because the guitar is out of tune. :lol:

yeah, as I said, just a quick job, no tweaking etc, just wabted to compare....
miced properly now for reamping tomorrow and both sound awesome.

yep, I miss the boogiearchives!
 
To me A has abit of extrabite over B in the upper mids. I could imagine it would come through a mix just abit better.