See, to me my favorite example of "the" recto tone is of the 3 ch. models, with the same cut of Clip A, but less kkhhhzzzzzzzz 3k/5k sounding and more a sort of aggressive edge, like on "Demigod"
Rectifier RevF vs. Racktifier RevG Clips
- Thread starter Lasse Lammert
- Start date
And then the Roadster I always think of as "The Apostasy" (I know other amps were blended in, but every experience I've had playing and hearing a Roadster has really resembled that tone, and I WANT - e.g. opening riff of "Be Without Fear") - I'm sure it could of course get tighter if one wanted, but not me 
yup, just grabbed the guit after having been away from the studio for 3 weeks...didnÄt tune nor bother
Harry Hughes
âââ¬â¬
- Apr 25, 2009
- 4,353
- 0
- 36
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
I don't think it matters at all. These clips are not different enough to care about the subtle little differences (just IMO).
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Mikaël-ange
Member
- Nov 7, 2008
- 2,368
- 1
- 36
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
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?), 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
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
You are right Markus, only difference between regG and revF in your old recto are big logo, parallel FX loop and some capacitor. Except this, same transformer (Schumasher serial EIA-606), same speaker outpout configuration (4,4,8/16,8/16 ohms), attached power cord...
We already spoke about this ton of time Markus, but I'm really sure roadster is your perfect go to amp in term of voicing
And then the Roadster I always think of as "The Apostasy" (I know other amps were blended in, but every experience I've had playing and hearing a Roadster has really resembled that tone, and I WANT - e.g. opening riff of "Be Without Fear") - I'm sure it could of course get tighter if one wanted, but not me
I'm sure 80% of TA tone are roadster; 10% Ubershall and others % VH4/Prodigy
However, while no one has directly suggested it, I have a slight pet peeve to air about when people in a shootout say that "oh, well there are differences, but with different settings one could totally sound like the other" - surely we all realize how complex distorted guitar tones are (in terms of all the harmonics from, you know, distortion), and also the fact that the tone stack controls on any given amp (except one with a Graphic EQ) are extremely imprecise (in terms of large Q values) and thus by no means cut out for any sort of surgical eq'ing. This is fine with me, I wouldn't have it any other way, I prefer them to be able to just shape the natural sound of the amp - however, that's where their ability ends IMO, so if the natural sound of said amp ain't your thing, then on to another IMO!
Actually, I think you misunderstood what I was saying dude - I meant that I feel my old amp (now your amp) is a Rev G. in a Rev F. chassis (with Rev F transformers), and thus is much closer to the Rev G. in sound (take out the chassis and look at that spot between the two pairs of blue capacitors, as shown on the left in this pic, you can see it says R1G on the circuit board)
And here's a clip of my old Rev G through a Recto cab, btw, which I feel sounds closer to "B" than "A" in this test (specifically fizz-wise)
Mikaël-ange
Member
- Nov 7, 2008
- 2,368
- 1
- 36
I don't misunderstood your point of view Markus, but I didn't speak about Lasse comp btw. Just about global rectifer familly member voicing or shining pot (don't know correct name
)...Btw, you can find revG with small logo, parallele FX loop and detachable power cord but schumacher transformer or revG with big logo, detachable power cord and serial FX loop
Bastard revG serieim for b. more of the frequency energy I would like the guitars to have.
although it would be useful to compare in a mix context, because A could work better with the proper bass tone to complement it.
although it would be useful to compare in a mix context, because A could work better with the proper bass tone to complement it.
::XeS::
Member
Similar threads
