Rectifier 2ch comparison (RevF, RevG, Rackto, Schumacher ..)

The Boogie Board

Help Support The Boogie Board:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Your Fav?

  • 1

    Votes: 8 42.1%
  • 2

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • 3

    Votes: 6 31.6%

  • Total voters
    19

metalaxe

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
114
Reaction score
0
Yo, I've just recorded a little sample-clip through my main 3 Rectifiers

I thought you might be interested in hearing it yourselves, the dials were the same on all the clips of course, EVERTHING at noon but the Master (9:00).

Tubes were rather similar also (chinese in v1 and mixture of Tung Sol and chinese in v2-v5, Poweramp: =C= in the RevF and Rackto and Sovtek 5881 in the RevG).

the amps are:


- RevG Dual Rectifier with Schumacher transformers (sovtek 5881 in poweramp)
- RevG Rackmount Dual Rectifier with Mercury Magnetics transformers (=C= in poweramp)
- RevF Dual Rectifier with Schumacher transformers (=C= in poweramp)

here are the clips (random order):

1
2
3

of course no post-processing on these clips...just a single sm57 in front of the v30 in a mesa recto cab

tell me which one you like best and why....I'll later tell you which clip belongs to which amp

Why is there no 3ch Clip you're asking? I've done that comparison before (might even have posted the clips here) and the 3ch is just no competition, so I didn't even include it in this shootout)
 
I really like the F. My Rev E is pretty much identical in sound. Has a bit more grit to it. Cool clips!!!
 
fluff191 said:
I really like the F. My Rev E is pretty much identical in sound. Has a bit more grit to it. Cool clips!!!

how do you know which one the RevF is? :D
 
What the heck, I'll take a shot... 8)

#1 is =C= / Merc Mag. (most open sounding, most dynamic range...though very hard to tell at this dist. level)
2 is =C= / Shumacher (a bit more muffled)
3 is 5881 / Shumacher (most muffled, to my ears anyway)

Of course the differences could just be inherent with the individual amps anyway.

They all sound great and are very close to each other. :wink:

How close am I? :?:
 
i like them in this order
1
3
2
clip one has the most clarity and presence with a little more attack.
clip two was flatter sounding
clip three was darker but had more saturation and some sizzle

so i guess your gonna tell us it was an axe fx now? lol

really curious about the MM difference,it has to clip one. if not i wont be buying a MM tranny anytime soon.
 
no AxeFX of course, all real amps.
yep, I like 1 best, too, followed by 3



rectofried said:
i like them in this order
1
3
2
clip one has the most clarity and presence with a little more attack.
clip two was flatter sounding
clip three was darker but had more saturation and some sizzle

so i guess your gonna tell us it was an axe fx now? lol

really curious about the MM difference,it has to clip one. if not i wont be buying a MM tranny anytime soon.
 
I couldn't really tell much of a difference between the 3, to be honest. I don't think spending hundreds on MM transformers makes much of a difference. There wasn't one clip that stood out above the rest.

I'd say 3 is the F, 2 is the G with MM transformers, and 1 is the G with stock trannies.

Still, I couldn't hear hundred of dollars worth of difference. Any difference I could hear, would be lost in a band setting.
 
mikey383 said:
Still, I couldn't hear hundred of dollars worth of difference. Any difference I could hear, would be lost in a band setting.

Yea really, huh?
Never had someone from the audience ask me "Is that the stock transformer?" or "Did you change tube brands?"
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Still, most of us musicians can tell, so as always, buy what makes you happy! :D
 
I liked 1, then 3, then 2 as well, just like everyone else :). But they're so close it's probably down to tubes or the variance in linearity of the controls at the "same" settings, or other tolerances. Mesa does use 1% tolerance resistors for most positions, which is better than many amp companies, but the caps still have a wider tolerance (I think 5%, but I could be wrong). That's easily enough to account for the tiny differences here.

I agree about different transformers - of the same basic spec - not making as much difference as often claimed. But not about tubes making no difference, even to an audience - I retube all my amps with NOS (or just plain old tubes!) and the difference compared to the stock new-production ones is very noticeable, both in tone and even output volume - the better tubes seem to have much more power, presence and dynamics, and it's quite clear (maybe even *especially* clear) in a band context against the bass and drums. It's not just perception either - I measured more than 10% extra output power from my old DC-5 when I retubed it with NOS Philips 7581As... that's a lot, even if in absolute terms it's less than 1dB. It also increased the bass response and clarity far more than just turning up the volume a bit does, and really made the amp cut through better. Audiences might not know they're hearing different tubes, but they will be able to hear that sort of change - the rest of the band certainly did!
 
dammit, looks like I forgot to tell you what's what, lol.

here you go:

1: RevF Head (Schumacher)
2: RevG Head (Schumacher)
3: RevG Rackmount Recto (Mercury Magnetics)


interesting to see that the poll results on another board were completely different from these :)
 
metalaxe said:
dammit, looks like I forgot to tell you what's what, lol.

here you go:

1: RevF Head (Schumacher)
2: RevG Head (Schumacher)
3: RevG Rackmount Recto (Mercury Magnetics)


interesting to see that the poll results on another board were completely different from these :)

I listened to all of them (on a proper monitor setup) and made mental notes. I put the Schumachers at the top of my list. I immediately knew clip 1 was the F, as it it sounds completely different.

This double blind clip shootout was a great idea, I commend you.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top