Adventures in Fractal's Dual Rectifiers

@MirrorProfiles if you match the knobs on the model to the amp by eye, can you tune the SIC by ear to dial out the flub with low Freq and dial in the right top end with high Freq?

even if model master is on 0.1 there's still way too much low end parasitics going on, that's what's happening to the top end, on the amp MV it's on a gradient, with the model MV it's always on. If you reduce low res freq the top end is kinda there.

idk if it's the model MV bright cap that's missing from the equation. even with master on 0.1 the low end resonance is so overwhelmingly prominent to smear the top end, the amp isn't like that with MV really low. the top end doesn't squish down until the MV starts to compress. the only way reduce it in the model is reduce SIC low res or turn down/off screen Freq and Q.
 
Just for my own fun I made a Quad Cortex capture of the NAM profile ( DI RECTO) you made and shared @MirrorProfiles

1: I used your Gitar DI to reamp the NAM profile I made a capture of and used a QC cab block


2: Your real Recto AMP DI, reamped with the same QC cab block


My capture of the real amp NAM file, is missing a bit of omff in the low end, but the hi end is there I think. I wonder if things would be more real sounding if we could capture the real amp, and not use a NAM proflie to make a QC capture..that was a mouthful...lol


capmod2.jpg


Kidding!!! I'm sorry, I couldn't resist :rofl The QC captures do sound great! They're just built with black magic and have no artist's soul:LOL:;)
 
I never got along with Rectos as much as I tried, but I should spend some time with the models.

Absolutely love the constructive discussions here.

Same here :bag

But the FAS Modern version is turning me into a believer. Whatever tweaks Cliff made makes it sit better in my ear.
 
@MirrorProfiles if you match the knobs on the model to the amp by eye, can you tune the SIC by ear to dial out the flub with low Freq and dial in the right top end with high Freq?

even if model master is on 0.1 there's still way too much low end parasitics going on, that's what's happening to the top end, on the amp MV it's on a gradient, with the model MV it's always on. If you reduce low res freq the top end is kinda there.

idk if it's the model MV bright cap that's missing from the equation. even with master on 0.1 the low end resonance is so overwhelmingly prominent to smear the top end, the amp isn't like that with MV really low. the top end doesn't squish down until the MV starts to compress. the only way reduce it in the model is reduce SIC low res or turn down/off screen Freq and Q.
will definitely try this. Feel like I’ll be better off using some signal generators for this one so I’ll need enough time to get things set up. Maybe Sunday I’ll be able to do this.

What’s the best way to measure this? If I understand right, what you’re saying is the model has more low end coming from the SIC which is causing the power amp to compress sooner than the amp, and it’s trying to deduce whether it’s from the cabs resonance, or from a bright cap on the MV?

I can also take better photos of the actual amp - guessing the MV pot itself would have a cap strapped across it (rather than being on the PCB)?

Curious if the pots themselves have the taper marked on them too, or whether they’d need measuring (or both as tolerance is also a factor…). Also trying to remember if there is an available parameter for adding a MV bright cap (or whether it’s a case of just dipping the SIC resonance at lower MV settings).
 
Just for my own fun I made a Quad Cortex capture of the NAM profile ( DI RECTO) you made and shared @MirrorProfiles

1: I used your Gitar DI to reamp the NAM profile I made a capture of and used a QC cab block


2: Your real Recto AMP DI, reamped with the same QC cab block


My capture of the real amp NAM file, is missing a bit of omff in the low end, but the hi end is there I think. I wonder if things would be more real sounding if we could capture the real amp, and not use a NAM proflie to make a QC capture..that was a mouthful...lol

I haven’t used a QC much but I remember with the Rectifier model, having to set the MV below 1 to sound like my amp. Not sure if that’s down to their reference amp being a 3 channel, different MV tapers, or whether they had the fx loop/global master in the chain. Curious if you’re able to match with their model.
 


Real 1994 Dual Rectifier with Mesa OS 4x12. This used to be mine.
I sold it to a friend and got a recording of it today.

Edited to say, the strings on his guitar were as dead as doornails.

love it, such a distinctive recto tone. Do you know what the serial no. is? Mine is low 5000’s, guessing they could be similar? What year is the cab from?

I’ll also try and mic things this weekend, will be cool to explore the speaker controls a bit more
 


Real 1994 Dual Rectifier with Mesa OS 4x12. This used to be mine.
I sold it to a friend and got a recording of it today.

Edited to say, the strings on his guitar were as dead as doornails.

Crushing!
 
love it, such a distinctive recto tone. Do you know what the serial no. is? Mine is low 5000’s, guessing they could be similar? What year is the cab from?

I’ll also try and mic things this weekend, will be cool to explore the speaker controls a bit more
This one is in the 2600 range. He bought the armored cab I used to record this. I am not sure of it's year.
Crushing!
Thank you, sir!
dead strings, nothing. that sounds great.
Thank you!
 
Last edited:
88roj1.jpg


:bag <-- Non Owner.
Authentic Mark GEQ slider tapers, when?

The more I think about that the more undecided I get. I mean I’d like an authentic EQ but the 5 band is like the devil’s ÈQ when it comes to the real amp and how sensitive it is, at least in the Mark V.

I’m pretty comfortable with the AXE 5 Band (Mark) as it sits now but it could be interesting to see the difference.

Seem tricky though because you can use the 5 Band (Mark) on any amp too. Like which Mark 5 Band Mark would you model, Mark IV? I guess, maybe? This is why I go back and fourth on it.

aOWnURe.png
 
Like which Mark 5 Band Mark would you model, Mark IV? I guess, maybe?
They are very similar in response.
The V uses positive voltage in the EQ circuit instead of negative and swapped PNP/NPN transistors, the bands Q and range should be exactly the same as the IIC+ and IV.
Adding a "5 Band (Mark Auth)" is 100% Win-Win no matter how we look at it, it's not replacing or changing anything, no polls are needed either.
 
sweep lengths.jpg


The effect of different sweep lengths when capturing the frequency response of my recto. Settings for the amp are:
Dual Recto Red Modern:
Bass - noon
Mid - 2 o'clock
Treble - 2 o'clock
Gain - 2 o'clock
Master - 9 o'clock
Presence - 3 o'clock
FX Loop Bypassed
Bold
Diode
Load - Egnater Tourmaster 4x12 V30 16ohms

The super lows are quite interesting, but after about 10hz it is all a much of a muchness. So my advice would be, stick with the default 256k sweep length, in order to avoid pissing off neighbours.
 
Back
Top