[Drew]

Thanks Budda, I think.

You could totally take a Rectoverb and a delay pedal to a Pink Floyd gig and, bone stock, get through the set without it sounding out of place. It's actually a seriously great blues/rock amp.

[7StringofAblicK]

My understanding of the recto has always been that it's more versatile than MOST people think.

Many rock and metal players swear by them, coincidentally. I think it's great that you can get Devil Driver tones and 10 Years-type tones from one amplifier

That being said, I mostly didn't get along with the dynamics of the amp, not the tone. Truth be told, it was probably my cabinet.

[7StringofAblicK]

And Drew, nice tone.

I think live it would sound even better (and in the room it probably sounds more rich), but the recording doesn't have that typical 'glassyness' that a lot of blues tone has. I'd probably attribute that more to the guitar, pickups, etc than the fact that the amp is a recto.

I love the Mark IV (to go back on topic of the thread), but I'm curious as to what the differences will be in the IV and the V. More channels? Mirrored lead channel, improved rhythm channel, etc?
The Sig X sounds great on paper, and as a proud VHT owner, I'd probably be comfortable steering someone in its direction.

[Drew]

Thanks Eric. I think it's more the way it's set - I had pretty dark, middy settings dialed up - than the guitar (my strat), though the fact it was a quick and dirty recording with an Audix i5, a mic that's brighter and less middy than a SM57, probably doesn't do me any favors. I was going for sort of a Stones sort of grunginess... All the same, I freely admit that a Recto won't get half as "glassy" as a JCM800.

What was your thing with the dynamics? Too open? Too compressed?

[ibznorange]

Originally Posted by Drew

Thanks Budda, I think.

You could totally take a Rectoverb and a delay pedal to a Pink Floyd gig and, bone stock, get through the set without it sounding out of place. It's actually a seriously great blues/rock amp.

thats what sold me on mine. I cranked shit and flipped through the EQ, and instant metal, but i could mess around more and get blues, chimey cleans, and all kinds of stuff. Not the BEST amp at much of anything (ive heard better cleans, better crunch, better low end chug, better almost everything) but its still damn good at all of it. Its not bad at anything. May not be the best at somethign, but id rather have something that is awesome for everything than Perfect at one thing. Its more than good enough, i can get any tone i want to be at bare minimum "satisfying"

[budda]

drew, you gave me bad gas.

my next head might not be a Mak2 lol.

jerk.

and yes, i was saying it was a good clip, twas a "hmph.. *wants to play like that and get that kind of tone for it*" post lol

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Drew

I drank my ass off last night

Surprise, surprise.

Seriously, sounded great.

[Drew]

Hey, the Recto may not be the amp for you at the end of the day, but honestly it's worth spending some time playing one properly dialed in, and not just dialed in for the tight rhythm chunk they're known for. Don't necessarily write off the Mak2, just compare it to a few others.

[zimbloth]

Originally Posted by newfinator

So, can the Sig:X, by your estimation, produce nice thick organic leads? I ask because most clips I've heard seem to be closer to a modern mid scooped kinda thing.

I'm not a die hard, hard code medal guy, though I certainly play some. I play reasonably heavy stuff from the 80's to now and want to cover that wide range. Something that would be limited like a 5150, dual recto or similar probably wouldn't do it for me. Which explains why my 5150 sits quietly a lot. Any suggestions?

Of course it can dude, it's a VHT The first thing you need to learn to ignore is shitty webclips. You can't judge an amp of this caliber from an amateur recording. How many shitty clips of Mesas have we been subjected to over the years? It doesn't mean much You have to just spend time with it in real life through a proper cab, or just go on reviews/etc.

Somehow this thread has turned into a Recto discussion, not sure why. We all know Rectos are good amps, but if the topic of versatility is coming up, there is no contest folks. The Sig:X is one of the most innovative and feature-rich amps you can find. You can shape your tone in so many ways that Mesas just can't.

Whether you like the tones the VHT has to offer more than the tones the Mesa has to offer, that's up to an individual's taste of course. As Drew talks about ad nauseum, Mesas handle lower gain applications terrific too. Some Mesas have excellent cleans too. That said, the Sig:X is a lot more flexible and you can get a lot more different kinds of sounds and responses out of it.

I'd obviously take the Sig:X over a Mark IV. However, you could take Noodles' advice and wait for the Mark V to come out and see if you like that better. Until then, try to find a place that stocks VHTs (with VHT cabs, important) and see what you think. Don't put too much stock into webclips, the amp when setup right sounds amazing. As does the Mark IV, but just in a different way.

[ibznorange]

i think it sort of went the recto because someone mentioned "Mark IV" and "versatility", and we all sorta just went lol and took the recto as the mesa versatile option. Id agree with you in that the Sig:X is even more versatile, but the rectos do NOT lack versatility at all, despite common conception. Just if the Sig:x is anything like the Ultralead, its versatility is fucking ridiculous is all.

Mark IV's on the other hand...