View other reviews for this product:
thorgen
Published on 09/15/10 at 15:54
I think it is not necessary to revisit the characteristics, those who read these lines know the craft.
Note the effects loop rather peculiar, if not capricious. I put only 8 because of it, because otherwise the connection is complete, the settings effective, ample power (for group play, because in your room is really too much).
The finish is impeccable. The covers are supplied with good practices
UTILIZATION
* The configuration is simple?
* Gets it easy to sound good?
* The manual is clear and sufficient? ...
the manual is very clear and gives specific examples of settings, what is surprising is indicated ranges not to exceed for the potentiometer settings, and use, we realize that Indeed, it is best to stay around half of the race, both the gain for low mids or treble.
I read everywhere that this amp was difficult to resolve, but if it goes smoothly and if you take the time to listen, no particular problem.
I think it deserves a 7.
SOUNDS
* Will it fit your style of music?
* With what (s) guitar (s) / low (s) or effect (s) do you play?
* What kind of sound you get and with what settings ("crystalline", "fat ",....)?
* What are the sounds you prefer, you hate?
The clear sound surprised me: with a single coil in the neck position, it is more than correct.
A good point: no excessive wind, no noise except the first channel change: the famous "plop" (that too, it's disappointing, but we know when we bought it).
The main problem is, in my case, both channels saturated: Can not use the "Modern" or Silicon positions and Bold, as I twist the treble and bass eardrums were "muddy" as they say Anglo-Saxon)?
I am therefore satisfied at the beginning of the vintage fashion front, and position "vacuum" and "spongy" on the back. There, no worries, but a slight lack of dynamics.
(I use it primarily with a U.S. Hamer Californian, a Jackson Soloist, and my guitar "homemade").
Being also a user CA 100 NOS, I decided to entrust the craft workshops Gerard Cortier NOS, so that the changes a little.
The amendment did not touch the clear sound. However, bass, treble and the gain of both channels were saturated changed: since the controls can be used over a much wider range, treble themselves civilized, bass gained in precision, and I can ride gain without the sound deteriorates. I grabbed the momentum can safely use the method "modern" and positions "bold" and "silicon". Mesa grain was perfectly preserved, even exacerbated, as if the sound had been treated in the studio.
In short, the amp has become even more versatility.
At the last rehearsal, the bassist who was unaware of the changes asked me: "you've changed something in your Mesa? It looks like it sounds better than before".
In conclusion, I will put that 4 to this chapter: insufficient, mainly because of the reputation that we made this amp, which is not up to my expectations.
However, after the mod, I think he deserves a good 8 (very good): clear clear, well saturated fat but sufficiently accurate, low present but not invasive, acute manageable, versatile.
OVERALL OPINION
* For how long have you been using it?
* What thing do you like most/least about it?
* Did you try many other models before getting this one?
* What is your opinion about the value for the price?
* Knowing what you know now, would you make the same choice? ...
So I use this amp since June, but only since August version "modified NOS."
Before, I had a bunch of amps and preamps, tube and transistor: MAC (I'm sure nobody knows: lol
, Music Industry, Rockman, Peavey (Reknown)-in the year 70, it dates me
- Rocktron Voodo Valve tube Peavey FX Marsalla (JMP, TSL 2000), Hughes & Kettner TriAmp, Triaxis Mesa, Carvin V3, Diezel Einstein and now OUR CA100 and Dual Recto; the Rectifier is a very good amp, but too expensive for what it is. After the change (the cost is very low), it is much more usable and I think the store.
As to make the election again, yes, but only occasionally, and especially by making him do a short stay in Alès, in workshops NOS. But ultimately, for me, in the original, it is below the Diezel Einstein, and far behind the NOS CA100.
Again, I will put that 5 (average), mainly because of the value that is frankly not very good, especially if you buy it new; in time, no problem, it becomes affordable, and in this cases can be traced note.
Afterwards, if we can afford to have it changed, it becomes an excellent amp.
Note the effects loop rather peculiar, if not capricious. I put only 8 because of it, because otherwise the connection is complete, the settings effective, ample power (for group play, because in your room is really too much).
The finish is impeccable. The covers are supplied with good practices
UTILIZATION
* The configuration is simple?
* Gets it easy to sound good?
* The manual is clear and sufficient? ...
the manual is very clear and gives specific examples of settings, what is surprising is indicated ranges not to exceed for the potentiometer settings, and use, we realize that Indeed, it is best to stay around half of the race, both the gain for low mids or treble.
I read everywhere that this amp was difficult to resolve, but if it goes smoothly and if you take the time to listen, no particular problem.
I think it deserves a 7.
SOUNDS
* Will it fit your style of music?
* With what (s) guitar (s) / low (s) or effect (s) do you play?
* What kind of sound you get and with what settings ("crystalline", "fat ",....)?
* What are the sounds you prefer, you hate?
The clear sound surprised me: with a single coil in the neck position, it is more than correct.
A good point: no excessive wind, no noise except the first channel change: the famous "plop" (that too, it's disappointing, but we know when we bought it).
The main problem is, in my case, both channels saturated: Can not use the "Modern" or Silicon positions and Bold, as I twist the treble and bass eardrums were "muddy" as they say Anglo-Saxon)?
I am therefore satisfied at the beginning of the vintage fashion front, and position "vacuum" and "spongy" on the back. There, no worries, but a slight lack of dynamics.
(I use it primarily with a U.S. Hamer Californian, a Jackson Soloist, and my guitar "homemade").
Being also a user CA 100 NOS, I decided to entrust the craft workshops Gerard Cortier NOS, so that the changes a little.
The amendment did not touch the clear sound. However, bass, treble and the gain of both channels were saturated changed: since the controls can be used over a much wider range, treble themselves civilized, bass gained in precision, and I can ride gain without the sound deteriorates. I grabbed the momentum can safely use the method "modern" and positions "bold" and "silicon". Mesa grain was perfectly preserved, even exacerbated, as if the sound had been treated in the studio.
In short, the amp has become even more versatility.
At the last rehearsal, the bassist who was unaware of the changes asked me: "you've changed something in your Mesa? It looks like it sounds better than before".
In conclusion, I will put that 4 to this chapter: insufficient, mainly because of the reputation that we made this amp, which is not up to my expectations.
However, after the mod, I think he deserves a good 8 (very good): clear clear, well saturated fat but sufficiently accurate, low present but not invasive, acute manageable, versatile.
OVERALL OPINION
* For how long have you been using it?
* What thing do you like most/least about it?
* Did you try many other models before getting this one?
* What is your opinion about the value for the price?
* Knowing what you know now, would you make the same choice? ...
So I use this amp since June, but only since August version "modified NOS."
Before, I had a bunch of amps and preamps, tube and transistor: MAC (I'm sure nobody knows: lol
, Music Industry, Rockman, Peavey (Reknown)-in the year 70, it dates me - Rocktron Voodo Valve tube Peavey FX Marsalla (JMP, TSL 2000), Hughes & Kettner TriAmp, Triaxis Mesa, Carvin V3, Diezel Einstein and now OUR CA100 and Dual Recto; the Rectifier is a very good amp, but too expensive for what it is. After the change (the cost is very low), it is much more usable and I think the store. As to make the election again, yes, but only occasionally, and especially by making him do a short stay in Alès, in workshops NOS. But ultimately, for me, in the original, it is below the Diezel Einstein, and far behind the NOS CA100.
Again, I will put that 5 (average), mainly because of the value that is frankly not very good, especially if you buy it new; in time, no problem, it becomes affordable, and in this cases can be traced note
. Afterwards, if we can afford to have it changed, it becomes an excellent amp.