Triple VS Dual Multi-Watt Rectifier | Shootout | Comparison

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 26 жов 2024
  • A real-world test comparing the two beasts, does the power section matter in a mix? 1 Take Left 1 Take Right with drums and without. Let me know what you think! All comments and criticisms are welcome! If you like this type of video don't forget to like and subscribe! Thanks
    Riff One - Breathe Life by Killswitch Engage
    Signal Chain
    ESP LTD EC-500 - Drop C
    EMG 81
    Maxon 808
    AMP - Modern Mode
    Mesa 4x12 OS V30 2006
    SM-57 API512c
    Riff Two - The Betrayal - Black Label Society
    Signal Chain
    Ibanez RGD 321 - Drop A
    Ibanez CAP-VK2-DT
    Horizon Devices Precision Drive
    AMP - Vintage Mode
    Mesa 4x12 OS V30 2006
    SM-57 API512c
    Riff 2.5 The Betrayal - Black Label Society
    Signal Chain
    Gibson Les Paul Supreme
    Gibson 498T
    Horizon Devices Precision Drive
    AMP - Vintage Mode BOTH 50W modes
    Marshall 4x12 1971 G12H30 55hz 16 Ohm Pulsonic Cone
    SM-57 API512c

КОМЕНТАРІ • 19

  • @lesleelogan7959
    @lesleelogan7959 4 дні тому +1

    These are F***** brutal!! Horns up on the dual for sure.

  • @free_electron
    @free_electron Місяць тому +2

    I prefer the more mid forward in your face attitude of the dual here over the triple. Which is shocking because you’d think 150W would sound bigger than 100W but in this case it sounded thinned out and scooped in an odd response attitude that didn’t hit the mark or seem as musical under a microphone. Thanks for the comparison I really appreciate it and will be going multi watt dual instead over triple like I’d planned.

    • @acrylicrecording
      @acrylicrecording  Місяць тому

      For sure the Dual in these examples sounds a bit more "musical" possibly because I set the tones on it first, then matched them on the triple. Could have gone completely the opposite if i did it the other way round I think. thw 150w watt is less compressed and has was more response too it.. sometimes too much. I'd compare it to the 50w vs 100w 5150s lower watts is tighter and compressed and more focused but less dynamic response to your picking dynamics and less dynamics especially in the low end. In these examples the compression on the low end of the dual is VERY nice. The biggest difference is in the room and under the fingers, way more difference than under the mic just listening back, so to me its much more about your personal playing style and what kind of response you like from your amp, tight and compressed/focused or open and very dynamic/responsive

  • @FRANANGELICOONA
    @FRANANGELICOONA Місяць тому +2

    Sounds very similar
    May as well get the triple then.

    • @acrylicrecording
      @acrylicrecording  Місяць тому

      Feel in the room is quite different, triple is loose and very dynamic, dual is very tight and a bit more focused. But yeah I kept the Triple.

  • @BaritoneGoatStudio
    @BaritoneGoatStudio 2 місяці тому +1

    The most notable difference immediately was the more mid forward character of the triple rec. it almost gave the effect of bumping the level by about 0.5db overall.

  • @steves12strings
    @steves12strings 2 місяці тому +1

    Expected to love everything Triple... instead loved the Dual in every scenario.

    • @acrylicrecording
      @acrylicrecording  2 місяці тому +1

      Hahah same! In this secnario at least, I wonder if I dialed the original tones on Triple if I would've liked it more.

  • @ronnymilianowicz5228
    @ronnymilianowicz5228 2 місяці тому +1

    Very happy with that I likes Dual Red channel more since I thought 150 is always better then 100 watt. I never came across that with 50/100 watt though. Maybe Im bias since I have the 100 watt version. :)

  • @StevenLamkin-yz2rd
    @StevenLamkin-yz2rd 2 місяці тому

    I prefer both but to me I think the dual sounds nice cause it gives you that classic 80s metal tune and of course the classic rock tune but to be honest I like both 🤘 but if I have to choose one it might be the dual

  • @James3II3
    @James3II3 2 місяці тому

    "Breathe life" ,For that im subscribing

    • @acrylicrecording
      @acrylicrecording  2 місяці тому +1

      Helllll yeah, figured it'd be a good riff for testing. Thanks! :)

  • @9iii460
    @9iii460 2 місяці тому

    I have to say Gibson sounds better, but I have a question. Would you replace the 498t pickup with a more expensive, more delicate custombucker?It is rare to see people playing metal with custombucker such as R9 or 1968 Les Paul, even though they are clearly higher spec guitars.

    • @acrylicrecording
      @acrylicrecording  2 місяці тому +1

      Custombucker = total ripoff, i just looked up how much they cost. FUUUUu that. The 498T sounds fantasticcc so why would I change it? I don't think i'd ever spend more than 100-130 on a pickup. Pickups are important but they're all just different flavours.. rarely is one just BETTER than another.. they're just different.
      Reminder the Gibson is through a different speaker than the rest

    • @9iii460
      @9iii460 2 місяці тому

      @@acrylicrecording I also like my 498t, especially clean, although I have seen many guitarists replace it with sh4.

    • @acrylicrecording
      @acrylicrecording  2 місяці тому +1

      @@9iii460 I’m working on record recorded with a JB right now, very nice, hard punchy mids. But I like the sizzle and chime of my 498t. That being said who’s to say how much is the guitar it’s self and how much is the pickup. I really don’t think pickups change a guitars sound super dramatically.

    • @aheadofmetal
      @aheadofmetal Місяць тому

      +1 for 498t. I'll never change mine.