Atomic 50/50 vs. MATRIX GT800FX

Well - I presume youve seen mark Days video demo of the AFX2 and Atomic 50/50. Well hes done one for the Matrix GT800FX too. Check them both out and make your own choice :)





Personally I dont think theres much in it. Theres more "room" in the Atomic clip - you can here it in the reverb. Maybe its not recorded eactly the same way. The Atomic seems to go into harmonics a touch easier - but its difficult to exactly recreate that in two takes - and if its louder in the room with one amp it will make a difference too. The Matrix seems a touch thicker - that will be the low mids that all valve power amps are lighter on (not a bad thing or a good one - just is and its personal which you prefer. The slight EQ difference (that thicker low mids) can be EQd out easily enough should you wish, and the dynamics seem very close even if it is youtube.

Given the Atomic is more expensive (even in the states) heavier, bigger, has valve maintenance and replacement my personal choice is the Matrix - but tonally its close.
 
Last edited:
Judging my the 2 Mark Day vids it sounds like I'd expect to hear...the Atomic has more presence in the top without being hard on the ears. The Matrix clip sounded just fine, but I've done enough with various ways to amplify the Axe-Fx but I seem to prefer having power tubes somewhere between the Axe and my speakers...whether that is full range or guitar cabs with power amp.

Plus the Atomic stuff held up amazingly well on the road.
 
Sounded a little harsher than the atomic.. But you know what, it's got to be tough to get a clear feel via you tube. I would like if Mark had said what he likes about them both seeing that he has them both. Anyway I am very happy with my 50/50.
 
I dont think its harsher as such. I think the Matrix has a little more string definition which leads to a slightly more aggressive attack. I like that - you may not. I think both are perfect partners for the Axe, and it is a personal choice. I dont think Id sell either for the other. If weight/size is a an issue the Matrix will be the choice I feel. If thats not an issue its just down to personal prefernce.
 
AK74 said:
Sounded a little harsher than the atomic.. But you know what, it's got to be tough to get a clear feel via you tube. I would like if Mark had said what he likes about them both seeing that he has them both. Anyway I am very happy with my 50/50.
Click to expand...

I think on the clean sounds the 50/50 was sweeter and more bell like. The matrix sounded sterile. My complaint with most SS stuff the cleans reveal the true nature of the beast
 
paulmapp8306 said:
I dont think its harsher as such. I think the Matrix has a little more string definition which leads to a slightly more aggressive attack. I like that - you may not. I think both are perfect partners for the Axe, and it is a personal choice. I dont think Id sell either for the other. If weight/size is a an issue the Matrix will be the choice I feel. If thats not an issue its just down to personal prefernce.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, I think they are both great choices. It's cool that the forums are now filled with players that are happy with their power amp choices.
 
It's so close I would use ether one of these amps... Given a little time I'll bet you can EQ then to sound and feel identical.
 
James Cullen said:
I think on the clean sounds the 50/50 was sweeter and more bell like. The matrix sounded sterile. My complaint with most SS stuff the cleans reveal the true nature of the beast
Click to expand...

I hear the same thing actually - but I didnt put it down to being sterile - I put it down to the more prescence and high mids the Atomic has. My VHT had the same in a direct comparrison to the Matrix - but that can be EQd out easily enough in your patches. i started with a global EQ curve to mimic my VHT. not any more - my patches have evolved to suit the Matrix. ill have to start again anyway when I get the AFX2 so??

I got the Matrix before the Atomic was released - but I still think id go that route - cos the weight is important to my 44 year old body that already gets spasms in its lower back. If I was young and fit I may have gone the other way.
 
paulmapp8306 said:
I hear the same thing actually - but I didnt put it down to being sterile - I put it down to the more prescence and high mids the Atomic has. My VHT had the same in a direct comparrison to the Matrix - but that can be EQd out easily enough in your patches. i started with a global EQ curve to mimic my VHT. not any more - my patches have evolved to suit the Matrix. ill have to start again anyway when I get the AFX2 so??

I got the Matrix before the Atomic was released - but I still think id go that route - cos the weight is important to my 44 year old body that already gets spasms in its lower back. If I was young and fit I may have gone the other way.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Its good to know that the EQ can get you there. I just have a particular liking for those clean sounds but the weight and price of the Matrix make it an attractive proposition. I have ordered an AXE II and 50/50 but as I live close to Usk where they make the Matrix, it would be good to try both. My 47 year old body prob would appreciate the lack of weight too!!
 
These were so close it really is just splitting hairs. Both sound great. I do think the 50/50 had slight edge in the cleans but as others have said that can be tweaked with EQ.

The main question is do they both feel the same in the room? My guess is they are similar.
 
Both sound really good but I personally like the Atomic for its more present, open and bell-like top end. If I can hear it this clearly in a YouTube video I would imagine that the difference would be greater in person.

The other area that I can really tell the difference is the “image”. Try listening to a section of both clips with your eyes closed where Mark plays the same riffs and try to envision where the sound is emanating from. To me, the Atomic clip floats out in front of the speakers whereas the Matrix seems less out front and more one dimensional.

Even though some of the differences may be subtle, I don’t consider them trivial. Better is better (I realize that this is subjective). That is why I continue to choose Atomic for my main rig. If weight and size are a more important consideration than sound quality and feel, I won’t argue that the Matrix is an excellent choice.
 
James Cullen said:
Its good to know that the EQ can get you there.
Click to expand...
Maybe, and maybe not.

Typical valve designs are inherently less linear than typical SS designs, and EQ can't make up those differences, only tone balance differences. Of course, one of the things the AxeFX does so well is model valve non-linearity, so it's just a matter of whether you think a valve power amp adds some sweetness that you can't get from your patches.
 
Last edited:
IMHO Matrix is better with distortion and Atomic better with clean. Based on Mark's videos though... Both are quite close tonally. Did Mark use global eq with Matrix? PaulMapp's global eq tips will make Matrix sound even more tube like.
 
I believe the patch was the same one with no EQ or advanced tweeks. Looks like he did both clips at the same time - so he will have just switched the amps around.

Its stragne because in one way this is the fairest way of comparing. Same patch, same guitar, same player, same (virtually) riffs, same cab, same mic, same room. But on another level its not fair as one is valve with everything that gives and one isnt. The Axe "should" be capable of giving the valvness the Matrix doesnt have intrinsically - so for a fair test you should tweek the patche slightly.

Either way - both sound like top amps with the AFX2. Tonaly perfection, weight, cost will all be considerations for each individuals choice and either choice would be wrong. Think of them as different beasts if you will. Do these videos make a difference? do they show that with its flat (er) response the Atomic is the best valve power amp solution at present? and that the Matrix is the best SS one? Personally after owning the Art SLA, and a VHT 2:50:2 and trying various other top quality amps (Haffler and co) I think they are. Havent tried the Rocktron or Carvin SS offerings, nor the Mesa 2:90 so cant say for sure.
 
My take on demo is that both amps rock for different reasons. I found nothing I didn't like about the GT except perhaps that in comparison to the Atomc it didn't sound quite as raw. Big in your face sound with a really nice tight bottom end. The Atomic had a fuller sound on harmonics and lead stuff but I was surprised by the amount of hiss on the top end and the flub added to the bottom end, but both these things could probably be adjusted for. I did note the hiss with the GT as well but it was nowhere near as present. OTOH the cleans on the Atomc sounded stellar to me.
Bottom line for me they're both great amps but based on Marks demos I would go with the GT. It seemed to have the more 'even' consistent sound of the two.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Soma said:
Bottom line for me they're both great amps but based on Marks demos I would go with the GT. It seemed to have the more 'even' consistent sound of the two.

Cheers
Click to expand...

I just did a side by side of Mark Days youtube vid on the GT and the Atomic 50/50 and I still prefered the Atomic. It all comes down to personal preferrence.
 
paulmapp8306 said:
Well - I presume youve seen mark Days video demo of the AFX2 and Atomic 50/50. Well hes done one for the Matrix GT800FX too. Check them both out and make your own choice :)





Personally I dont think theres much in it. Theres more "room" in the Atomic clip - you can here it in the reverb. Maybe its not recorded eactly the same way. The Atomic seems to go into harmonics a touch easier - but its difficult to exactly recreate that in two takes - and if its louder in the room with one amp it will make a difference too. The Matrix seems a touch thicker - that will be the low mids that all valve power amps are lighter on (not a bad thing or a good one - just is and its personal which you prefer. The slight EQ difference (that thicker low mids) can be EQd out easily enough should you wish, and the dynamics seem very close even if it is youtube.

Given the Atomic is more expensive (even in the states) heavier, bigger, has valve maintenance and replacement my personal choice is the Matrix - but tonally its close.
Click to expand...
After watching a bit of both videos... here is my take via the YT video (whatever that's worth)...

Atomic 50/50: Smoother overall... needs a more low end "omph"... couldn't really hear that presence "sizzle," maybe he had it dialed out (set to zero)?
Matrix: Low end galore... maybe too much... needed some more high end sizzle, it sounded a bit "honky"...

Don't know if it's because of the power amps or because of Mark's picking style but the "pick pluck" was very pronounced on the Matrix to the point where I didn't want to hear any more of that clip and the Atomic had some of the "pick pluck" but it wasn't as pronounced... specifically during the high gain clips.

Damn, I want to hear how these two compare to the Carvin F1200! Arg!!! Anyone want to send me $1500 so I can demo all three units together? ;) :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom