Atomic 50/50 vs. Matrix or other tube power amps?

christopherzberlin

christopherzberlin

Inspired
Hi guys,

After half a year back in the real amp world I am going back to an Axe II. I got an offer for an Atomic 50/50 power amp and am considering it. Any users who can recommend it or can share their experience? I had the Axe II in combination with a Matrix 1000 and a Marshall 9100 before. The Marshall was great but it is too heavy to carry around. So I'm thinking either Matrix or the Atomic.... I'm going to use a Bogner 2x12 or two 1x12s.... Thanks for any advice! Cheers
Chris
 
The 50/50 is an excellent neutral amp. I liked the Presence controls on it.
It's heavy though.

Compared to the Matrix its high frequency range sounds more "natural", and as a whole it sounds more 3D.
But this is when directly comparing amps. You probably won't notice the differences when just using the Matrix, which also is a great amp and used by many pros.
 
Hi Yek, thanks for the answer. So you think I would be able to keep using the power amp modeling of the axe? With the Marshall that did not sound good, so I just turned it off and made use of different preamps.... I know the rule is "if it sounds good it works" but I'm wondering if the Atomic is neutral enough for the ampsims... ? Could it be comparible to the old 50 watt blocks in the powered wedges maybe? I remember they were FRFR?
 
christopherzberlin said:
Hi guys,

After half a year back in the real amp world I am going back to an Axe II. I got an offer for an Atomic 50/50 power amp and am considering it. Any users who can recommend it or can share their experience? I had the Axe II in combination with a Matrix 1000 and a Marshall 9100 before. The Marshall was great but it is too heavy to carry around. So I'm thinking either Matrix or the Atomic.... I'm going to use a Bogner 2x12 or two 1x12s.... Thanks for any advice! Cheers
Chris
Click to expand...

I had an Atomic 50/50 a year or 2 back. It sounded good, but it will put its own DNA on the Axe Fx tone as you start turning it up. I A/B'd it with a Carvin DCM1540L, and the Carvin stayed much cleaner at higher volumes, retaining the true modeling without added distortion from tubes. The Atomic, while it sounded good, did add some distortion of it's own (but only when turned up). I do wish I had kept the Atomic for running a tube preamp that I have into, so if you don't end up buying the Atomic, please let me know.
 
I have both...Had the Atomic first and then picked up the Matrix 1000. They are both excellent amps and I still use both. I prefer the Matrix with my guitar cabs (old Marshall 4x12 and/or various 2x12 and 1x12 cabs). It has a nice warmth to it and I like the response better with a the bigger, closed back cabs. The Atomic sounds better with smaller open back cabs to my ears. Either way you can't go wrong IMO. I think with the continued refinement of the amplifier modelling in the Axe Fx, both units will perform equally as well for you.
 
hi all, quick report. After getting the Atomic 50/50 I'm pretty happy. It's very clean and doesn't color tone too much... Drives the speaker better than a solid state amp would. Can't A/B it but I remember being unhappy with the Matrix and a real cab. So as a Mesa or Marshall power amp is too heavy to carry around, the Atomic really is a good solution. Wonder why they discontinued it... ? No comparable product in the market... Anyway happy christmas to all!
 
Have not had the atomic but had a mesa 2:90 for years and the matrix gt1600fx was only thing that gave me balls in a solid state amp. Mostly didn't have to adjust patches much at all with the switch and sounded better as all modelling of power amps sounded more distinct and widened the palette to paint from.

I would get solid state matrix over tube amp. Almost 4 years of use and zero issues. No tubes to replace and weighs 13 lbs!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom