Carvin 1540L vs Matrix

sarge

sarge

Power User
Anyone had the chance to try these two out side by side? I guess it is pretty doubtful.

Really liking the price of the Carvin.

Advantages of one vs the other?

I would probably run either through a 4x12.
 
I currently own both. Recently did an A/B in the studio and found the Carvin to be a little bit clearer. I still think I like the feel of the Matrix a little bit more when playing live. Overall, they are quite close... closer than some of the Matrix hype vs. general Carvin dislike seen on this forum may seem to indicate.

I tend to use the Carvin for bass.. actually shared it with the bassist in my band for the last tour. Honestly, since I like the feel of the Matrix more live, I would probably sell the Carvin if I wasn't using it for bass. Hard to say if it's actually worth the extra cash.
 
I was a long time Carvin and axefx user. I have the 1540L and a matrix amp. I A/B the two of them and from my impression the matrix was a clear winner. I can see why the previous post would describe the Carvin as clearer. In a way is, but to me that clearness is from a lack of fullness and lowend authority. In my opinion the matrix sounds big full and 3d while the Carvin sounds a bit small and thin in comparison. I can't tell you if it's worth the money, for me it was lol
 
Sound is always subjective. Ive not used the Carvin as their all but impossible to get in the UK. however, even if they both sound identical, the Matrix is 1U v the Carvin 2U - and the Matrix weighs 3.7kg v the Carvins 6.3kg. To some people the size/weight advantage is enough to justify a price difference. On the other hand the Carvin is 1500w bridged v the Matrix 800w bridged which MAY also be of consideration (unlikely, but rsf1977 wanted more power than the Matrix provided), and around $420 (I think) v the matrix at around $680 is also a consideration.
 
Last edited:
I have the 200L the little brother to the 1540L. Never had complainants about the 200L tone wise, found it slightly under-powered and was going to jump to the 1540L but with all the hype of the GT800FX my curiosity got the best of me and glad it did. Although out of all the amps I have tried to use with the Axe Fx my two favorites are the Carvin and the Matrix. I wrote a little review when I first got the Matrix which I still stand by, kind of shot out of a canon at the time so worded a little clunky.
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/amps-cabs/41306-carvin-dcm200l-vs-matrix-gt800fx.html

Bottom line, out of everything I have tried if Matrix was not around I would be using the 1540L, because it is a great amp for the Axe Fx IMO. I never sold my 200L because I still love it and can use it for other applications. On the other side, is the Matrix worth the extra money? IMO yes for sure! Sounds great, plenty of power, and 1 rack space.
John
 
paulmapp8306 said:
Sound is always subjective. Ive not used the Carvin as their all but impossible to get in the UK. however, even if they both sound identical, the Matrix is 1U v the Carvin 2U - and the Matrix weighs 3.7kg v the Carvins 6.3kg. To some people the size/weight advantage is enough to justify a price difference. On the other hand the Carvin is 1500w bridged v the Matrix 800w bridged which MAY also be of consideration (unlikely, but rsf1977 wanted more power than the Matrix provided), and around $420 (I think) v the matrix at around $680 is also a consideration.
Click to expand...

yea, i run dual 4x12s cabinets in a loud as hell metal band and 1540L as well as the matrix 800 didn't really have enough juice when running stereo cabs. The 1540L was limiting at loud bass heavy palm mute parts so i knew the amp was being pushed out of its comfort zone. So i upgraded to the carvin dcm3000L which to me sound identical to the 1540L just more power. The matrix I have, which is a custom 2000watt verion of the matrix gt800, sounded way better then both carvin models.
 
wow, 2000 watts sounds like a lot. I'm curious, any idea what would you be using if it was a conventional tube power amp?
 
well it sounds like more then it is the way i use it. I have one cab that's 4ohms and 8ohms. So I have to provide enough for the 8ohm cab and I know the 4ohm will be fine. My matrix amp is 1000 a channel into 4 ohm and 650 a channel into 8ohm. So basically 650watts was what I was after. The 1000 watts into 4ohms never really gets passed a little more then half power.
 
rsf, it really surprises me that both channels of the 1540L was not nearly enough for you. On my most recent tour, I used one channel into my 8 ohm guitar cab and the other into the 4ohm bass cab. Worked out well. If anything the bass was what needed additional volume.
 
well I tune down to drop A. So when I do a palm mute ona low A it's asking a lot of the power to reproduce that note. It's like the 1540L was almost enough headroom to keep the amp from limiting when up loud, but when those low A notes were really loud it always was too much, so I had to go one unit higher to the 3000DCML which was more then I needed, but it's always better to have too much power and not use then be needing more then you have. You just have to use common sense when turning it up, if you think it sounds too loud and its going to fry a speaker then turn it down. I've been running this setup for a long time now over a year and I've never had a problem carrying a room or fear of blowing anything up, lol. Knock on wood.
 
Last edited:
6L6C said:
I have the 200L the little brother to the 1540L. Never had complainants about the 200L tone wise, found it slightly under-powered and was going to jump to the 1540L but with all the hype of the GT800FX my curiosity got the best of me and glad it did. Although out of all the amps I have tried to use with the Axe Fx my two favorites are the Carvin and the Matrix. I wrote a little review when I first got the Matrix which I still stand by, kind of shot out of a canon at the time so worded a little clunky.
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/amps-cabs/41306-carvin-dcm200l-vs-matrix-gt800fx.html

Bottom line, out of everything I have tried if Matrix was not around I would be using the 1540L, because it is a great amp for the Axe Fx IMO. I never sold my 200L because I still love it and can use it for other applications. On the other side, is the Matrix worth the extra money? IMO yes for sure! Sounds great, plenty of power, and 1 rack space.
John
Click to expand...


I don't think the 200L is related much at all to the higher powered 1540/3000/3800L series. Before I bought the 1540L and 200Ls, I checked up on their schematics on the Carvin site. The 200L doesn't have a schematic, but there is one for the 150 which is probably similar, as the 200L is its replacement.

The 1540/3000/3800L series are all based on identical circuits, main difference is that they probably populate the higher powered ones with more output devices... just a guess. The 150/200 is a completely different circuit, and the output device is completely different than the 1540 series. The 200L is its own little amp.
 
I'd like to interject a comment here. I'm not at all familiar with Matrix so I will not comment on the +/-'s of those amps, however the posts I've seen in this thread about the failings of Carvin power amps all relate to how they interact with guitar cabs. The Matrix power-amp may very well have been designed to work with guitar cabs, but the Carvin amps are designed as linear power-amps. They're designed to work specifically with FRFR speaker systems. I suspect that if your rig is lackluster in performance with a Carvin amp it's because your using a guitar cab that is designed for a totally different type of amp (tube).

Don't fault the amp because you are misusing it.

I run my Axe-Fx Ultra through a DCM1540L into a pair of 3 way FRFR cabs that have specs that are flat line straight from low bass to high treble, and have an output of 103db @1w x 1m and believe me there is NO problem with the bass or in fact any other part of the frequency spectrum.

I'm not knocking the Matrix amps in any way, shape, form, or fashion, I know nothing about them. But let's get our facts straight here. If your having a problem with the Carvin power-amps IMO it's because your not using them right.
 
rsf1977 said:
well I tune down to drop A. So when I do a palm mute ona low A it's asking a lot of the power to reproduce that note. It's like the 1540L was almost enough headroom to keep the amp from limiting when up loud, but when those low A notes were really loud it always was too much, so I had to go one unit higher to the 3000DCML which was more then I needed, but it's always better to have too much power and not use then be needing more then you have. You just have to use common sense when turning it up, if you think it sounds too loud and its going to fry a speaker then turn it down. I've been running this setup for a long time now over a year and I've never had a problem carrying a room or fear of blowing anything up, lol. Knock on wood.
Click to expand...


I tune to B standard. Your band must be loud.
 
t0aj15 said:
I'd like to interject a comment here. I'm not at all familiar with Matrix so I will not comment on the +/-'s of those amps, however the posts I've seen in this thread about the failings of Carvin power amps all relate to how they interact with guitar cabs. The Matrix power-amp may very well have been designed to work with guitar cabs, but the Carvin amps are designed as linear power-amps. They're designed to work specifically with FRFR speaker systems. I suspect that if your rig is lackluster in performance with a Carvin amp it's because your using a guitar cab that is designed for a totally different type of amp (tube).

Don't fault the amp because you are misusing it.

I run my Axe-Fx Ultra through a DCM1540L into a pair of 3 way FRFR cabs that have specs that are flat line straight from low bass to high treble, and have an output of 103db @1w x 1m and believe me there is NO problem with the bass or in fact any other part of the frequency spectrum.

I'm not knocking the Matrix amps in any way, shape, form, or fashion, I know nothing about them. But let's get our facts straight here. If your having a problem with the Carvin power-amps IMO it's because your not using them right.
Click to expand...



There is no parameter on the Matrix that makes it more or less suitable for guitar cabs than any other high quality SS amp, zero. Jay Mitchell did some tests on the GT800FX and found that it was quite simply no different in terms of response than any other PA amp.

I am very satisfied with the DCM1540L going into my guitar cabs. DCM1540L into guitar cab is every bit as proper a use as GT800FX into guitar cab.
 
qingcong said:
I don't think the 200L is related much at all to the higher powered 1540/3000/3800L series. Before I bought the 1540L and 200Ls, I checked up on their schematics on the Carvin site. The 200L doesn't have a schematic, but there is one for the 150 which is probably similar, as the 200L is its replacement.

The 200L is its own little amp.
Click to expand...

Just took a peak at the schematics and see what you mean. Not the little brother to the 1540 more like the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] cousin. :lol
 
The Matrix has a flat freq response as well. It came from the XT800 PA amps - and while there are differences there primarily how the amp reacts to the input not the freq response it produces - and of course the connectivity. the Matrix "feels" more like a valve amp but still provided a flat freq response.
 
qingcong said:
Jay Mitchell did some tests on the GT800FX and found that it was quite simply no different in terms of response than any other PA amp.
Click to expand...

Jay said his tests were limited to just the response and found it to be perfectly flat......not all PA amps are flat.
 
paulmapp8306 said:
The Matrix has a flat freq response as well. It came from the XT800 PA amps - and while there are differences there primarily how the amp reacts to the input not the freq response it produces - and of course the connectivity. the Matrix "feels" more like a valve amp but still provided a flat freq response.
Click to expand...
How do you define "valve amp feel"?



Lightningboy said:
Jay said his tests were limited to just the response and found it to be perfectly flat......not all PA amps are flat.
Click to expand...
If they are worth a crap, they are supposed to be flat.


Look guys, I'm not busting on the Matrix, but I think the whole idea that it has some magical tonal property needs to be dispelled. It is quite simply a typical, well designed power amp.
 
qingcong said:
If they are worth a crap, they are supposed to be flat.


Look guys, I'm not busting on the Matrix, but I think the whole idea that it has some magical tonal property needs to be dispelled. It is quite simply a typical, well designed power amp.
Click to expand...

The first statement is true - however many many PAs in the lower price areas are not flat at all. As for the second - Jay said as much. he said it is not different (from a freq response POV) than any other quality power amp. he even re-iterated the quality part and said that many amps are NOT quality.

The point of the Matrix is that most amps cheaper than the Matrix - and many at the same price point and slightly above arnt quality - or as high a quality as the Matrix.

i myself have said the same thing. I have found SS power amps just as good as the matrix - but they were 2U, heavier than the Matrix and more expensive. Carvin amps are similar to Matrix in the quality/price ration by all accounts. that is offering amps higher in quality than others at their price point. How they directly compare to the Matrix i cant say - as I said earlier their all but impossible to get hold of in the UK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom