6L6C
Power User
A few guys are interested in Carvin vs Matrix so here we go.
(Carvin DCM200L vs Matrix GT800FX)
Little background been playing since 1977 have had a fair amount of gear through the years, also built racks for a few people (mostly friends) processor and midi programming that sort of thing. Have always been interested in the tech side. Always thought there would be a solid state solution that was on par with tube gear, just didn’t think I would see it in my life time! The first that really peaked my interest was the original POD in 1998 maybe 97, forget?? Anyway it was the one piece of gear that made me think “this is starting to go in the right direction”. There were others after, but nothing that was moving forward, in what, I would consider a positive direction. Just adding bells and whistles. Didn’t matter, along came the Axe Fx Standard in (09 for me) and now the AF II.
Thought a little background would just put you, (the reader), get a little into my head. Don’t know if it helps or not. Bottom line been around.
Keep in mind I have not had the Matrix long a few days and have not had the opportunity to spend allot of time with it, so I would call this more first impressions. First of the Matrix is really nice construction lite but very solid.
Another very important thing to take into consideration, allot of the reviews I have seen for the Matrix are based on real guitar cabs and also matching the EQ curves of other tube amp’s VHT being top of that list. I on the other hand am currently FRFR cabs (Atomics) and just keeping the Matrix neutral.
Always liked my Carvin, in my case a little under powered with the 200L so was considering the 1540L, and then started seeing more and more on the Matrix and curiosity got the best of me, and glad it did. Without going into a bunch of techno-babble, the Matrix sounds more 3D especially with higher notes there is just more meat there. With the Carvin I was using the output1 EQ (just little tweaks) with the Matrix I returned it back to neutral and getting a more satisfying results.
Bottom line can get a good result out of both amp’s but the Matrix is the winner, sometimes it’s just a matter of color between the two pieces of gear in question, but in this case it is a bit more. I even feel a bit more connected with my FRFR system (hard to explain, just take my word for it). What also makes the Matrix a winner to me, if I were to walk out of the room and somebody A/B amps, could I tell the difference. YES I can, and believe most players would be able to pick one from the other.
So that is my first impression, if on a tight budget the Carvin is still a great choice the 1540L would be my choice, again my 200L sounds great but slightly underpowered. Other amp’s I have tried, the Atomic Mono Block . Decent amp for sure, the Carvin sounds pretty dam close though. Also had an Art SLA-2 which I hated but there again I wonder if it was because I was running it FRFR where others are using a real cabinet with it?
John
(Carvin DCM200L vs Matrix GT800FX)
Little background been playing since 1977 have had a fair amount of gear through the years, also built racks for a few people (mostly friends) processor and midi programming that sort of thing. Have always been interested in the tech side. Always thought there would be a solid state solution that was on par with tube gear, just didn’t think I would see it in my life time! The first that really peaked my interest was the original POD in 1998 maybe 97, forget?? Anyway it was the one piece of gear that made me think “this is starting to go in the right direction”. There were others after, but nothing that was moving forward, in what, I would consider a positive direction. Just adding bells and whistles. Didn’t matter, along came the Axe Fx Standard in (09 for me) and now the AF II.
Thought a little background would just put you, (the reader), get a little into my head. Don’t know if it helps or not. Bottom line been around.
Keep in mind I have not had the Matrix long a few days and have not had the opportunity to spend allot of time with it, so I would call this more first impressions. First of the Matrix is really nice construction lite but very solid.
Another very important thing to take into consideration, allot of the reviews I have seen for the Matrix are based on real guitar cabs and also matching the EQ curves of other tube amp’s VHT being top of that list. I on the other hand am currently FRFR cabs (Atomics) and just keeping the Matrix neutral.
Always liked my Carvin, in my case a little under powered with the 200L so was considering the 1540L, and then started seeing more and more on the Matrix and curiosity got the best of me, and glad it did. Without going into a bunch of techno-babble, the Matrix sounds more 3D especially with higher notes there is just more meat there. With the Carvin I was using the output1 EQ (just little tweaks) with the Matrix I returned it back to neutral and getting a more satisfying results.
Bottom line can get a good result out of both amp’s but the Matrix is the winner, sometimes it’s just a matter of color between the two pieces of gear in question, but in this case it is a bit more. I even feel a bit more connected with my FRFR system (hard to explain, just take my word for it). What also makes the Matrix a winner to me, if I were to walk out of the room and somebody A/B amps, could I tell the difference. YES I can, and believe most players would be able to pick one from the other.
So that is my first impression, if on a tight budget the Carvin is still a great choice the 1540L would be my choice, again my 200L sounds great but slightly underpowered. Other amp’s I have tried, the Atomic Mono Block . Decent amp for sure, the Carvin sounds pretty dam close though. Also had an Art SLA-2 which I hated but there again I wonder if it was because I was running it FRFR where others are using a real cabinet with it?
John