Not enjoying Matrix....Mesa 20/20?

[eljodon]

We are not "tweakers" we are guitar players.. If I only played clean and low gain stuff then FRFR & SS would be a no brainer for AXF does them as the original.

If you want to blow out a match at ten feet, you need a TUBE AMP with the AFX.......

I agree! I used different solid state power amps before and it sounded good. Then I bought a Mesa 2 90 for my studio to run a bunch of my amps with a dummy load. One night I decided to try it when I had the Axe Fx Ultra and I was blown away at the difference. Then I took it to rehearsal and it blew away my rhythm guitar player's Axe Fx that uses a power amp 3 times the wattage of the 2 90 and he has the same presets that I had because I exported it to his Axe Fx.
I have class AB power amp that has similar specs like the Matrix, but not as powerful and it sounded better than my other power amps, but not as good as the 2 90!
Now that I have the Axe Fx 2, I can't wait to try it when my band rehearses. With the other power amps I do have to do some tweaking. I just want to plug and play!

 

[paulmapp8306]

We are not "tweakers" we are guitar players.. If I only played clean and low gain stuff then FRFR & SS would be a no brainer for AXF does them as the original.

If you want to blow out a match at ten feet, you need a TUBE AMP with the AFX.......

Were all tweekers. Get a new amp and you have to tweek it. Im not talking lots of time, in detail - just re-tuning you patches to the new power amp, just like you'd re-tune to a new head or cab.

Either way its personal. I used a VHT 2:50:2 with the AFX for over a year. Tried the Mesa 2:90 and really didnt like it. Tried the Matrix stuff and it was close to the VHT, and the weight made such a difference but kept the VHT. Changed to the GT1000 when it came out and I no longer felt the need to keep the VHT it was so close. I only every use cabs - not FRFR.

There are no bad choices, there are no bad options, there is only personal preferences. Use what makes you smile.


@ eljodon, you do know why you need more power is an SS amp? Power amps provide more power than they say on the tin - its just not clean. Its compressing and clipping. SS amps dont do that or they sound terrible, so you need lots more power - around 4 times really to make sure you stay in their clean zone. Its also why valve amps sound better turned up - your used to that compression and clipping (not necessarily audible clipping either - but its still there). These are the things you need to compensate for when going from a valve power amp to a SS one. You have compensated for them being there in the patch design - when you switch there no longer there and you have to add them back in the AFX. Many people understand this (or dont) and do just that and make SS amps work. Some dont. If you dont - no biggy, use the valve gear. Its all good.

 

[Triaxis75]

The 20/20 has to be the worst sounding tube power amp I've ever tried. 2/90 is great. 50/50 is great. 20/20, not so much.

Wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't ask but, which tubes were you using in the 2:90? I ask this because I run the same and more or less agree with the rest. 20/20..pfft(fart sound). It's budget decent.

 

[Roadrunner]

the 2:90 comes stock with 6L6, 8 of them.

 

[eljodon]

Were all tweekers. Get a new amp and you have to tweek it. Im not talking lots of time, in detail - just re-tuning you patches to the new power amp, just like you'd re-tune to a new head or cab.

Either way its personal. I used a VHT 2:50:2 with the AFX for over a year. Tried the Mesa 2:90 and really didnt like it. Tried the Matrix stuff and it was close to the VHT, and the weight made such a difference but kept the VHT. Changed to the GT1000 when it came out and I no longer felt the need to keep the VHT it was so close. I only every use cabs - not FRFR.

There are no bad choices, there are no bad options, there is only personal preferences. Use what makes you smile.

@ eljodon, you do know why you need more power is an SS amp? Power amps provide more power than they say on the tin - its just not clean. Its compressing and clipping. SS amps dont do that or they sound terrible, so you need lots more power - around 4 times really to make sure you stay in their clean zone. Its also why valve amps sound better turned up - your used to that compression and clipping (not necessarily audible clipping either - but its still there). These are the things you need to compensate for when going from a valve power amp to a SS one. You have compensated for them being there in the patch design - when you switch there no longer there and you have to add them back in the AFX. Many people understand this (or dont) and do just that and make SS amps work. Some dont. If you dont - no biggy, use the valve gear. Its all good.

Thanks for the explanation. I've been using the Axe Fx Ultra for more than 2 years and I knew it inside and out. I just got the Axe Fx 2 and it has a lot of new parameters but the power amp sim sometimes sounds weird to me depending on what amp I use. I bought the Axe Fx mostly for live playing because I have 2 herniated disks in my neck and my live system now is a lot smaller. I write music for a living and also mix albums when I have some free time in my studio and for recording I prefer my tube amps. But you're right, it's just a matter of preference and the it's not a right or wrong way as long as you're getting the sound you like.

 

[kippiejr]

UPDATE: I think i might have the GT1000FX working like a tube amp. I tried to post a picture of the grid screen but I could not get it to upload a small .jpg. The AMP block and TMA block are a live tone match of my ENGL SE 670. Time matching and tweaking 6 hours. Sag is off and every knob has been tweaked as well as the Freq in TMA block. I went A/B with a pedal at least 100 times as i tweaked. I spent another hour on the GEQ to liking of a tube amp. My ears are fried for I tweaked at gig volumes to be sure. Practice scheduled this week so we will see in a live setting. Clean channel was a tweak of EJ clean... I was on a mission for a light weight set up.. Other than the 4x12.. i might have it....

Damn

CPR into FIL into AMP into TMA into GEQ to sound 98% like my ENGL SE 670

 

[eljodon]

The Matrix power amp is a MOSFET class AB power amp which I think is basically like an HH V800 or the Carvin FET 900. They're supposed to kind of sound like a tube amps. I used to have a Carvin FET 400 and I remember it sounding warm with no hyped up high frequency. Eddie Van Halen used to use a bunch of HH V800 and other guitar players because they sounded amazing. Steve Stevens still uses them. In wonder how the Matrix sounds compared to the HH V800 power amps. The HH 800 amps put out 400 wpc , but they were huge compared to the Matrix which. I mentioned in AF forum before that I own a B&K ST-140 which is a MOSFET power amp and it's only 105 wpc and it sounds better than many of the power amps I owned. But is not powerful enough for a live band
The Matrix can handle 16 ohm cabinets which is very cool.

 

[boardwlk17]

eddie still uses H&H 800's i have a GT1000 and i love how it sounds

 

[eljodon]

I would like to buy a Matrix power amp and try it out, I'm trying to make some IR's with my Scumback speakers and I'm using my B&K MOSFET power amp right now and see how they come out. I want something totally flat because I'm using my TG 2 mic preamps to add some character to the IRs. I'm also using my SSL eq and compressor to try to eq it just like I do when I'm mixing.
I guess I could record a DI guitar and reamp it to my Axe Fx 2 so I can play it to tweak the eq. I think it would sound more natural than using a flat IR and eqing with the Axe Fx 2.

 

[Roadrunner]

The Matrix can handle 16 ohm cabinets which is very cool.

Well, actually there is nothing cool about that…it's just a way of running which basically ANY amp can do.
The higher the resistance = less the output power = amp is running lighter = less volume.
If for example you take 2 x 8 ohm cabs and run them in series than you get 16 ohms and the amp will work less hard, but if you parallel them than you go down to 4 ohms and the amp is running harder and the overall power is higher

 

[MatrixAmp]

The Matrix power amp is a MOSFET class AB power amp which I think is basically like an HH V800 or the Carvin FET 900. They're supposed to kind of sound like a tube amps. I used to have a Carvin FET 400 and I remember it sounding warm with no hyped up high frequency. Eddie Van Halen used to use a bunch of HH V800 and other guitar players because they sounded amazing. Steve Stevens still uses them. In wonder how the Matrix sounds compared to the HH V800 power amps. The HH 800 amps put out 400 wpc , but they were huge compared to the Matrix which. I mentioned in AF forum before that I own a B&K ST-140 which is a MOSFET power amp and it's only 105 wpc and it sounds better than many of the power amps I owned. But is not powerful enough for a live band
The Matrix can handle 16 ohm cabinets which is very cool.

Hi there,
Yes, all of the Matrix range are class AB MOSFET, even the XT7000MF 7000 watt one we use for large bass arrays.

Steve Stevens has been using 2 x GT1000FX for over a year. He AB'd it against the V800 and thought it sounded better. The fact it weighs less and takes less space was also a benefit. Anyone who had the pleasure of listening to Billy Idol on tour last year was listening to Matrix

The second part of his recent video in which he discusses the amp is here : Guitar Interactive Magazine - Issue 16: Feature - Steve Stevens though it is worth watching the whole 30 mins worth

Hope this helps.
My best regards
Matt

 

[paulmapp8306]

Steve Stevens still uses them. .

No he doesnt. He switched them for Matrix GTs around a year ago. Theres YouTube clips and stuff around somewhere. Basically he said the Matrix amps were at least as good as the HHs and weighed nothing.

*Damn Mat - you got there first

 

[eljodon]

No he doesnt. He switched them for Matrix GTs around a year ago. Theres YouTube clips and stuff around somewhere. Basically he said the Matrix amps were at least as good as the HHs and weighed nothing.

*Damn Mat - you got there first

Damn! I'm a year behind! I saw a photo in RT of Stave Stevens rig and it had a bunch of HH V800 that Friedman put together. And they take up 3 rack spaces! I guess that was a year ago? I've been reading the specs on the Matrix amps they're quite impressive. I like the size of them. I was using a D class power amp for some time an I didn't like it. I was using it (Crown XLS 1000) because it was very light, but I switch to the Mesa 2 90 because the sound was much fuller and I didn't have to push it as hard to get the volume I needed. I had to use 2 Marshall stereo cabs plugged into the 4 ohm side to get the volume I needed. But with the 2 90 It sounds louder and I'm able to use 1 Marshall stereo cabinet which is 8 ohm and it was way louder.I'll eventually will have to get something lighter because I can't carry a tube amp like the 2 90 because I have 2 herniated disc on my neck, so I'm I looking for something lighter and I've always liked how the MOSFET amps sound. The D class power amps sound sterile to my ears.
But sometimes my band plays gigs were I use 4 Marshal cabs ( we have roadies for the bigger gigs) , so I need an amp that can drive 4 Marshall cabs which I would run at 16 ohms each for a total of 8 ohms per side. So I need a power with a minimum of 400 wpc that can power them with enough headroom.

 

[MatrixAmp]

Damn! I'm a year behind! I saw a photo in RT of Stave Stevens rig and it had a bunch of HH V800 that Friedman put together. And they take up 3 rack spaces! I guess that was a year ago? I've been reading the specs on the Matrix amps they're quite impressive. I like the size of them. I was using a D class power amp for some time an I didn't like it. I was using it (Crown XLS 1000) because it was very light, but I switch to the Mesa 2 90 because the sound was much fuller and I didn't have to push it as hard to get the volume I needed. I had to use 2 Marshall stereo cabs plugged into the 4 ohm side to get the volume I needed. But with the 2 90 It sounds louder and I'm able to use 1 Marshall stereo cabinet which is 8 ohm and it was way louder.I'll eventually will have to get something lighter because I can't carry a tube amp like the 2 90 because I have 2 herniated disc on my neck, so I'm I looking for something lighter and I've always liked how the MOSFET amps sound. The D class power amps sound sterile to my ears.
But sometimes my band plays gigs were I use 4 Marshal cabs ( we have roadies for the bigger gigs) , so I need an amp that can drive 4 Marshall cabs which I would run at 16 ohms each for a total of 8 ohms per side. So I need a power with a minimum of 400 wpc that can power them with enough headroom.

Hi there,
This should be perfect for you.

GT1600FX 2u Rackmount Amplifier :: Matrix

Please let me know if you have any questions.

My best regards
Matt

 

[paulmapp8306]

Going to say the GT1600.

A Typical Marshall 4x12 has a rating of 240 watts and 16 Ohms. That means, to drive it fully you want around 480w available into 16 Ohms if you use a SS amp (to keep well in its linear region - ie headroom). That would compare with the 2:90 which would need clean power of around 180w SS, so 360W to keep in its linear zone to be roughly inequivalent.

You need that power into 16 Ohms however. The GT1000 will give you that if you bridge the amp and only use one cab - but wont quite get that high from a single channel (its enough for a lot of people, but not all). The GT1600 is designed to power a 240w 16 Ohm cab to its limit on each channel - meaning using a pair of cabs for stereo is possible. Its 2U so a little larger than the 1000, but weights pretty much the same.

 

[eljodon]

Hi there,
This should be perfect for you.

GT1600FX 2u Rackmount Amplifier :: Matrix

Please let me know if you have any questions.

My best regards
Matt

The specs looks very impressive! I need to wait a month or 2 because I just upgraded my studio with some SSL gear, bought the Axe Fx 2, modded 2 of my guitar amp plus bought a new PRS custom 24! I'm using Scumback speakers on 2 of my Marshall cabs, one with 4 H75 another one with 4 M75 and the other ones have V30's. I also waiting on 2 BM75 which I got the 100 watt version that I'm installing on a custom 2 x12 stereo cab that I'm using for smaller gigs.
I just have one question, why is that the Mesa Boogie 2 90 is louder than my Crown XLS 1000 which is a D class power amp rates at around 215 wpc at 8 ohms, 350 at 4 ohms and doesn't seem to have the reserve power? The 2 90 is rated at 90 wpc and it seems to also have more headroom. Thanks for all the info.

 

[Kriig]

Someone here had the 2:90 and found the GT1600FX as the only compareble amp. I don´t remember who. I´ve got the old Mesa 50/50. Don´t know where i´m ending amp wise..

The GT1600FX may be the one to compare the 50/50 too?

Sorry for keeping derailing your thread kippiejr....

 

[paulmapp8306]

The specs looks very impressive! I need to wait a month or 2 because I just upgraded my studio with some SSL gear, bought the Axe Fx 2, modded 2 of my guitar amp plus bought a new PRS custom 24! I'm using Scumback speakers on 2 of my Marshall cabs, one with 4 H75 another one with 4 M75 and the other ones have V30's. I also waiting on 2 BM75 which I got the 100 watt version that I'm installing on a custom 2 x12 stereo cab that I'm using for smaller gigs.
I just have one question, why is that the Mesa Boogie 2 90 is louder than my Crown XLS 1000 which is a D class power amp rates at around 215 wpc at 8 ohms, 350 at 4 ohms and doesn't seem to have the reserve power? The 2 90 is rated at 90 wpc and it seems to also have more headroom. Thanks for all the info.

As I explained earlier. The 2:90 generates up to 180w - not 90. The 90 is Clean but any tube amp compresses and distorts as it gets wound up. You actually generate more than the rated power in the end. A SS power amp doesnt distort nicely, so you cant drive it past its rated output. In fact you want to stay well within its rated output or peaks will clip/distort. Many SS amps have protection to prevent you getting into clip so limit the amp. That means to generate 90w clean continuous power from a SS amp it needs to be capable of around 180w max. To generate the 180w the 2:90 may get close to when pushed you need closer to 360w.

You also need to take into account its input sensitivity. That is the level of input signal the amp needs to generate its rated output. Its not uncommon for a SS amp to need a bigger signal going in to get its max output than a valve amp does. This could mean the SS amp is getting 1/2 its required signal when fed with the same level the valve power amp needs - meaning it only gives 1/2 its rated output. Thats not all SS amps, but is one reason why some SS amps seem low in volume compared to a valve amp - turning up the input signal to what the SS needs and it gets closer.

Its more important to compare the GAIN of the amps rather than the Max outputs in some ways. Yes theMax output counts, because a SS amp cant generate more - so you need the capability for it to generate the power you need, but its no good getting an amp that generates the 360w you need if you have to feed it with a 1w to get that output if your input device ()the AFX in this case) can only output 1/4 Watt (those figures way way high - Im using it as an example). Those figures would give the SS amp a gain of 360, but if the valve amp only needed 1/10 Watt to give its 90W output, it would have a gain of 900 - 3 times that of the SS amp. If you consider those two figures for those two amps, and suppose your input device could provide 1/5th watt max - then the valve amp would generate its 90w easily, and would reach its max 180w (driven) with that 1/5th watt - however the SS amp would only generate 1/5th of its max - though it would be well within its clean zone so wouldnt clip. You'd never get more than 72 Watts from that SS amp (1/5th of 360) verses the valve amps max 180w.

A bit long winded, but hope it made sense.

Oh - you also have to think that a valve amp will APPEAR clean - or have plenty of headroom when its actually providing more than its rated power (90W in the 2:90s case). Its NOT necessarily a clean signal though - it just appears that way because of how a valve amp starts to compress when it clips. Eventually you'll hear distortion - but only when its already quite a bit above its rated 90w.

 

[Kriig]

Learning new stuff. Cool...

 

[MikeyB59]

The 20/20 has to be the worst sounding tube power amp I've ever tried. 2/90 is great. 50/50 is great. 20/20, not so much.

I agree. There isn't a clean sound to be had from it and its probably the most colored power amp I ever used. I know Peavey doesn't get much love, but their classic series tube power amps are WAY better than the 20/20 and cheaper.