What's so special about Matrix GT1000?

From my POV it's nearly impossible to compare a amp/speaker system based on class-D or more traditional MOS-FET circuit. Mostly because you have two scenarios:

1. A box with speaker-units, a passive cross-over plus a separate power-amp.
2. A box with wpeaker-units and a power-amp which incorporates a digital cross-over PLUS digital correction of the physical alignment between woofer and tweeter.

It's simply not fair just to compare audible differences between the two topologies "as a whole". Atomic are very secret around their design, but I would assume, that they have worked a lot with tweeking in the digital domain.

Working with the Matrix GT1000 and various speaker-units/passive cross-overs I really miss the ability to be free of passive components plus make time-domain adjustments.

And yes Paco, there must be full respect of the various ways to "the sonic bliss". Fortunately we have a lot of products and hard working inventors making the way.
 
BBN said:
To say that Matrix is the ONLY company that makes a SS amp with this 'tone/feel' is absolutely a lofty statement.
I've tried the Matrix GT800, and I very much liked it.
I have a Crown K2 that I put side by side and they sounded/felt almost identical.
I have heard a Bryston, which I think sounded better than the Matrix (and felt more like a valve amp).

Is the Matrix GT series a great product, absolutely! I liked the GT800, and I loved the GM50 in a XiTone cab.
Is the Matrix GT series the ONLY (and I'm stressing the word 'only' because that is what was stated) SS amp that amplifies the Axe to sound up to a certain level of realistic valve feel. No way.

I find it hard to believe that anyone would ever describe a product like a power amp as the 'only' one that produces a certain level of quality/tone/feel/sound.....when there are hundreds of manufactures around the world.
Click to expand...




After spending a lot of money on solutions that didn't get what I wanted, I will stand my ground and say that there are two solid state solutions under the $3500 price point that I would go with before wasting money on anything else. (And I have bought and sold/lost money on a bunch of stuff that people have sworn by). Matrix and Atomic. Each solution has a different application. I'm sure there are some tube amp solution that are great but, I wanted to get away from tubes all together.

IMO, the Matrix is the best SS power amp to pair with the AXE FX when trying to achieve an amp like feel and sound in a live application. Meaning this what I like the best. When playing on stage across from other real guitar amps, the Matrix sounds more like a real amp then anything I've played through. I prefer having to 2- Matrix 12QA's just in case I can't go through the PA. In most cases, one will get it done, but why not have 2;). They're small and easy to carry and two of them will go up to eleven.

I recently got my hands on 1 atomic wedge. I used this as a monitor while going through the front of house. Absolutely loved it!! So, IMHO, depending on the application, these are the two I would pick.

You will save money in the long run..
 
LVC said:
Dude please .. lets not go there.

Honestly I am exhausted with the Power Point and chart argument bullshit. I have been hacking away playing clubs and weddings for 40 some odd years with tube amps (some great and some shitty). At this point in my life I only trust my ears and what my arthritic fingers can dial in.
Click to expand...



What??? You trust your ears over irrefutable science. I don't understand this position at all and I'm not pointing fingers at you. So many around here dismiss factual science for their own fabricated realities.

I can understand many guitarists want to be just that, musicians not scientists and attempting to sort through tons of information you don't quite understand is tedious and frustrating. It takes education first which takes time away from playing. There is nothing wrong with wanting to avoid all that just dial in a sound you like and play.

What I can't process is how this leads to complete dismissal of the facts. In your case the evidence is quoted as "bs".
 
LVC said:
Been saying the same thing about the CLR since I returned mine after two gigs.

Many PA amps and monitors that cost a fraction of the CLR use the same or similar Chinese made Class D Hypex amp modules found in the CLR.

So go figure.
Click to expand...

Many PA amps monitors?? Which ones??
 
PacoCasanovas said:
as stated above - ElectroVoice LiveX or Dynacord A-Line ;) Hypex UcD-modules were cheap but made of industry standard quality - this is necessary to keep the price point low on these entry/mid-price products. They sound great for small PA application, sound reinforcement and where very easy to handle in terms of service. If they fail, pop 'em out trow it away, but some new in.....sound again! Personally, I'm not a fan.....but who cares :nightmare::mrgreen

@Laz: Don't use this against Atomic. Atomic made great products too, which makes many people happy - I respect that and everyone here is free on what he uses. Personally I would love to try out the CLR myself one day, there is even a passive version, so people who love their GT1000 - maybe this is your solution that works for you. Try it out for yourself and follow your ears only.
I don't like to play out Matrix and Atomic against them here. Let's focus on the basic FRFR user, who need good support and tutorials how to setup and play the gear. Information regarding the correct and safety use of ss-power amps, input- output sensitivity were welcome here. But please don't turn this in a Atomic vs. Matrix war. Life is too short....and we're all humans!

I know, we all can sort this out with a bit of mutual respect! This goes out to everyone. Don't let us turn this into another religious fight. :)

Respectfully
Paco
Click to expand...

Paco, you've verified that claim I assume? Because there is also - at least to my knowledge - proprietary digital processing involved. I highly doubt I could plug and play an off the shelf power amp into the CLR should one of mine go down. Though if that is the case, that's good to know. You've worked on one firsthand to know that then? Interesting.

BTW, disagreeing with 'he who won't be named' will turn most anything big or small into a fully religious battle and diatribe deriding your character for daring to oppose his opinions. Since he's the expert with all the experience and no one else can dare even question his knowledge and/or experience in any way... lest they are evil and must be attacked! LOL. ;) Even though most here have at least the same experience and probably far more... ;)
 
Scott Peterson said:
Paco, you've verified that claim I assume? Because there is also - at least to my knowledge - proprietary digital processing involved. I highly doubt I could plug and play an off the shelf power amp into the CLR should one of mine go down. Though if that is the case, that's good to know. You've worked on one firsthand to know that then? Interesting.

BTW, disagreeing with 'he who won't be named' will turn most anything big or small into a fully religious battle and diatribe deriding your character for daring to oppose his opinions. Since he's the expert with all the experience and no one else can dare even question his knowledge and/or experience in any way... lest they are evil and must be attacked! LOL. ;) Even though most here have at least the same experience and probably far more... ;)
Click to expand...


You know, the JM saga is an interesting one.

Sure he is an egotistical a$$, who belittles anyone with fundamental questions, incorrect assumptions or lack of understanding.

On the other hand I am friends with many acoustiticians. They ALL revere JM as the godfather of speaker science .

A funny side note, once while discussing so me science and referencing one of JM posts , I was told by one of my friends that I shouldn't believe what I read on the internet and he would help me. He went and grabbed some old books to reference. Funny enough I immediately noticed JM wrote the books.

It seems his terrible attitude and bedside manner has overshadowed his knowledge at this point. Sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sam
Moltenmetalburn said:
What??? You trust your ears over irrefutable science. I don't understand this position at all and I'm not pointing fingers at you. So many around here dismiss factual science for their own fabricated realities.

I can understand many guitarists want to be just that, musicians not scientists and attempting to sort through tons of information you don't quite understand is tedious and frustrating. It takes education first which takes time away from playing. There is nothing wrong with wanting to avoid all that just dial in a sound you like and play.

What I can't process is how this leads to complete dismissal of the facts. In your case the evidence is quoted as "bs".
Click to expand...

Because at the end of the day it is your that ear that tells you if something sounds good or bad to you. All the specs, charts and powerpoint slides in the world is not going to change that.
 
Last edited:
Scott Peterson said:
BTW, disagreeing with 'he who won't be named' will turn most anything big or small into a fully religious battle and diatribe deriding your character for daring to oppose his opinions. Since he's the expert with all the experience and no one else can dare even question his knowledge and/or experience in any way... lest they are evil and must be attacked! LOL. ;) Even though most here have at least the same experience and probably far more... ;)
Click to expand...

I am assuming your are talking about your patron saint -- Jay Mitchell :lol
 
Moltenmetalburn said:
You know, the JM saga is an interesting one.

Sure he is an egotistical a$$, who belittles anyone with fundamental questions, incorrect assumptions or lack of understanding.

On the other hand I am friends with many acoustiticians. They ALL revere JM as the godfather of speaker science .

A funny side note, once while discussing so me science and referencing one of JM posts , I was told by one of my friends that I shouldn't believe what I read on the internet and he would help me. He went and grabbed some old books to reference. Funny enough I immediately noticed JM wrote the books.

It seems his terrible attitude and bedside manner has overshadowed his knowledge at this point. Sad.
Click to expand...
LVC said:
I am assuming your are talking about your patron saint -- Jay Mitchell :lol
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to John Mayer or Jay Mitchell. LOL. Too funny.. ;) :D
 
Last edited:
Scott Peterson said:
Paco, you've verified that claim I assume?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do....

IMG_0726.jpg


Scott Peterson said:
Because there is also - at least to my knowledge - proprietary digital processing involved
Click to expand...

Correct! As on most modern class D designs, there is a DSP who do the time alignment, crossover (based on FIR filter) and limiting algorithms involved. But these thing doesn't happen on the UcD modules itself. It's part of the DSP / Input / Control PCB.
If there is a UcD180OEM for HF and UcD320OEM for LF installed in your active CLR, you can pop them out once they would fail. This would not happen very often, the Hypex stuff is well designed and top of industry standard regarding class D technology - along with B&O icepower or Powersoft Digimod (which is also used by Alesis and Alto, but just from their chinese manufacturer).

It's not a secret that I chosen Matrix, also not a secret that I don't agree with CLRs being studio monitors for nearfield applications. But I believe they were awesome products well made and with huge background and knowledge by JM. I respect that.
We should try to bring this thread back to the topic which was Matrix.....okey!?

Cheers
Paco
 
Per the OP: I've reviewed the Matrix power amps; and I've met Andy and the crew at Matrix in person; I know and respect them as individuals and as a company and had good discussions with them over the years now. Top notch company, top notch products. Dependable. Designed to purpose and supported fully after the sale. Good people, good products.

Crown, Carvin, etc are just companies making products to spec on a bean-counter profit/loss balance to move units. Good companies, yes. General use products, average support. Not purpose built.

I almost always go for the smaller companies where you can talk to people that actually work there; I love supporting companies that really care, really listen and really support their gear. I do not currently run any Matrix products, but I do not hesitate to ever recommend them or their products. They design good gear, they produce good gear and they support the gear they make.
 
LVC said:
Because at the end of the day it is your that ear that tells you if something sounds good or bad to you. All the specs, charts and powerpoint slides in the world is not going to change that.
Click to expand...

Exactly! I will add that, just because another user with good ears was unable to set them up, doesn't make it good or bad either.
Just beacuse you can't figure it out, it doesn't mean they are bad.

I have spent a good amount of time with CLRs and I know exactly when and why they sound boomy. Funny thing is because they are honest. Some people don't like honesty, they like to cover it up.

PS: I don't understand that made up Atomic - Matrix war. They are both Awesome and I wish I could have both [I will]!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom