Tweet
I'm no jgcable when it comes to detailed reviews, but I'll give this one a shot.
I got this head from Ethan this week(thanks again!). It's a 100 watt head with the tubes replaced with gold series Groove Tubes 12AX7R2s and gold series Groove Tubes 6L6Cs. It's a 2 channel amp with Reverb. I really only have my Single recto to compare it to. I wish I had a Marshall to A/B it with as I think the Carvin is a better match (as far as similar tone) for a Marshall than the Recto's are.
I first plugged in at low volume (it was late) and was able to dial in a usable tone right away. IT had a more mellow linear tone than than the Recto, but still plenty of gain. Very Marshallesque. The next day when I was able to push it more I realized that like most tube amps, the louder I went, the better it sounded. This thing screamed at 3. It seemed as though the gain got hotter at high volumes as well. I played it for 2 hours ( I only intended on playing for a minute ot 2 to get the feel for the higher volume. After that I immediatly plugged into my single Recto to get an idea of how they were different (keep in mind the Carvin is 100 watts and the Recto is 50 watts). I immediately realized why I love the recto so much...intant cruch!. Thats not to say that the Carvin is bad, just different. Thats why I wanted one (or a Marshall). It's not really a fare comparison and I'm not trying to pin them against each other. It's just like comparing apples to oranges, they're different. The presence didn't seem to do much on the Carvin until you pushed it more. At high volume, it was like adding rectifier type gain (a little) as you raised it. I found that I liked the mid at about 7/8 like the rectifier. The low is usable anyplace between 0-5 and unlike the rectifier, I liked the high dimed out. This gave me a great hard rock tone. Better than the 2205 Marshall 50 watt head I used to own. I like this amp for this type of tone. The only thing I didn't like was that when I clicked on the reverb, it seem to suck a little tone out. Not a big deal for me as I'm not a big reverb guy.
I have been wanting a Marshall again (along with my recto, not to replace it). I figured, for 400 bucks why not try the Carvin. I already had a good idea how it sounded by hearing John's. John's has E34L's in it from Euro tubes. I think I might go tht route. It's no big deal with the built in bias switch. John, I see an A/B comparison coming up soon with these two Carvins!
The bottom line is, for the money, I don't think you can find another 100 watt tube head with two channels, reverb and a bias switch of this caliber. This is a great amp and is a nice alternate for a Marshall. Did it cure my desire for a Jubilee series Marshall head? No, but there's only one thing that will cure that.......a Jubilee series Marshall head! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
I got this head from Ethan this week(thanks again!). It's a 100 watt head with the tubes replaced with gold series Groove Tubes 12AX7R2s and gold series Groove Tubes 6L6Cs. It's a 2 channel amp with Reverb. I really only have my Single recto to compare it to. I wish I had a Marshall to A/B it with as I think the Carvin is a better match (as far as similar tone) for a Marshall than the Recto's are.
I first plugged in at low volume (it was late) and was able to dial in a usable tone right away. IT had a more mellow linear tone than than the Recto, but still plenty of gain. Very Marshallesque. The next day when I was able to push it more I realized that like most tube amps, the louder I went, the better it sounded. This thing screamed at 3. It seemed as though the gain got hotter at high volumes as well. I played it for 2 hours ( I only intended on playing for a minute ot 2 to get the feel for the higher volume. After that I immediatly plugged into my single Recto to get an idea of how they were different (keep in mind the Carvin is 100 watts and the Recto is 50 watts). I immediately realized why I love the recto so much...intant cruch!. Thats not to say that the Carvin is bad, just different. Thats why I wanted one (or a Marshall). It's not really a fare comparison and I'm not trying to pin them against each other. It's just like comparing apples to oranges, they're different. The presence didn't seem to do much on the Carvin until you pushed it more. At high volume, it was like adding rectifier type gain (a little) as you raised it. I found that I liked the mid at about 7/8 like the rectifier. The low is usable anyplace between 0-5 and unlike the rectifier, I liked the high dimed out. This gave me a great hard rock tone. Better than the 2205 Marshall 50 watt head I used to own. I like this amp for this type of tone. The only thing I didn't like was that when I clicked on the reverb, it seem to suck a little tone out. Not a big deal for me as I'm not a big reverb guy.
I have been wanting a Marshall again (along with my recto, not to replace it). I figured, for 400 bucks why not try the Carvin. I already had a good idea how it sounded by hearing John's. John's has E34L's in it from Euro tubes. I think I might go tht route. It's no big deal with the built in bias switch. John, I see an A/B comparison coming up soon with these two Carvins!
The bottom line is, for the money, I don't think you can find another 100 watt tube head with two channels, reverb and a bias switch of this caliber. This is a great amp and is a nice alternate for a Marshall. Did it cure my desire for a Jubilee series Marshall head? No, but there's only one thing that will cure that.......a Jubilee series Marshall head! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Comment