Question:
My favorite amp is the Fender Twin. I plan to buy one (a new one) in a few months. However I need something to use in the meantime (and to use for rehearsals once I get a Twin).
I am primarily a gospel rhythm player. I rarely use distortion, and when I do need it I prefer to use a pedal (for consistency, when I travel often the amps are provided). I sometimes have to play some rather large churches and venues without PA amplification, so volume is important. Bottom line, I need something loud and clean, no frills.
I was looking originally at the Fender FM-212R. It seemed similar enough to a Twin, and was reviewed as being very loud and with a good clean channel. The distortion channel and reverb got poor reviews but I likely wouldnt use those anyways. Comparing to other similar amps I found the Carvin SX200C. It also received very good reviews, and Carvin has a very good reputation.
I need something right away, and unfortunately dont have the opportunity to try out any amps in person. My price range is really only $200-300, and 2x12 with significant volume is a must. I dont need effects, modeling, any sort of add-ons at all.
I really dont have any problem with solid state amps. One of my favorite amps I used to have is a Yamaha G100-212, in fact I'm really looking for a new version of this amp, regardless of the brand.
I would really appreciate hearing from anyone who is familiar with either or especially both of the amps I am looking in to. A comparison of the two would be really helpful. I know there are plenty that will disapprove of both options, but I believe that either will fit the bill for what I need, and I'm just trying to discern the better of the two.
Thank you very much!
Answer:
the carvin is supposed to have extremely good clean tones, however i haven't played through one...yet. i just ordered one, should be here in a wekk or so, (i live on the east coast) and i purchased it in part due to it's glowing reviews about the clean channel.
Answer:
Carvin SX, definitely. The Fender's volume on the clean channel kinda stops getting louder at 6 or 7 for some reason. The Carvin is loud, and has some frills to go along. I'd reccomend the Carvin.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Rainer. Carvin SX, definitely. The Fender's volume on the clean channel kinda stops getting louder at 6 or 7 for some reason. The Carvin is loud, and has some frills to go along. I'd reccomend the Carvin. the volume lvl "prob" with the fender is due to amps having a more logarithmic-looking volume volume curve, weras the carvin has a very linear (x=y) line for it's volume.
Answer:
Since volume is being analyzed . . . say both amps are on the clean channel, and turned up as loud as they go without breaking up unwantedly. Which is louder, and by a significant amount?
If one makes more efficient use of the 100watts, the curve of the volume control itself might not matter.
I tend to play with a very full sound-- bass, midrange, AND treble. Muddy sounding amps dont work for me, the bass breaks up and sacrifices the volume. Think of Prince's clean sound, except he's a much better musician than I!
I dont know why, but looking at the Carvin, it somehow gives me the impression it wouldnt have nearly as much . . . ability to cut through with a full clean sound? I think it's because 1. The mesh grill reminds me of playing through a keyboard amp or PA speaker and so I expect it to sound that way 2. The onboard chorus reminds me of my old Princeton Chorus, which aways seemed like a wimpy sounding clean amp to me.
Those are all irrational reasons not to want the Carvin . . . and the Fender says "Fender" on it Just Like a Twin! It has to be good!
Yeah, the Fender appeals to be, and the Carvin just doesnt have that magic. But I somehow suspect the Carvin is the better amp. I really hate having to buy musical equipment without trying it extensively in person.
Answer:
1. carvin has a 10 day test policy. basically if you order anything from them and don't like it, you can return it to them for a refund or exchange. (loss shipping, and if you break it you buy it.)
2. the clean channel on the carvin reportedly doesn't distort, at all. (the speakers might OD but if so i haven't heard) i have heard this from several ppl. as for how loud, well, reportedly this amp is too loud to use in a bedroom at 3 or 4 on the dial, will blow out windows on 7 or 8, and goes all the way up to twelve. i have yet to hear about someone saying how loud it is at max.
3. as for which is louder, from what i've heard i think the carvin will probably be louder with out breakup than the fender. also carvin is pretty well know for their reliability, the amp should last a while.
4. as for muddyness, well this amp's clean channel is said to be crystal clear, not at all muddy. if you haven't already, check out the recordings of this amp at http://www.carvin.com/multimedia/ (scrool down to the bottom and click on the jamroom, then select your amp. the clean w/chorus-reverb sounds really awesome IMO)
Answer:
Originally Posted by What5647 the volume lvl "prob" with the fender is due to amps having a more logarithmic-looking volume volume curve, weras the carvin has a very linear (x=y) line for it's volume.
Actually, interestingly, the curve of the Fender would be the linear one, and the Carvin would have the logistic curve to its control, as the way our ears hear volume makes it so that actual volume may be linear, but percieved volume goes in a curve. An "audio taper" control gives the volume uncrease a curve, so that our ears hear it going up smoothly.
[quote=mt_spiffy]
Since volume is being analyzed . . . say both amps are on the clean channel, and turned up as loud as they go without breaking up unwantedly. Which is louder, and by a significant amount?
If one makes more efficient use of the 100watts, the curve of the volume control itself might not matter.[quote]
I believe the Carvin I've played would be louder. The Fender makes better use of its 100 watts on the distorted channel then the clean. Overall, the Carvin seems to make better use of it. I've never played through the Carvin past 3, and I've easily pushed the Fender past 6.
I tend to play with a very full sound-- bass, midrange, AND treble. Muddy sounding amps dont work for me, the bass breaks up and sacrifices the volume. Think of Prince's clean sound, except he's a much better musician than I!
Carvin will give you better control over your tone, I believe. The Fender's clean channel is rather cold to me. I like the Carvin's tone better.
I dont know why, but looking at the Carvin, it somehow gives me the impression it wouldnt have nearly as much . . . ability to cut through with a full clean sound? I think it's because 1. The mesh grill reminds me of playing through a keyboard amp or PA speaker and so I expect it to sound that way 2. The onboard chorus reminds me of my old Princeton Chorus, which aways seemed like a wimpy sounding clean amp to me.
Those are all irrational reasons not to want the Carvin . . . and the Fender says "Fender" on it Just Like a Twin! It has to be good!
Yes, you're doubting the Carvin for all the wrong reasons. You don't have to use the onboard effects if you don't like 'em. The EQ plus presence control has plenty of power to cut through. It doesn't distort as far as I know, though I've never pushed it over 5, never needed to.
I have not been impressed by Fender's solid state amps at all. They're just not quite up to par with whatever else is on the market.
Yeah, the Fender appeals to be, and the Carvin just doesnt have that magic. But I somehow suspect the Carvin is the better amp. I really hate having to buy musical equipment without trying it extensively in person.
Yeah, buying without trying isn't that good.
Answer:
Well, my decision has been made more complicated! I found a music store that sold the FM line of amps. They didnt have the FM212R but they did have the FM65R, the FM210R, and the FM100H head + 4x10 cab.
Note: All of these were tested using an American Strat. Volume on 7, both tone controls at max, neck or neck+center pickup. Remember I like a loud and CLEAN sound, so I only tested the clean channels, with no effects of any kind.
I tried the FM65 first. It sounded like garbage. Lots of hiss and hum, like a ground loop, and the tone was very tinny. Turning the bass up only made it muddy. I quickly put this one away.
Next I tried the FM100 head and cab. The sound was surprisingly good. With all 3 tone controls (bass, mid, treble) around 7 I got a very full clean sound. HOWEVER I was surprised at how NOT LOUD this amp is. Everything everyone's told me about the FM212, I expected this amp to be extremely loud. With the volume on 7 I was still at a practive level, no one else in the music store so much as turned their head, much less gave me that "too loud" look! I was thoroughly disappointed, and began to wonder if the FM212 would be loud enough for my needs.
Lastly I tried the FM210. Out of the three amps I liked this one the best. It sounded very thin and trebly at first, however I was able to find a tone I liked with the bass at full and the treble at 3 or 4 (it has no midrange control). It had some hum and hiss but not nearly as much as the 65. It wasnt loud enough for my needs however it was quite loud for such a small amp, definitely louder than my Princeton Chorus (which I dont have at the moment otherwise I wouldnt be in such a hurry for an amp).
SO, if the FM212 subscribes to the same volume/size ration as the 210 it'll work for me, especially if it SOUNDS like the FM100. If it's only as loud as the 100, well, it will be a waste for me.
Of the responses I've got from people that have tried the Fender, the Carvin, or both . . .
People that have tried the Fender say either "It's a good amp it'll work for you" or "it sucks". But people that have tried the Carvin say "great amp" whether they've tried the Fender or not . . . So I suppose I am leaning Carvinwards. I jsut wish I could try it, and I wish I knew which amp was really louder (on clean).
Dan
Answer:
i know how you feel, it's a kinda blind leap buying an amp you haven't played. for that i'm really hoping it shows up soon, so i can see how it sounds. the main reason i personnaly went with carvin was because whenever you say high quality, tube like SS amp most ppl say carvin...
Answer:
The problem I have with some of the ones you're looking at is they come with a bunch of built in effects, which you have stated you don't need. That's probably why the Fender FM series does not sound good to you. Unless you are willing to pay for a higher end SS like a Line 6 Flextone II or similar, there will be a sacrifice in tone for versatility. You are really looking for a simple amp with no gimmicks. For the same amount of money I might suggest you look at simple amps like the Fender Pro Junior, an all-tube 15W amp with a 10" speaker. Or consider the Peavey Studio Pro II. In any event, get a good clean, simple and inexpensive amp - then, mic it for volume after you get the desired clean sound.
When you get your Twin (GASSING at the mention of the amp) in the next few months, this will all be moot and you will have your main amp and the practice amp you need to carry around. The only reason I balk at getting a Twin is it's too heavy for my needs.
When I finally got my cab built for my "69 Bandmaster Reverb, the clean tone just overwhelmed me. The 22 watts are plenty loud! Overdriven and distorted sounds can be cool, but the sound of a good, clean amp really moves me.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Hopeful The problem I have with some of the ones you're looking at is they come with a bunch of built in effects, which you have stated you don't need. That's probably why the Fender FM series does not sound good to you.
The Fender is a very stripped down amp. No effects, no headphone jacl, no external speaker jack . . . they clearly cut some things so it could afford to sell for $300. Which makes me wonder about the Carvin, since it actually sells for $20 less, and has features-- maybe 4 or 5 onboard effects, dual channels that can be used at once, speaker impedance switching . . . how do they offer more features for less money without it being a lesser quality amp? Most people say it's actually better quality than the Fender.
I dont mind the added features, even though I'm looking for a bare-bones amp. What I *dont* want is something like the Behringer-- 200 digital effects, amp modeling, so many knobs to twiddle with you can never find a decent sound anyways. Honestly I would prefer a box with just "volume, bass, midrange, treble" but I reckon if I get the Carvin I might have a little fun with the digital delay.
Originally Posted by Hopeful Unless you are willing to pay for a higher end SS like a Line 6 Flextone II or similar, there will be a sacrifice in tone for versatility. You are really looking for a simple amp with no gimmicks. For the same amount of money I might suggest you look at simple amps like the Fender Pro Junior, an all-tube 15W amp with a 10" speaker. Or consider the Peavey Studio Pro II. In any event, get a good clean, simple and inexpensive amp - then, mic it for volume after you get the desired clean sound.
Actually, I wasnt unhappy with the tone of the Fenders, with the exception of the FM65. What's more important to me right now is CLEAN VOLUME than the subtleties of my tone-- from what I understand I will be at least content with the clean tone of either amp for the time being. There are situations where I cant mic the amp, and yet I have to compete with outrageous volume levels. I've pretty much come to terms with, as soon as I am fairly certain which amp is louder on the clean channel, of the two I mentioned, that's the one I am buying.
Answer:
The big deal with Carvin is that they sell factory direct. The only store they have is the one they own. Everything you get comes from the factory = no middle men = less price for same or better quality.

Not to mention your paying probably a shocking amount of markup for that Fender name. Just think about it... you're somewhat of a newbie and you decide you want to buy your first real amp and you tell everyone you want something with a great clean tone. Everyone is going to say "Fender." And that's all you'll remember. (everyone one here would say get a Fender Tube amp. )
Answer:
Originally Posted by Casey The big deal with Carvin is that they sell factory direct. The only store they have is the one they own. Everything you get comes from the factory = no middle men = less price for same or better quality.
I was wondering about that. Because we're dealing with three different price categories: direct from the factory (Carvin), cutthroat online warehouse prices (Fender from Musicians Friend or AMS), and manufacturer list prices. The Carvin does list for a much higher price than the Fender.

Originally Posted by Casey Not to mention your paying probably a shocking amount of markup for that Fender name. Just think about it... you're somewhat of a newbie and you decide you want to buy your first real amp and you tell everyone you want something with a great clean tone. Everyone is going to say "Fender." And that's all you'll remember. (everyone one here would say get a Fender Tube amp. )
Well I'd like to think there's a good reason for that! My opinion is you cant find a better clean amp than a Fender Twin. Presumably all similar Fender products are of the same basic designs regardless of price or even quality. Of course if the amp in question is not made by Fender (or made to their specifications) but made in some Chinese factory and then Fender slaps a label on them . . . But yes I had that mindset. I saw the FM212 and said "there's an amp by Fender that's 2x12 I bet it's like a Twin!"
So the question is, which is moreso (like a Twin), the Carvin or the Fender? Especially in volume?
I'm probably going to break down and call Carvin later today, but I'm still uncertain.
Answer:
So the question is, which is moreso (like a Twin), the Carvin or the Fender? Especially in volume?
The Carvin MTS is a modern tube amp. I mean that in the simplest definition of the word. It is a relatively new amp in the world of amps. The Twin is what you would call a Vintage tube amp. The Twin is known for its ability to be turned up very, very loud and not break up. With the Twin, you get all clean all the time. The Carvin is more adapted to modern times though. It can be argued that distortion and overdrive have become an essential part of more modern music. All this simply to say that the Carvin's clean channel will eventually break up, and the result is natural tube distortion or "overdrive." If you buy the Carvin, you can remedy this overdriving quite easily and quite cheaply by replacing from one to a few preamp tubes with lower-gain tubes.

If I have to strictly answer your question in relation these two stock amps and their volume, then I have to answer the Fender. The Fender's sound will stay clean longer than the Carvin.

As for my personal opinion, I say go with the Carvin. Easily. You really just have to think of how the success of this company is generated most likely by word of mouth more than anything else. I too have searched the web searching for bad comments on any Carvin products with hardly anything to show.

Get the Carvin .

EDIT: I read the whole thread and then replied thinking you were considering one of Carvin's Tube amps. this is me: .

I still say go with the Carvin. If you don't like it, send it back and you're out no more than $40 on shipping.
Answer:
I'm not sure if you're aware, but I'm not considering a Carvin MTS3212 versus a Fender Twin . . . I'm comparing a Carvin SX200C to a Fender FM212R as a cheap stand-in for a Twin. So the Carvin MTS series, and I'm sure it's excellent, really doesnt factor into my decision.
And from your comparison of the MTS and the Twin, that's why, for my expensive amp, I am definitely getting a Twin. Clean all the way up until no one has any hearing left!
I used to get Carvin's catalogs, back in the day. I'm not sure how I got on their mailing list but I always enjoyed looking at their products.