Carvin Quad X-Amp Tube Preamp

i'm currently using an 80's charvel with a duncan 59 in the bridge.also I use a japanese strat with three noiseless single coil pickups.I pipe the carvin through a fender deville 4x10.i go out the carvin to power amp in of the fender.channel 3 is my favorite.think paul kossof's tone in the song"alright now".the tone controls are active therefore shaping your sound is a pleasure.I keep my gain on ch. 3 on 7.Channel 4 is higher gain ,van halen's brown sound.I keep that on about 4 or 5.real high gain stuff cannot be attained,thank God.

i'm guessing this amp was manufactured in the early 90's.it has four channels,nine pre-amp tubes,all analog.it's fully equipped,effects loops for each channel.i'm happy with it's features.the reverb is not very authentic sounding. that's just my opinion,though.

I've owned this unit for six months now and have had no problems.this is a road worthy piece of gear.I will eventually swap the tubes out.this is a vintage piece so I suggest if you see one to snap it up hands down.

I haven't dealt with carvin so ,unable to comment.

I've been playing for about 18 yrs.If it were lost or stolen I'd try to find another one.My friends that have heard this pre-amp rave about it. I used to own a rocktron pirahna and that was a joke compared.after getting this I'm glad I lost it in the pawn shop.the footswith that came with it is as tough as nails. that alone is worth the 200 bones I spent .

This amp does it all! My greatest joy was around channel 1. I've played many Fender amps with my neck p/u thru a TC chorus and nothing compares to this one. Tons of detail and complexity. It's very clean and tough to push, but when you get it there, it's a beauty. I've played entire gigs with chan 1 only, w/some heavy effects on the crunch stuff and it just performs.

Oh yeah, 3 more chans. Don't like 3- 4 is real cool. Don't really like the vol drop, but that's easily remedied with the master vol. Full, round distict distortion where all the notes are very defined, unless you really push it and this thing can go there.

This amp goes everywhere. Jazz, County, hard rock, punk- it finds it all! Hell, I run my acoustic thru chan 1 and it's perfect. I had an oportunity to trade it for a Marshall pre, but came around just in time. This is a one of a kind.

You?ve read them all. All smart very and versatile . Many, many places to go. I don?t use the bright function, never do with any of my amps, but this one has a nice round quality I haven?t found elsewhere.
The cloaking this is cool. I don?t have much of a need for it, but it works very nice when I push the amp to want that touch.

I read a bad review of the reverb. I think it?s top shelf. A very welcomed discovery.

This baby is the early pre modern midi and it's never even coughed. Dive it hard with some hard gig knocks and it keeps on ticking. I swapped some tubes around a few times (very much recommended)

carvin defines CS

Carvin decided that they need more margin, like everyone else in the business, so they discontinued the line. As with all Carvin products, sad but true, they don?t appreciate in value. Carvin owners hang on to them. This thing is the real deal. Tube heaven. There are more places to go with this one than you?ll find in anything. For $400, it would be a wise move to buy one, even if it were going too sit in a studio for a few months before you get around to brining it in. They?re out there and it?s a very good thing to own. Not that it matters, but who else do you know is an owner- Amaze people.

I use a Gibson Blueshawk (Blues 90 pickups). Heavy gauge strings. Used with a Carvin T100 power amp (kept real low) and Carvin V212 cab.

This is PERFECT. I play a bit of everything, mostly medium gain rock/blues. Channel 1 is big, round, and bubbly in the mids, with sweet, chimmy highs (ever played an original Sunn Model-T?, it's like the bright channel). Good base. Channel 2 and 3 are less defined, but have different dynamics, and are certainly useful in a live situation, especially as every channel has independant effects loops. Channel three is pretty useful in-house when working that vibe where clean chords alternate with dirty.

Channel 4: Bright on, Bass 6, Mid 8, Treb 7, OD 2.5, you've got a great glassy AC30 vibe, sweet highs and stingy light overdrive with lots of room for picking dynamics and good compression (the blues tone of my dreams). With the OD up, this is one thick, fuzzy, sustaining channel. The overdrive is totally it's own, but closest to a DC30 in timbre with the best properties of a modern Boogie (the full bass/mids, harmonics, compression, and smooth character). It works equally for classic rock and modern alternative.

I like how this doesn't sound like any other amp (Fender, Marshall, etc). I get that AC30/DC30 vibe at low OD levels, with the EQ set as above, but from there on it's like a Matchless meets original Big Muff. The clean is also nice, round, and chimmy. Very warm.

Reverb is decent (think solid-state Fender) but there's a reverb loop on the back for substituting one's own outboard reverb unit--some day I'll get around to it. The bright and boost switches work well; the bright is essential to my sound, the boost is not huge, but designed (says in manual) to bring a weaker single-coild guitar up to the proper input level (+10db). As my guitar falls in between single-coil and hb in output, I alternate...basically it makes channels 3 & 4 more agressive.

You know them from other reviewers. 4 channels, footswitch, EQ. Bright and boost switches are great.

Other than this unit, I own a Rt.66 pedal (Visual Sound), and I want to get a wah and Zoom UF1 fuzz. This is a setup I'd wanted for a long time, and it's my ideal, so I guess I'd have to get it again.

I love how it sounds unique--bright, full, and very smooth, like I'd always wished a Fender would sound, with nice compression. There's not one thing I don't like. I've played Vox AC15, Fender Deluxe Reverb, a bunch of Marshalls, a Matchless SC30, etc. Channel 1 sounds like a Sunn Model-T, 2 & 3 sound closest to a Deluxe Reverb, channel 4 is like nothing else (super-saturated Matchless?).

Reverb is weak, but usable.

Strats work great (I want to get a strat with a hotrails in the bridge to do that 90s alternative thing), humbuckers are devastating on channel 4 (think Linkin Park), and my Blueshawk treads all areas of modern and classic blues, rock, and jazz in between. My accoustic sounds HUGE on channel 1.

i like to jump between early VanHalen sounding lead guitar to clean jazz and anything in between. this pre-amp can actually do that, and many things in between. for you scooped mid metel heads, this will do exactly what you want it to do by setting the graphic eQ. I tried many preamps and NONE had the wide palette of sounds that this has, even for twice the price.
oh yeah,as with any preamp when you are dealing with tube overdrive, you will always be creating some noise(hiss/hum/etc). thats where the built in noise gate(activated by the INPUT signal)comes in- its killer.
how brutal is the distortion you ask? well, using a little outboard compression in the Ch4 effects loop, i need only set the drive knob at about 3 (out of 10)for ripping distortion. i honestly dont think anyone would need anything over 6 or 7. its all there folks.
i do not care for the cloaking control which does nothing for me at all, perhaps they could have replaced this with a presence control or even a selectable MID freq(a la parametric)..no biggie

I traded in my '92(pre-MIDI) model for a '95(fully MIDI-fied) unit. despite obvious differences in components between the early and later years, both sound quite similar.
The footswitch is a must have - it allows you to switch channels and tap in and out the reverb, eQ, and effects loop on the fly.
As for features, WOW! carvin has really done it, packing 4 channels, some incredibly tube cascade overdrive, built in spring reverb, awesome noise gate, graphic eQ, and plenty of effects loops to incorporate all your outboard gear.
i wish Ch2&3 had MID controls instead of just LOW/HIGH, that would really help. Dont get me wrong, i could live off Ch1&4 exclusively and not miss the others.
oh yeah, did i mention this thing has 9(nine) tubes? whoa!

anytime you have lots of tubes, even though they are preamp tubes which can last 20 years or more, it's always a good idea to keep some spares. i have had no problems, but i imagine with some rough treatment, the tube boards could unsnap from their fittings. all else looks pretty solid inside.

havent tried

i cant believe this musical marvel came and went briefly during the mid 90's and i had never heard about it nor met anyone who owned one. so glad to have discovered it now!!
a truly versitile and professionally designed amp that just sounds great.

I love this Amp, it has Great sounds, Its easy to dial in since its the old school knobs...I have had mine 5 years & giged with it for three

I use a range of guitars, but with the Quad-X, I prefer a Strat...Mine have JB jr's that give a ton of Gain on channel 4 & the others complement the clean tones well.

Gig'd without a backup for this amp, but have always used more than one amp, so.... It has failed once due to tube death, but that is to be expected, after putting Groove Tubes in channel 4, it came alive!

Carvin has always been helpful, but due to reliability, Its doubtful you'll need them

I play cover, from Country to Hard Rock, & use different amps for different purposes, Carvin is great for Cleaner, "country sounds" - my only complaint is that it has four channels, this was great for years, but now MIDI allows me hundreds of tones from other amps...This amp could do it all, but would have to manually adjusted, un-like the Tri-axis, or my current favorite, Roland GP-100. The noise gate is incredible, & the sheer number of loops is incredible, I have the footswitch if anybody wants it, I switch mine via MIDI. I agree totally with the Carvin phrase, Bang for the Buck....Its not my favorite, but it was damn close & cost 1/3 !!1

I'm using a RG J.CUSTOM with humb. dimarzios.
It suits my style very well...i can say that you can Achieve every tone you need. (maybe no extreme brutal metal....but traditional metal yes =)
it's not noisy since you have a wonderful noisegate which filter all the noises.

this is a 1992 amp.. NO MIDI.
It's quite versatile since:
you have 4 channels( 2 cleans, 1 crunch,1 lead-distortion.)
it was provided with a sturdy metal footswitch. it has a master effect loop plus 4 loops extra for every channel. Cabinet emulator, headphone jack....balanced exits for poweramp, a good spring reverb, pre and post eq. boost and a very good noise gate

It's quite cheap for a tube preamp with these features. i would advice it to anyone.

Used with a variety of guitars (Duncan humbuckers) through a Carvin T-100 tube amp. I waited to play a gig with it to give my review, because amps in your bedroom or in practice can really be different mic'd and at gig volumes through a PA. Lets just look at each channel: Clean 1 - Very nice! very clean and warm, cuts through very well. Sounds superb with single coils. My ear probably isn't good enough to tell the difference between this and a "holy grail" Fender clean, but I really like the Carvin. Clean 2 - Since I eq this for crunch, I don't use it. A lot of people have said they like this better than Clean 1. Channel 3 (Crunch) - This shares eq with the clean 2. I have seen people are disappointed with this channel, not enough gain. I find this channel sounds really good, especially live. The secret is to set the "cloaking" option to give it some bottom end. The only problem with this cahneel is it doesn't seem to sustain very well - still, it has a great rhythm sound for straight ahead rock. Channel 4 - Sustain. Well, this is the reason most people want this amp. Is it that good? Yes it is. Big, fat, nasty distortion. Very "rude" sounding, like Mick Marrs from crew. Live, all the channels cut through the mix very well. I had been playing a Marshall JCM 900 and this thing absolutely blows it away for live playing. By the way, the eq can be used for a lead boost, and that is very handy and works very nicely. Maybe the most impressive thing I found was the noise gate. It does a great job of keeping the noise filtered without cutting off the beginning or ending of notes like a lot of gates. I've never used a Hush, but Carvin's does a great job. Overall, the sounds in the box (through a tube amp and a Marshall 4x12) are excellent, competitive with anything else out there, including the suddenly mega-popular Boogie's.

Well, this thing is obviously pretty packed with features. 4 channels, fx loops, midi, cabinet emulator etc ... The controls are pretty straight forward and there are knobs versus electronic settings, makes tweaking MUCH easier. I use it pretty straight forward, the only feature I haven't used that I want is the emulator, I hear it is awesome.

Hey, it's got tubes, how reliable do you expect it to be! Seriously, haven't had it long enough to abuse it much, but like any other electronic piece of equipment, it does require some extra care.

I bought this rig on ebay, Carvin disconinued this guy a few years ago. I've bought 2 other amps and a guitar from Carvin, and they have always been dead easy to work with. I've found if you treat any service person with a decent amount of respect, they will return the same. Otherwise, just hang up, call back, and talk to someone else. Usually, the new person can tell who talked to you last and can get the other guy in trouble.

I have heard rumblings that Carvin may do some sort of update or re-issue on this bad boy. If you go to the Carvin website, there seems to be what they call a "cult" of Quad-X users. If you get one, you will know why. They can be had pretty easily on ebay if you have $300-$500 bones (not that much really), getting the footswitch might be a litle tougher since a lot seem to go without the footswitch, you can always get a standard midi switch like some others have mentioned here. Absolutely a best buy in guitar amps, just be sure you go all tube power amp and you won't be disappointed.

I guess the main question is "which sounds better?"

Well, I personally prefer the newer Quad-X, but it isn't quite that cut and dry...

first of all, the older model has a combination of Chinese tubes ("National" 12AX7's in the first two channels, no-name 12AX7's in the rest except the last slot in channel 4, which is a "Groove-Tube"). The newer model has all no-name tubes, which I assume are Chinese - if they are stock (given Carvin's history in this area).

More importantly, these two versions of Carvin's Quad-X preamp just seem to be voiced differently. The reason I like the newer Quad-X is because the distortion channel (Ch.4) sounds more like my Mesa/Boogie, smooth and warm. The older version, on the other hand, sounds more like a Marshall JCM2000 - which has more bite and a harder edge. Not that this is bad, afterall there are a lot of people who prefer this type of sound. On the other hand, both have EXCELLENT sustain and, despite their differences, I'd consider the "quality" level equally satifactory in both units.

I guess the clincher for me was Channel 1 (clean). The newer one sounds more like a Fender "blackface", warm and glassy. The older one sounded similar, but again, had a slightly harder edge to it - not *quite* as pleasant in my opinion. On the other hand, for some reason the older one had a noticeably smoother Channel 3 (crunch), much nicer than the newer one (which sounded harse). Both had very similar sounds as far as channel 2 is concerned; a nice mellow tone, good for Jazz or other softer styles.

I don't know if a tube change would make a difference, but it is something to keep in mind if you are considering getting one.

All in all I'd have to say that I am very pleased with the quality of sound that each of these units have and can only give them each high praises. None the less, I have to admit that the newer one sounds better to me overall and if it had a better sounding crunch (in channel 3) I'd have given it full blown 10 in this category. Also, if the older unit had a nicer channel 1 I'd do the same.

So, given these considerations, I gave these two an overall 9 rating in sound (although I'd give the distortion channels in each a solid 10 despite their differences and my personal preferences).

I have two Carvin Quad-X tube preamps; an older version and a newer one, so I have a unique perspective on changes made to this product. The later version has a sticker on it stating "QUAD X V 1.0.2", which I assume is short for "version 1.0.2", whatever that means...

First of all there are notable differences in the circuitry between the two. The most obvious exterior change can be seen on the rear panel. The older Quad-X has a funky MIDI interface consisting of four 1/4" jacks labeled Ch.1 - Ch.4, plus three other 1/4" jacks labeled "Graphic Equalizer", "Reverb" and "Effects". I have no idea how this setup is suppose to work. Conversely, the newer Quad-X has a more conventional MIDI IN and THRU arrangement, which is also powered (has a DIN-7 jack where pin 6 is ground and pin 7 provides +15VDC phantom power). It also has four DIP switches for more specific MIDI channel assignments. For a short while I had a MIDI footswitch (called "MIDI Buddy" by Rolls) for channel switching and it worked without any fuss. As for the older Quad-X, like I said, I have no idea how to use the MIDI setup on it.

Other changes involve the interior circuitry itself...

With the two units placed side by side I looked closely and discovered significant changes. The first thing I noticed was an obvious switch to different suppliers when it came to capacitors and some of the IC chips. But more importantly I noticed major changes in the circuitry itself. Everything from the main circuit board, tranformer interface circuit, the tube circuit board and the rear panel have noticeable changes, with some areas utilizing completely different circuit paths and components altogether. As for each individual channel's tone circuits, I couldn't really tell since it is well concealed beneath the main circuit board, although (from what little I could see) some of the component manufactures have definitely been changed, which must no doubt make some subtle difference in how the two units sound (see the "Sounds" category for my observations).

Other than that, everything else seems consistent. The front panels are layed out exactly the same. Except for the MIDI stuff, the rear panels share all the other features (although layed out a little differently). Both came with Accutronics reverb tanks and have the same part number stamped on the transformers by (what looks like) the same manufacturer.

I also have the original footswitch which works great, although it's fairly cumbersome (plan to get a separate carrying case for it if you manage to get one). I found the MIDI Buddy to be somewhat more convenient (be sure to get one with phantom power), although I never did figure out how to get anything except the channel switching to work. It also seems to be fairly flimsy compared to the Carvin footswitch, although it always worked well.

Anyway, overall I'd say that this is one feature-packed mutha! I especially like the noise gate and the fact that each channel has its own effects loop. Those features, along with the graphic EQ and cabinet voicing, makes this an extremely versatile preamp indeed!

Without a doubt, the Quad-X gets a 10 in this category.

Although both units have been well used, everything still works great! There is no extraneous noise as far as I could tell and all pots, buttons, sliders and jacks work smoothly and quietly. The chassis is sturdy and the circuitry is neat and well designed, with clean soldering points and tight sockets. Tubes are easy to change and everything is laid out very logically.

Being a stickler for quality, I'd say that the Quad-X is as good as - or better than - any preamp that is available out there today.

I have been playing and recording for well over 21 years. I own a lot of guitars (Gibson LP, Fender Strat/Tele/Toronado, a 1965 Epiphone Century, Carvin DC200 etc.) and amps (Mesa/Boogie, Ampeg, Vox).

I can't see how you could go wrong getting either of these units (older vs newer), with the only decision being which *somewhat* different sound you prefer and which type of MIDI interface you require (if any at all).

I mainly use the newer one in both live and recording situations. I find it most enjoyable plugging it into my Mesa/Boogie Rect-O-Verb's "effects return" jack (to bypass the amp's preamp section, directly accessing the power amp). It also works great for practicing with its built in headphone jack.

Since you can now find these going for $400 dollars or less on eBay, they represent a remarkable value - especially if you're in the market for a high quality, multi-channel tube preamp with dozens of features. I am a huge Mesa/Boogie fan but I still can't justify getting one of their pricy preamps, since I manage to get everything I need from my Carvin Quad-X!

Are there better tube preamps? I'm sure there are... but if there's one going for $400 with as many features and level of quality as the Carvin Quad-X, I'm pretty sure I would have found it by now!

Good Luck!

Controls seem pretty straightforward. It has pretty good tone with everything at '5' which gives you a good place to build a sound from. Getting the same volume out of each channel is kind of tricky especially if you play with the EQ while you're doing so. The manual is pretty easy to read and is readily available through Carvin's web site.

PRS style guitars made by me (and one PRS Custom 24) => Lexicon MPX G2 => Carvin Quad X Amp (Master EFX Send)=> Lexicon MPX G2 (back end) => (Master EFX Return) Carvin Quad X Amp => Mesa/Boogie 50/50 => two ADA split stack 2x12 cabinets.

I use the Carvin as my tone center. Meaning that for all of the effects that I put on a guitar sound, I like to have a defined foundation from which to start. It's nice to be working with a preamp that can accomplish this.

Channel 1 is a nice clean sound with a bit more EQ flexibility than 2. I use that when I'm trying to get acoustic like sounds, but it's nice and pristine. I mostly use channel 2(clean 2) and 3(overdrive). Something that I hate about it is that if I use a piezo into it (on one of my custom guitars) I get this really annoying high end distortion. I generally don't use channel 4 because it is SO tube compressed, you can hear it breathing. REALLY annoying. It's good for getting those over-compressed lead tones though. It is sustain city.

The spring reverb is good. Better than most combo amps I've heard. It's just a little spring reverb, but I don't use it much. (neither would you if you had Lexicon stereo lushness at your disposal)

I gig with it regularly. I've had it crap out on me once (problem was a microphonic tube). The unit has 9 12AX7's in it, so that will happen from time to time. I dropped it about 4 feet to a hardwood floor in an SKB rack case with no adverse effects. I play gigs at least 3 times a week with it with no backup.

Although, you open the thing up, and you wonder with all of that ribbon wire and small solder joints, how long can this thing hold up?

Another thing is that the 9-pin DIN jack that the footswitch is supposed to plug into is clearly not designed for frequent attatch/detatchment. After about a dozen gigs with it, I stripped out one of the nuts that keeps it in place. I highly recommend getting a 9-pin DIN extention cable (any computer store has them.... it's the same connector as an old school PS/2 mouse) and permanently attatching one end to the 9 pin jack. That way, if you strip the other end, you can replace it easily between gigs at a Staples without having to dismantle your rack on some bar-room floor.

Never dealt with them. This is an item that Carvin does not make anymore. The fact that they still have the PDF of the instruction manual on their web site either says that they still care about us users, or that their web-guy hasn't taken it down yet. tough call.

I play in a 'groove-rock band' (whatever that means...) I have to span a lot of different styles from blues to ambient/spacey to straight up rock to jazz. The Quad X Amp lays a pretty good foundation from where I can start building a tone.

I've been playing guitar for 15 years (I'm 24). I own lots of other gear, but see above for my gig-rig.

If it were stolen or lost, I would probably buy something else. I don't know what, but something that's wired a bit more straight forward. Something with less features and more tone. I swear that there's like 10 miles of ribbon wire in this guy.

I love it's tonal flexibility. I love the fact that it has 4 channels. It looks great in my rack too! I hate the fact that channel 4 is so compressed! Saturation is one thing, but if I wanted to compress it, I'd use a compressor. Channel 3 (if you tweak it) can sound amazing... almost Neil Young overdrives. Playing open chords into it with a neck pickup is mind-blowing.

The only other rack-mount preamps I've tried are the Tri-axis (great sound, hefty price tag, tough to get a PERSONAL sound out of it) and the Formula (which IMHO kinda bites if you'll excuse the double meaning). I'd love to try the Soldanos, the Groove Tubes preamp, and that CAE stuff everybody's so crazy about. Why did I choose the Carvin? Four words: Bang For The Buck.

I wish it had separate EQ's for channel 2 and 3. And maybe a straight 4db boost that was footswitchable. (I'm thinking not having to dedicate the graphic EQ for this purpose) This would also make it a bit easier to switch from humbucker to split coil sounds without having to go back to the rack and turn up.

If I had to, I'd make music with whatever gear I had. This however, helps me to get some sounds that I couldn't get before. I think that there are Lots of things on the market that can do this better than the Carvin. However, you're not going to be able to buy them for a couple hundred bucks.

Value wise, I don't think that you can really beat this. Maybe if money were not an object, I would pick something else.

Gibson Les Paul XPL/Ibanez Talman-->Carvin Quad-->MosValve-->ADA Split cab 2x12.

The clean Channel 1 sounds very nice, though a tad boxy and bright. Channel 2 is useful for a warmer, jazzier clean sound.
90% of the time I play with a 'just-on-the-verge-of-breaking-up' crunch and Channel 3 really disappointed me. The distortion just sounds mushy and flabby to me. If I play around with the EQ and bright switch, it's passable - but it ain't no Fender.
Channel 4 is great for sucked mids Boogie style metal but I find the channel too extreme.
Overall I prefer single coils to humbuckers through this rig.
Now I use it primarily for direct recording, which sounds very good.

Bought new from Carvin in 1994. Feature laden, 4 channels (2 clean, 1 overdrive, 1 lead), reverb, 6 band EQ, XLR and 1/4' outputs, headphones, master effects loop + one loop for each channel, speaker simulation, bright switch and boost, phew!

This thing is a horse. I gigged and recorded extensively with it and never a problem.

I tried running it into the power input of my Fender Deville and it sounded better than my rack rig, but it was prone to feedback. Overall the extreme textures are excellent (great clean, good lead), but for me it's lacking in the in-between settings.