D-Moll and Paul comparisons?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Soundstorm
  • Start date Start date
Soundstorm

Soundstorm

Well-known member
Has anyone owned or played both and can give me a run down? I've owned the D-Moll twice and am curious about the Paul.
 
Own a VH2 and a Paul....the two are known to have the same first channel....but they're different ....the VH2 is more directionnal whereas the Paul certainly due to the 2 tubes and 45 watts seems to be more organic , alive , sensitive....Paul is on third channel able to do metal but is main personnality is based on classik rock.....under 12o'clock you can find a lot of crunchy tones ...really impressive .....after 12 it probably depends on your guitar pickups......the reverb is really great too.....a really good amp...
 
Own a VH2 and a Paul....the two are known to have the same first channel....but they're different ....the VH2 is more directionnal whereas the Paul certainly due to the 2 tubes and 45 watts seems to be more organic , alive , sensitive....Paul is on third channel able to do metal but is main personnality is based on classik rock.....under 12o'clock you can find a lot of crunchy tones ...really impressive .....after 12 it probably depends on your guitar pickups......the reverb is really great too.....a really good amp...
Thanks Pierre! How would you compare the distortion between the VH2 and the Paul? In the metal range. I use EMGs fwiw.
 
I prefer the VH2 ....because it adds a lot more low mids ( less high mids ) which give you a powerfull impression ....Paul has more high mids ,more classic ...my taste.....but you can see on youtube" the submancometh" testing metal on a Diezel Paul ....it works very well
 
I prefer the VH2 ....because it adds a lot more low mids ( less high mids ) which give you a powerfull impression ....Paul has more high mids ,more classic ...my taste.....but you can see on youtube" the submancometh" testing metal on a Diezel Paul ....it works very well
That low mid buildup/excess lows are exactly what I'm trying to get rid of without having to resort to post EQ. I play only baritone guitars so as much as I love the gain structure of Diezels, that's been my one gripe with them. Would you say the Paul is a tighter Diezel?
 
Dude the Paul is not great for metal. Great amp . But I feel metal wise d moll destroys it
I've heard some clips that sounds like it has at least as much gain as I remember my D-Molls having, why do you say they're not good for metal?
 
I've heard some clips that sounds like it has at least as much gain as I remember my D-Molls having, why do you say they're not good for metal?
It’s like my electrodyne . Many say it’s cool for metal and it’s got a lot of gain . But if your use to more modern type feel it’s different and very rock ish . Not mad metal ish in the room
IMO for metal it’s a step back.
My electrodyne is great for rock and play metal on it but it just don’t cut it of feel right after a mark or recto
I would think d moll to Paul is a similar thing
You can do metal and it’s got gain
Especially with a drummer I just think it be wring amp for metal
 
If you have the money I’d for Herbert . Vh4 or vh2
Loved my VH4. I was looking for something in the 50 watt range and wanted back into the Diezel sound. This amp stays in my studio so no need to worry about drummers. I looked for a used Einstein 50 but they rarely come up. I went ahead and bought a used Paul, should have it in a week or so. Hopefully it works out! Thanks for always chiming in, Tech!
 
Loved my VH4. I was looking for something in the 50 watt range and wanted back into the Diezel sound. This amp stays in my studio so no need to worry about drummers. I looked for a used Einstein 50 but they rarely come up. I went ahead and bought a used Paul, should have it in a week or so. Hopefully it works out! Thanks for always chiming in, Tech!
I think if you’re not using it with drummer it should work fine . But lmk what you think about it doing metal
Great amp though no matter what I feel
 
Back
Top