Paul or a Schmidt....?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joeytpg
  • Start date Start date
If i could, i would get the schmidt. Amazing clean and overdrive. I dont need that much gain anymore so for me the schmidt would be perfect.
 
Hi Joey,

the Schmidt is out of production.

Please contact peterstapfer (at) diezelamplification (dot) com
for details on the Paul.
 
The Peter Stapfer interview at Namm mentions that the Schmidt & Paul clean channels are the same.



3:58

Skip back a minute & you get more of the clean demo.
 
I once tried the Schmidt (in a beautiful small shop in the Netherlands (Guitar King)) and was blown away by the clean and overdrive sound ... but found it had not enough gain for what I like ... so I drove after 2 hours testing back home to Belgium, disappointed because I did find what I was looking for. Then half a year ago, I saw the video of Peter with the Paul, and I bought it immediately: it has everything I was looking for! The Paul also has much better switching features than the Schmidt ... Go for PAUL!

Jan
 
To my opinion, Paul's clean is much brighter and more alive than that of Einstein ...
 
I've heard them both and the Paul seems more versatile but to be honest I'm not looking for versatility per se.... I'm a pop guitarist and I seldom go into high gain, not even medium gain that much, I like the "small" size of the Schmidt. I'm moving to London in a week and I'll search for a used Schmidt there and see what's up, if not I'll order a Paul which sounds very nice too.
 
On the surface it seems like the Paul is a blend of the Schmidt and Einstein.
 
It depends on what you're looking for. I am a Marshall guy, and Channel 2 of the Paul (with gain between 10 o'clock and noon, with presence and mids turned up) is way more old school Marshall than I ever got out of other Diezel amps (Einstein or VH4). Never owned the Schmidt. The Paul is very touch responsive and dynamic as well, with great clarity and note separation. Lots of great features on this amp, not the least of which is a really great clean channel that offers plenty of chime and jangle with strats and teles.

If you're looking to do more of a modern metal thing, I would probably look to other Diezel amps rather than the Paul. Once you push the gain to 1 'o clock or more on channel 2 of the Paul, the amp really softens up and loses that zing/bite and clarity that I always need to have. I think you can hear this on some of the clips that have been posted online. The key for me with the Paul is to keep gain on Channel 2 below noon and use channel 3 when I want more drive and compression.
 
littleguitars":27gc7tm0 said:
Once you push the gain to 1 'o clock or more on channel 2 of the Paul, the amp really softens up and loses that zing/bite and clarity that I always need to have. I think you can hear this on some of the clips that have been posted online. The key for me with the Paul is to keep gain on Channel 2 below noon and use channel 3 when I want more drive and compression.
Click to expand...
I agree - and IMO that's the problem with the clips available (except yours) so far. The guys turned up the gain too far (as do many when recording Diezels). Paul shines with both gain channels set to noon or even a bit less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top