Favourite Marshall Amph?

[Robert]

What's 1 choice and why?

 

[sunvalleylaw]

Boy, I don't know for sure as I have never really played one. I liked the sound of Tone2theBone's jubiliee he used to have. Jimi (both Hendrix, and Jimi75) had nice sounding ones. I love the sound of a marshall circuit with a strat through it. For me, I would want that warm sound but in something not too huge and loud. I guess that is why I was coming back to that jubilee.

Edit: Voted Jubilee. I think I would pick a 2x12 model, 25/50.

I think Tone's is a 1x12, but I think a 2x12 would be maybe a bit more open.



with strat

 

[bcdon]

I like the JCM800 because of the way these guys make it sound: AC/DC, Zakk Wylde, Kerry King, &c.

 

[sixstringdrug]

I love the silver jubilee! tone on tone on tone! I used to have a jcm2000 dsl 201 that I absolutely adored. Was forced to sell some time ago when I hit on hard times. I now rue that day in my nightmares everynight!! We shall be together Petunia, and we can rekindle our love!

 

[Spudman]

What I've heard of the one Robert recently got impresses me a lot. I also like the Silver Jubilee that Tone has. But, because I've had my JMP50 since 1977 and have taken it all over the place I'll go with it just for sentimental reasons. However, I'd be perfectly happy with the other two I mentioned as well. I'd have to play them both a bit to see which one wins.

Mine originally looked like this, but it stuck out too much on stage so I spray painted the grille back to make it look more modern and hidden on the sage a bit more.

Before (not mine)

and after (also not mine)

 

[Katastrophe]

I think Tone's Silver Jubilee has the sound that defines the Marshall tone. Funny that such great sounds come from a 1x12 combo.

That said, the JCM 800 is incredible, and Jimi's JTM45 sounds awesome with his Strat. Robert's and Dee's amphs sound glorious, too. The choices are so tightly grouped that it's hard to pick one, but Tone's amph is something special, I think.

My first band's other guitar player played a Les Paul Studio direct into a 50 watt JCM 800 head and 4x12. At live volumes (read: earsplitting, we played VERY loud, to compensate for our drummer), it sounded unreal. I should have followed his lead and bought one of those heads instead of my rack rig. I'd still have it today, instead of a pile of useless parts.

 

[mark wein]

My first "real" amp was a 100 watt Jubilee half stack. A ridiculous amp for a 17 year old to own

I still have the 4x12 cab here at Premier in the back of the building but I sold the head to buy a Mesa Boogie when I got out of college. A horrible trade in retrospect.

 

[deeaa]

Me, I never really got the Jubilee craze. It's much like a JCM800 2210, it also has diodes for distortion but they're a bit differently in the signal chain and the amp tonestack is geared towards cleaner tones I understand. They don't reportedly have a choke either because there apparently was no room in the combo chassis but later done for many Marshalls to save on costs, and it's making them a little less 'organic' and tighter, cleaner sounding than 800 series. The triode switch is cool, but from what I remember it more like just eats away at tone than really lower the volume. Not that it's bad to have diodes for drive, no need for pedals then maybe but for amph purists that's a big no-no.

Of course, when it sounds good, it _is_ good, but that's not the classic Marshall sound to me. I think the classic Marshall sounds are that of the Bluesbreaker, the kinda nearly Voxy headroom-less crunchy cleanish roar, and the EL84 breaker with the super-organic dark mutter, and definitely 2203&4 50W AC/DC crunch that is behind almost 100% rock sounds prior to the 90's.

Yeah, the 50W single-channel all-tube 2203 amph surely is the Marshall I think is the most iconic one easily...no other amp sounds quite the same. I often regret selling the JMP 50W combo, because I felt the JMP-1 rack system was so much easier to handle and use. But I voted for the JVM, because it's such a great combination of 'em all. Preamp sections from four of the classic JCM amps and all tube with no diodes...it is been made a compromise, though, so I'm in the process of modding it to have one channel basically identical to JMP and one channel identical to JCM2204 by adding a choke and changing some caps and components for their correct values. Maybe over the weekend I can get the soldering done and hear for myself

Here's a clip with my old JMP...it just sounded so huge with the EMG85's...in retrospect, so much bigger than the 4x10" rig it's against here:

 

[guitartango]

Me, I never really got the Jubilee craze. It's much like a JCM800 2210, it also has diodes for distortion but they're a bit differently in the signal chain and the amp tonestack is geared towards cleaner tones I understand. They don't reportedly have a choke either because there apparently was no room in the combo chassis but later done for many Marshalls to save on costs, and it's making them a little less 'organic' and tighter, cleaner sounding than 800 series. The triode switch is cool, but from what I remember it more like just eats away at tone than really lower the volume. Not that it's bad to have diodes for drive, no need for pedals then maybe but for amph purists that's a big no-no.

Of course, when it sounds good, it _is_ good, but that's not the classic Marshall sound to me. I think the classic Marshall sounds are that of the Bluesbreaker, the kinda nearly Voxy headroom-less crunchy cleanish roar, and the EL84 breaker with the super-organic dark mutter, and definitely 2203&4 50W AC/DC crunch that is behind almost 100% rock sounds prior to the 90's.

I agree on the classic Marshall tone with the Bluesbreaker, I currently own the 1974x which is a superb amp, no EQ just Volumme and a tone knob. This may be a one trick pony but i get all the tone by adjusting my guitar knobs. One thing it is missing is the reverb tank, but i can live with that (just add a reverb pedal). As for pedals all you really need is a booster to overdrive the amp.

 

[Eric]

Hey Dee, I thought AC/DC was always known for the 1959 superlead. Isn't the 2203 a 50W JCM800? I'm no Marshall historian, and the numbering has always confused me, so please pardon my ignorance if I'm incorrect.

 

[Eric]

Also, I always thought the JTM45 was the Bluesbreaker. What's the difference? This thread could be a good chance to air all of my questions about Marshalls.

 

[deeaa]

acdc marshalls have always been missed quite a lot...the 800 sseers covers most their sounds best imo.

 

[markb]

Also, I always thought the JTM45 was the Bluesbreaker. What's the difference? This thread could be a good chance to air all of my questions about Marshalls.

The "Bluesbreaker" is a JTM45 in a 2x12 combo form named for the picture on the John Mayall's Bluesbreakers featuring Eric Clapton album of 1966.

The JTM45 was basically a Tweed Bassman with a different tone stack.

As for my favourite Marshalls it has to be the 1987 model 50w "Plexi" and the various combo versions on the same chassis. Even when they tried to ruin them with a master volume you could just avoid it. The 1974 18w combo was basically a half power version. It all went downhill from the JCM800 onwards for me.

Having said that, I was very taken with a Silver Jubilee 25/50 2x12 combo once but the shop owner wasn't selling. The best cleans I've ever heard from a Marshall.

These days my Marshall needs come from a pedal. Much easier on the back and wallet

 

[sunvalleylaw]

Seeing as the Tweed Bassman is my other favorite tone, the JTM45 would also be a good choice. I would just want something with that type of tone in a smaller version.

 

[Eric]

I wish I could vote in this, but I honestly have no idea. My impression is that I'd like the JCM 800, but I've never really even come close to playing any of those. Maybe someday.

 

[Tig]

I still like the poor man's Plexi. It nails the JCM and Jubilee tones incredibly well.

 

[Ch0jin]

The "Bluesbreaker" is a JTM45 in a 2x12 combo form named for the picture on the John Mayall's Bluesbreakers featuring Eric Clapton album of 1966.

The JTM45 was basically a Tweed Bassman with a different tone stack.

Not that I'm an expert, but I did quite a bit of reading on the topic while I built my JTM45, and I believe the difference between the original Bassman and the JTM45 are a little more substantial than that. IMHO, it breaks down like this.

The Bassman has a 12AY7 as V1 and the JTM has a 12AX7. That's a big difference of itself. I've just received a NOS 12AY7 so I can try it in my JTM style amp and see what happens. I would expect much less gain.

The two have completely different output transformers. The Fender with a single 2 Ohm tap, the JTM with multiple taps. They also have different primary impedance's.

I think the chokes were different values

I think both started with 5881 bottles, then the JTM pretty quickly went to KT66's

Then there's the speakers and the various open and closed back designs used.

So yeah, for sure the JTM was based on the 5F6-A Bassman, but I don't believe, based on what I've been reading, that they are as close as often mentioned on the net. Which is, of course, why they sound different. I read one post somewhere that said the difference in sound was down to the fact that one had American parts and one British. I laughed about that for a while.

 

[bcdon]

I read one post somewhere that said the difference in sound was down to the fact that one had American parts and one British. I laughed about that for a while.

Now, why wouldn't the difference come down to American vs. British parts? After all, haven't you heard the joke as to why the British don't sale televisions.. they haven't found a way to make them leak oil yet. ;-)

 

[Ch0jin]

Haha classic. Little bit of truth in the USA v UK thing though I suppose, different power and output transformer manufacturers would almost certainly mean different sound.

 

[deeaa]

For my use, if I ever could only get one amp for every use I can imagine for the rest of my life, the x1974 would be a good contender. The Ceriatone I had was an almost exact copy, only twice the power, and it can give the sound I want with reasonable volumes.

The thing with Marshalls is - and remember I love their sound - is that they almost invariably need to be played quite loud for them to sound great. Sure there are plenty of master volume models but the real sound on them always comes at very high volumes really. It's always all about the preamp/poweramp interaction the most; that's the key to getting great Marshall sounds.

Pretty much all tube Marshall heads wih EL34's can sound more or less similar when cranked, IMO. Of course there are differences but the basic thing is quite the same, you recognize it anywhere. It's got the punch and the bite to be heard through any wall of noise and it's compact and hard-hitting but still a pleasure to hear. Even without lots of distortion or drive it still has this primal scream thing to it that just shouts at the listener with a great, dynamic roar.

That's the same for almost all JMP forward tube heads, more or less.

The JCM800 2210 I had for instance was 100W and the thing was just crazy loud when it sounded really good, and I never really liked the drive channel on it. The same applies to most any, even 50W Marshalls, but with some tricks they can be made a little quieter too while retaining the sound, but not much. They are for loud bands, period.

But if you can crank 'em, it's hard to get bad sounds from them. They're unforgiving in that they reveal player errors and bad tune like nothing else though, because there's not much distortion to their crunch...I remember playing a buddy's slightly JMP without pedals in the 80's...I felt like every single slip of my fingers became so loud, every mistake like a mountain. I was so glad to get back to playing the 800 series with a Boss SD-1 in front...soo much easier to play. But, yeah, even then the preference was a pedal in front of the clean 800 channel not the drive channel.

Now I'm modding my JVM so that it gets closer to the 800 series overall; since it's been made into such a compromise, best of all worlds, it's too geared towards preamp section sounds. Which is fine, the D/I sound is great, but it's a little lacking in dynamics and the power tube punch of the originals.

So what I'm doing is adding a choke and changing the way the poweramp gets fed its signals, less compression and most importantly WAY less negative feedback to the power stage to 'free it up'...the downsides will be that it will get loud MUCH quicker and I'll lose some ability to play it at lesser volumes, but it should really wake the poweramp punch up.

We'll see. I love the amp and if I can get that JMP/JCM power tube punch for real, I'll never part with it.

 

[markb]

Not that I'm an expert, but I did quite a bit of reading on the topic while I built my JTM45, and I believe the difference between the original Bassman and the JTM45 are a little more substantial than that. IMHO, it breaks down like this.

The Bassman has a 12AY7 as V1 and the JTM has a 12AX7. That's a big difference of itself. I've just received a NOS 12AY7 so I can try it in my JTM style amp and see what happens. I would expect much less gain.

The two have completely different output transformers. The Fender with a single 2 Ohm tap, the JTM with multiple taps. They also have different primary impedance's.

I think the chokes were different values

I think both started with 5881 bottles, then the JTM pretty quickly went to KT66's

Then there's the speakers and the various open and closed back designs used.

So yeah, for sure the JTM was based on the 5F6-A Bassman, but I don't believe, based on what I've been reading, that they are as close as often mentioned on the net. Which is, of course, why they sound different. I read one post somewhere that said the difference in sound was down to the fact that one had American parts and one British. I laughed about that for a while.

Certainly a few more changes. The speakers did make a real difference. Same basic circuit, different results. A bit like a smart cover version that sounds original in itself.
In the early days Marshall (and by Marshall I mean Ken Bran) sourced parts from Henry's electronic shop in the Tottenham Court Road at the far end of the no 7 bus route from the shop in Hanwell. As Marshall grew the parts used became more consistent.

 

[Ch0jin]

... A bit like a smart cover version that sounds original in itself. .

Well said!

 

[Eric]

The thing with Marshalls is - and remember I love their sound - is that they almost invariably need to be played quite loud for them to sound great. Sure there are plenty of master volume models but the real sound on them always comes at very high volumes really. It's always all about the preamp/poweramp interaction the most; that's the key to getting great Marshall sounds.

You know, I realize your reasoning for the played-loud thing is because of the interaction between the different sections of the amp, but I've found this to be true even when playing facsimiles of Marshalls. The whole Marshall tone thing just doesn't sound very good at low volumes. Some amps sound great at low volume, but I think the roar of a Marshall is so so much better at loud volumes, because it just kind of descends into fuzziness and loses a bunch of the power when it's soft. And my only experience with it is from modelers, pedals, some similarly designed tube amps, and the music I've listened to on recordings for years and years.

I just find it curious that for me, it's not just about power tube saturation or anything, but that low volumes don't do justice to the sound.

 

[deeaa]

exactly eric. thatswhy I like jmp-1 pre and jvm d/I out...best Marshall sounds at low volume. I just missed my jvm though...boy it sounds great now. will post about it later.

 

[mapka]

Voted for this one!


P1010053 by mapka2000, on Flickr

 

[deeaa]

ah the 900. There are many kinds of 900 out there. I've gotten some of my best Marshhall sounds from an old 900. el34. just a hotrod 800...like em.

 

[NWBasser]

The thing with Marshalls is - and remember I love their sound - is that they almost invariably need to be played quite loud for them to sound great.

I wonder how magnificent the tone is when you've become deaf from cranking it over the years?

 

[Photomike666]

How close are the modern solid state Marshall's? Do they give you good tone at the lower volume levels. I don't gig but love the sound of Marshall. I'm considering an mg series, probably the 102?

 

[deeaa]

Hehe yeah NWBasser...true. Need to wear plugs

Photomike: I was very impressed with this SS marshall rig I tried already a year back, especially the clean channel was very surprisingly good. It was one of these newer valvestate or such, with a single preamp tube and otherwise SS.

IMO, for the best Marshall type screaming power sound at home playing volumes, a Tech-21 TM-10 or 30 is better than any Marshall I ever tried. They just nail it. And on budget, I have this Behringer GMX-110 which is a TM-30 copy and it's got a really killer Marshall-type driven sound.

 

[Katastrophe]

How close are the modern solid state Marshall's? Do they give you good tone at the lower volume levels. I don't gig but love the sound of Marshall. I'm considering an mg series, probably the 102?

You're likely to get a varied response about the MG series Marshalls, with a good number saying, "They suck!" and another group saying, "They rock!" I've played through a couple of the MG4 series, and thought they were good, solid amphs, capable of getting very close to that Marshall crunch. They WILL require some tweaking to get them where you want them.

That said, I played through the previous version (before they came out with the MG4), it was a half stack. It sounded like a fizzy mess.

Here's a link to "Marshall Theatre," where they put one through its paces. Clicky