S
shogunlegend
Guest
am i crazy or does the dsl 100 actually sound better than the JVM head? i compared the two side by side yesterday for about 2 hours (on same 1960 cab). i've heard complaints that the JVM is complicated, but it's super easy to use. each channel has 3 modes and all you have to do is push a button. it remembers the settings if you push the memory button. you simply shape the sound with the eq, gain, resonance, and presence controls.
in any case, i think the DSL 100 was more representative of classic marshall tone. i'm in love with the lead 1 channel and can't seem to equal that on the jvm. the only things i noticed that was kind of an issue was the clean channel needs to be rather loud to sound really good. it sounds world-class, but the volume needs to be pushed just past bedroom levels to get a nice sounding clean tone.
another thing was the lead 2 channel. it wasn't that responsive to the gain control from about 1 o'clock to 5 o'clock. i could dial it in at say 5 o'clock and then back to 1 o'clock, but it hardly cleans up. i have to get back to at least 12 o'clock to get a real tone difference. not really an issue, but i'd like a slightly more responsive gain for lead 2. lead 1 is immaculate.
another thing was that the clean channel seemed to lack a little bottom, so you either have to use the mid boost or add a little bass. these settings are where the jvm has a clear advantage.
tone wise, however, the jvm seemed just a little fuzzier and less pronounced than the DSL which was a slightly more in-your-face solid tone. the DSL crunch seems a little tighter and more focused while the JVM, IMO, is a little softer sounding to my ears. i'm really impressed with the DSL and can't see why marshall would discontinue that head. it's utter stupidity.
has anyone else really compared these two? what do you think?
in any case, i think the DSL 100 was more representative of classic marshall tone. i'm in love with the lead 1 channel and can't seem to equal that on the jvm. the only things i noticed that was kind of an issue was the clean channel needs to be rather loud to sound really good. it sounds world-class, but the volume needs to be pushed just past bedroom levels to get a nice sounding clean tone.
another thing was the lead 2 channel. it wasn't that responsive to the gain control from about 1 o'clock to 5 o'clock. i could dial it in at say 5 o'clock and then back to 1 o'clock, but it hardly cleans up. i have to get back to at least 12 o'clock to get a real tone difference. not really an issue, but i'd like a slightly more responsive gain for lead 2. lead 1 is immaculate.
another thing was that the clean channel seemed to lack a little bottom, so you either have to use the mid boost or add a little bass. these settings are where the jvm has a clear advantage.
tone wise, however, the jvm seemed just a little fuzzier and less pronounced than the DSL which was a slightly more in-your-face solid tone. the DSL crunch seems a little tighter and more focused while the JVM, IMO, is a little softer sounding to my ears. i'm really impressed with the DSL and can't see why marshall would discontinue that head. it's utter stupidity.
has anyone else really compared these two? what do you think?
