Marshall JVM

[dystrust]

Re: Marshall JVM

The reissues are comparable to a slightly beter than average JCM 800 (7/10). I've played some that are better, and I've played quite a few that weren't as good. I don't own a reissue, so I can't say whether or not the tone can be improved with a tube swap. I prefer 6550s in a JCM800 2203 while the reissue ships with EL-34s; this could be why I didn't care for it. One good thing about the reissues is that they're very consistent, which original 800s were not.

If you're looking to get into this ballpark and tune your tone with a tube swap, an 800 reissue would be a good place to start, but they're expensive. If you liked my brother's tone (from the songs on myspace) you'd be better off looking for a JMP 2203 since the JCM800 version does sound different. If you're looking for an original JCM800 2203, be sure to get one with the inputs arranged vertically. The later (horizontal) 2203s do not have adequate filtering in the power section which causes them to be extremely harsh, bright, and thin.

 

[BloodRose]

Re: Marshall JVM

The reissues are comparable to a slightly beter than average JCM 800 (7/10). I've played some that are better, and I've played quite a few that weren't as good. I don't own a reissue, so I can't say whether or not the tone can be improved with a tube swap. I prefer 6550s in a JCM800 2203 while the reissue ships with EL-34s; this could be why I didn't care for it. One good thing about the reissues is that they're very consistent, which original 800s were not.

If you're looking to get into this ballpark and tune your tone with a tube swap, an 800 reissue would be a good place to start, but they're expensive. If you liked my brother's tone (from the songs on myspace) you'd be better off looking for a JMP 2203 since the JCM800 version does sound different. If you're looking for an original JCM800 2203, be sure to get one with the inputs arranged vertically. The later (horizontal) 2203s do not have adequate filtering in the power section which causes them to be extremely harsh, bright, and thin.

Thanks for the great info!

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Marshall JVM

Check out Jumpmarine's thread on the JVM410H, above.

Well, actually it's below this thread now (lol)

 

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

Re: Marshall JVM

You wacky people need to use the search function. Check out this thread as well.

- Keith

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

I wasn't impressed with the JVM or Vintage Modern; I thought both of the new amps sounded like a JCM 900 with slightly better clarity and more bottom. Regarding which Marshall I'd recommend, I'd have to know what you play and how deep your pockets are. One of the best Marshalls ever made is a JCM 800 2203, but it isn't very versatile or very forgiving. If you'd like some suggestions, please post or message me with what style you play, what your main guitar is, and what gauge strings you play. A 2203 sounds great with a JB and 11s while it can sound a bit weak with a 59 and 9s (at less than window shaking volume). Whether or not you need channel switching is another thing to consider. I used to love multi-channel amps, (and rack systems) but I find myself thinking 'less is more' as of late.

Some of the best Marshalls ever made were the earlier NMV 1987/1959 Marshalls! I put the JCM 800 series second(A close second)....The 800 series has no decent clean tones! And you're right,not as versatile,but it grinds out 80s stuff...LOL

 

[jimlp]

Re: Marshall JVM

The JVM circuit is based on the 2203. I like my JVM as is but if anything I think there is to much gain, a preamp tube swap may be in order if I want to warm it up a bit and dial out some gain. I run it through V30's so that might account for some of the brightness.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

The JVM circuit is based on the 2203. I like my JVM as is but if anything I think there is to much gain, a preamp tube swap may be in order if I want to warm it up a bit and dial out some gain. I run it through V30's so that might account for some of the brightness.

Lots of freakin knobs and stuff on that thing! :biglaugh: Another reason I can't stand alot of the Mesa stuff! All those switches,push/pull crap! Just me though...

 

[dystrust]

Re: Marshall JVM

Some of the best Marshalls ever made were the earlier NMV 1987/1959 Marshalls! I put the JCM 800 series second(A close second)....The 800 series has no decent clean tones! And you're right,not as versatile,but it grinds out 80s stuff...LOL

I agree that 1987s/1959s are great amps, but they aren't exactly practical for someone who doesn't have their own stadium to play it in. I used to have an awesome 1973 (hardwired) 1959 that sounded beyond incredible and I sold it. I loved the tone of the amp, but it was so loud that I just couldn't really use it for much of anything. My 2555 is still loud but in a much more practical sense.

I also agree that they don't have a pristine 'fender-ish' clean sound. The clean sound you get is slightly broken up, similar to Led Zeppelin or early Guns 'N Roses. I've never liked Fenders, so this didn't bother me.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

I agree that 1987s/1959s are great amps, but they aren't exactly practical for someone who doesn't have their own stadium to play it in. I used to have an awesome 1973 (hardwired) 1959 that sounded beyond incredible and I sold it. I loved the tone of the amp, but it was so loud that I just couldn't really use it for much of anything. My 2555 is still loud but in a much more practical sense.

I also agree that they don't have a pristine 'fender-ish' clean sound. The clean sound you get is slightly broken up, similar to Led Zeppelin or early Guns 'N Roses. I've never liked Fenders, so this didn't bother me.

I don't run mine wide open and just use some great pedals in front of mine...Sounds absolutely great!....It's not like the Hendrix days where we only had a fuzz box,a wah,and a univibe we could use to our amp....I play my 50 watter on about 4 and it's great...I get great singing sustain,but also a wonderful clean tone w/a verbzilla pedal for reverb....The JCM 800 is just lifeless and doesn't take to pedals well....I had the 800 and sold it years ago...

But I do hear ya brother! Depends on music styles also...I'm a classic rock,blues guy and I don't play with alot of gain...A Plexitone and a Tube Screamer is really enough..Mine is PTP now after I went totally through it last year and added Mercury Magnetic stuff to it,Sozos etc....Just a wonderful amp! Would never part with mine!

Here's a small glimse.....Not totally stock if you look real close! LOL....I disconnected the PI master volume though...

 

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

Re: Marshall JVM

IThe JCM 800 is just lifeless and doesn't take to pedals well....I had the 800 and sold it years ago...

Didn't you say the JCM800 is a close second?

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

Didn't you say the JCM800 is a close second?

For overdriven stuff heck yeah....For clean stuff....I'd rather A/B over to my BF Fender Pro Reverb amp...

That's why I Love the Valvetronix head....Not perfect,but versatile as hell.

 

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

Re: Marshall JVM

Ah, I misunderstood your previous post. Sure, I can see how Marshall clean doesn't compare to Fender clean.

Are there any great amps out there that can compete with Marshall OD and Fender clean, all in one neat box? (Not talking about the Valvetronix series here.)

- Keith

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

Ah, I misunderstood your previous post. Sure, I can see how Marshall clean doesn't compare to Fender clean.

Are there any great amps out there that can compete with Marshall OD and Fender clean, all in one neat box? (Not talking about the Valvetronix series here.)

- Keith

Probably.....I'm sure Mesa has reached that goal with some of their amps these days...The Tremoverb amp I owned did the high gain modern tone thing really well,but it's so called California Fender clean sounds missed the mark with that amp...The cleans were flat,sterile,and lifeless to me...I'm betting they have something in the Stilletto etc..that would get both.

 

[dystrust]

Re: Marshall JVM

I don't run mine wide open and just use some great pedals in front of mine...Sounds absolutely great!....It's not like the Hendrix days where we only had a fuzz box,a wah,and a univibe we could use to our amp....I play my 50 watter on about 4 and it's great...I get great singing sustain,but also a wonderful clean tone w/a verbzilla pedal for reverb....The JCM 800 is just lifeless and doesn't take to pedals well....I had the 800 and sold it years ago...

But I do hear ya brother! Depends on music styles also...I'm a classic rock,blues guy and I don't play with alot of gain...

I play heavy alt-rock and I'm not a big fan of using boost pedals except for leads. If I want a synthetic sounding distortion, I'll use a Big Muff or something similar. Otherwise I like the sound of an amp's natural breakup. This is definitely a case of different styles as the 800 does not work well for the style you're describing.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

I play heavy alt-rock and I'm not a big fan of using boost pedals except for leads. If I want a synthetic sounding distortion, I'll use a Big Muff or something similar. Otherwise I like the sound of an amp's natural breakup. This is definitely a case of different styles as the 800 does not work well for the style you're describing.

I'm not going to agree with you that the sounds coming out of my Marshall even with pedals sounds synthetic! I didn't feel Hendrix's tone was synthetic at all either...LOL...

I don't have to hide behind alot of distortion for my styles and prefer the note articulation and clarity of less gain and yep,it's a style thing for sure...I Like to hear individual notes and not muddy,buzzy,preamp gain mush!

The folks in the audience can't hear the difference between what you call synthetic and natural amp breakup anyway...The key is to be inspired regardless of what you play through with great tone! Very subjective topic actually...I've yet to have another guitar player or anyone else for that matter tell me my tone was synthetic(That's purely an opinion thing):bigok: :biglaugh:

I've got about 20 years on ya and speak from experiences and from both playing since age 13 or so and enough gigs under my belt....For me,I need versatility because my band covers alot of ground,from blues,classic rock,and some newer alternative stuff also...One amp doesn't cover it all in my case,but the Valvetronix head I use gets pretty close...It doesn't really sound synthetic to my ears either!:lol: :biglaugh:

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

I play heavy alt-rock and I'm not a big fan of using boost pedals except for leads. If I want a synthetic sounding distortion, I'll use a Big Muff or something similar. Otherwise I like the sound of an amp's natural breakup. This is definitely a case of different styles as the 800 does not work well for the style you're describing.

I hate the Big Muff sound......That's just terrible and yep,synthetic it is! Funny cause I think Hendrix used a Big Muff before he went Fuzz Face though!

I'm sitting here thinking that just about every one of my favorite guitarists I grew up listening to that used Marshalls,used some kind of effect in front of it....

Jeff Beck,Jimmy Page,Jimi Hendrix,Clapton,even Satriani just w/o making a larger list...These guys all had(and still have)great tone and used pretty primitive pedals by today's standards....

Not a pissing match with ya,but just my feelings on the topic...:beerchug:

 

[dystrust]

Re: Marshall JVM

:foot: In hindsight it seems 'synthetic' was the wrong word to use, excepting the Big Muff of course; and in no way did I intend to imply that your Marshall sounds synthetic. For the music that I play I prefer a cranked MV Marshall over a NMV with a pedal as the MV tends to be more clear and less compressed at similar levels of distortion.

I remember the first time I heard Appetite for Destruction in early '88 and decided that I wanted to be a guitar player. I had been listening to heavy music for a few years by then (I was corrupted at an early age) and I was completely blown away by how much more in your face the sound was compared to the typically polished and processed 80s guitar sound. That initial inspiration is largely responsible for how and what I play to this day, though I'll admit that my tastes have broadened in the last few years. An older friend of mine (he's 45) was inspired by Judas Priest back in the 70s so while we play similar styles, he has a far different idea of what a processed sound is.

As you said in your first reply, "The key is to be inspired regardless of what you play through with great tone!". A typical audience member doesn't know or care what makes your guitar sound like it does. What they do know is whether or not you're inspired to play your best.


I guess this all goes to show that tone is about as subjective as things get.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Marshall JVM

:foot: In hindsight it seems 'synthetic' was the wrong word to use, excepting the Big Muff of course; and in no way did I intend to imply that your Marshall sounds synthetic. For the music that I play I prefer a cranked MV Marshall over a NMV with a pedal as the MV tends to be more clear and less compressed at similar levels of distortion.

I remember the first time I heard Appetite for Destruction in early '88 and decided that I wanted to be a guitar player. I had been listening to heavy music for a few years by then (I was corrupted at an early age) and I was completely blown away by how much more in your face the sound was compared to the typically polished and processed 80s guitar sound. That initial inspiration is largely responsible for how and what I play to this day, though I'll admit that my tastes have broadened in the last few years. An older friend of mine (he's 45) was inspired by Judas Priest back in the 70s so while we play similar styles, he has a far different idea of what a processed sound is.

As you said in your first reply, "The key is to be inspired regardless of what you play through with great tone!". A typical audience member doesn't know or care what makes your guitar sound like it does. What they do know is whether or not you're inspired to play your best.


I guess this all goes to show that tone is about as subjective as things get.

Very cool post and I appreciate the fact that you didn't take my posting the wrong way or anything.I used to love my 50 watt 800 series amp when I could get the master volume up past 3,but I always found it's cleaner tones to be very dry and sterile sounding....My own Marshall is just incredible,in that it's got these great overtones,a nice clean tone,clear,loud,and articulate...The MM transformer and choke really helped alot,as did the Sozo caps and all the changes I Made in my amp...Everything just seemed to come together very nicely with it...I miss my JCM 800 at times also...It had that honk in the mids that I Liked alot..

One thing we both know and would agree on,is that when we sound great,we play better(sometimes above our normal)...Thanks for posting and also for being so very cool about it!

Think about how cool Jimmy Page's tones were on just the 1st Zeppelin album....Just a Supro amp,Tele,and maybe either a Treble Booster or the Sola Sound Fuzz..Or Jeff Beck with his RAT into a Marshall and another Sola pedal user...Can't leave out Jimi's tones through his Marshalls....You got the point though..:biglaugh:

 

[BloodRose]

Re: Marshall JVM

this has been a good read! I played a VM and the JVM again today.. Oddly the VM didnt sound good to me at all today.. The JVM really impressed me today.
Was plugged into a 1960 cab and was really singing. Since reading the reviews, I learned there were 3 diff modes for each channel button so I was able to find about 8 tones that REALLY rocked me! I Like it!! My fear is that all those buttons will fail early on. At least with the Mesas, there are hard switches that can be replaced. I worry about the digital push button stuff. I bought one of those Dan donegan digitech pedals and the switch got iffy REALLY fast..

 

[BloodRose]

Re: Marshall JVM

You wacky people need to use the search function. Check out this thread as well.

- Keith

Actually, I did search before starting this post because I figured it was already discussed and I didnt come up with anything. (must have done something wrong, but I tried) Thanks