ksmith63
New member
Re: Marshall Petition
i'd buy one of those monsters. or how about a dave navarro sig. head....
i'd buy one of those monsters. or how about a dave navarro sig. head....
T
TheArchitect
Guest
Re: Marshall Petition
I would be glad to see it go. No low end and way too much treble for my taste
A petition for Marshall to make quality amps again with some real quality control is something I could get behind
I would be glad to see it go. No low end and way too much treble for my taste
A petition for Marshall to make quality amps again with some real quality control is something I could get behind
T
TheArchitect
Guest
Dr.Mavashi
neonderthalotonalogist
Re: Marshall Petition
Yep that was my experience, I just could not shape anything out of it .... maybe it was because I used a Digitech 21/20 multi effect processor in front of it, I hated in the loop, it was a nightmare to do the whole thing where you had the wires in between the EFX loop and the front end going into 21/20, if I would get decent rythm tone I would not able to cut through on the leads if I had good lead it would such as rythm, when I programed 4 seperate patches I did not like any of them than I pushed with TS it just turned into such a noise busket, of course it was not moded by Spina yet. I dont know ... in the end I just sold them both.
Toner
New member
Re: Marshall Petition
I had a TSL100 head, and it sounded good to me, until I was playing up against my other guitarists Soldano SLO-100, the marshall sounded grainy harsh and lifeless, the tubes were newer and don't say I set the amp wrong, a TSL/DSL can not compete with an SLO unless it's modded, I picked up a KRANK and it's on par with the SLO, I get cleaner bass response over the SLO though! and I had woofy/chubby sloppy bass response with the marshall
To each his own though, buy your DSL and hold on to it and dont worry about marshall, the amount of $$$ they dish out for their research and production, they won't change their minds.
(side note, I love being able to call KRANK and talk straight up with Tony Krank about my amp/mods/tubes). Go call up JIM MARSHALL.
I had a TSL100 head, and it sounded good to me, until I was playing up against my other guitarists Soldano SLO-100, the marshall sounded grainy harsh and lifeless, the tubes were newer and don't say I set the amp wrong, a TSL/DSL can not compete with an SLO unless it's modded, I picked up a KRANK and it's on par with the SLO, I get cleaner bass response over the SLO though! and I had woofy/chubby sloppy bass response with the marshall
To each his own though, buy your DSL and hold on to it and dont worry about marshall, the amount of $$$ they dish out for their research and production, they won't change their minds.
(side note, I love being able to call KRANK and talk straight up with Tony Krank about my amp/mods/tubes). Go call up JIM MARSHALL.
S
shogunlegend
Guest
Re: Marshall Petition
man, i was really wanting one of those revolution combos but i couldn't put together $1,800 for one. how versatile are krank amps though? i love the tone in shadows fall and i know they use krank amps. i don't know of anyone else besides metal bands who use krank amps though
man, i was really wanting one of those revolution combos but i couldn't put together $1,800 for one. how versatile are krank amps though? i love the tone in shadows fall and i know they use krank amps. i don't know of anyone else besides metal bands who use krank amps though
nightwing122087
New member
Re: Marshall Petition
I'm so relieved to hear you guys say some of these things about the 2000. I'm not saying its the worse amp I've ever played, but I thought I was the only one who didn't like them. I have a few friends, and know a few other guitar players who have them. I used to practice at an hourly rehearsal studio that had the 2000's and I hated them. The other guy said it best when he said that it sounded "lifeless". It almost had a solid-state quality and didn't sound very "tubey" to me. And on top of that..it just didn't sound like a Marshall. I think a lot of people who buy them (at least the younger generation like me , guys around 20) buy them because of the name, "Marshall". I thought I was the only one to think this of these amps.
I'm so relieved to hear you guys say some of these things about the 2000. I'm not saying its the worse amp I've ever played, but I thought I was the only one who didn't like them. I have a few friends, and know a few other guitar players who have them. I used to practice at an hourly rehearsal studio that had the 2000's and I hated them. The other guy said it best when he said that it sounded "lifeless". It almost had a solid-state quality and didn't sound very "tubey" to me. And on top of that..it just didn't sound like a Marshall. I think a lot of people who buy them (at least the younger generation like me , guys around 20) buy them because of the name, "Marshall". I thought I was the only one to think this of these amps.
Robert S.
Super Moderator
Re: Marshall Petition
I have no beef with the 2000 line and I have heard them sound pretty good on several occasions. A couple of years ago I played in a band with a guy that had a DSL and while I liked his tone, he reallt liked the tone from my 1984 2203 better.
Currently I have my 1984 2203 here at the house and my other guitar players 1969 100 watt Plexi as well. They are both killer sounding amps and I wouldn't trade either of them for a DSL. Maybe it's just me but the more knobs you stick on a Marshall the more you mess up the tone. Hopefully for the guys looking at the VMs this is no longer the case.
I have no beef with the 2000 line and I have heard them sound pretty good on several occasions. A couple of years ago I played in a band with a guy that had a DSL and while I liked his tone, he reallt liked the tone from my 1984 2203 better.
Currently I have my 1984 2203 here at the house and my other guitar players 1969 100 watt Plexi as well. They are both killer sounding amps and I wouldn't trade either of them for a DSL. Maybe it's just me but the more knobs you stick on a Marshall the more you mess up the tone. Hopefully for the guys looking at the VMs this is no longer the case.
sosomething
Seymour Duncan Customer Support
Re: Marshall Petition
The VMs are pretty straight-forward though, aren't they Robert? I'd be interested in trying one of those to see how "Marshally" they can get.
The JVM is a knob-festooned beast, though.
After wresting with the feature-laden monstrosity that is the Road King, I'm understandably a little cagey when it comes to super-duper-versatile 9-channel amplifiers. Give me one or two good sounds and I'll take care of the rest, thanks.
The VMs are pretty straight-forward though, aren't they Robert? I'd be interested in trying one of those to see how "Marshally" they can get.
The JVM is a knob-festooned beast, though.
After wresting with the feature-laden monstrosity that is the Road King, I'm understandably a little cagey when it comes to super-duper-versatile 9-channel amplifiers. Give me one or two good sounds and I'll take care of the rest, thanks.
Mr 9finger
Digitally Challenged
Re: Marshall Petition
I've got a better idea for a petition. Howz about a petition for them to stop producing crap and get back to making real amps. The JVM is cool if you like having a 50 knobs on your amp and the Vintage Modern is/was a great idea if they didn't sound like poo and had better quality control. You know it's bad when you have 2 different guitar centers pissing and moaning about returns due to malfunctions.
IMO, Marshall may be in trouble if they don't straighten their act up soon. You can only ride on a name so long w/ out any solid backing. When you got a lot of other makers out there boutique or otherwise doing your signature tone a lot better than you do for less and better quality. You've got a major problem.
I've got a better idea for a petition. Howz about a petition for them to stop producing crap and get back to making real amps. The JVM is cool if you like having a 50 knobs on your amp and the Vintage Modern is/was a great idea if they didn't sound like poo and had better quality control. You know it's bad when you have 2 different guitar centers pissing and moaning about returns due to malfunctions.
IMO, Marshall may be in trouble if they don't straighten their act up soon. You can only ride on a name so long w/ out any solid backing. When you got a lot of other makers out there boutique or otherwise doing your signature tone a lot better than you do for less and better quality. You've got a major problem.
JohnnyGuitar
New member
Re: Marshall Petition
I rather see them make a more affordable Plexi reissue. Doesn't have to be dirt cheap but a basic 40w amp could be really cool.
I rather see them make a more affordable Plexi reissue. Doesn't have to be dirt cheap but a basic 40w amp could be really cool.
Hot _Grits
Buttery Toneologist
Re: Marshall Petition
Well, the supersonic was a replacement for the prosonic, and the express is basically a 'new and improved' successor to the F30/50. So that's basically like Marshall shelving older non-reissue designs and moving on, isn't it?
A more accurate analogy would be fender's reissuing of the tweed blues deville and deluxe amps. There's your precedent.
as for the DSL100, well where I live a new one of those is not significantly less expensive than a splawn. And judging by the amount of secondhand ones about, if I somehow decide to get interested in a DSL, I should be able to pick one up.
Well, the supersonic was a replacement for the prosonic, and the express is basically a 'new and improved' successor to the F30/50. So that's basically like Marshall shelving older non-reissue designs and moving on, isn't it?
A more accurate analogy would be fender's reissuing of the tweed blues deville and deluxe amps. There's your precedent.
as for the DSL100, well where I live a new one of those is not significantly less expensive than a splawn. And judging by the amount of secondhand ones about, if I somehow decide to get interested in a DSL, I should be able to pick one up.
jmh151
Active member
Re: Marshall Petition
The problem is when you walk into a Guitar Center or Sam Ash, or any major store, you see Marshall, Mesa, Fender, Crate, Peavey. You don't see Splawn, Bogner, Engle or the other boutique builders. As long as Marshalls are in stores and people have to choose between the 5 mentioned above, people will still buy Marshall.
I had a JCM 2000 401 and hated it. Traded it in towards a JCM800 combo and never regret it. The JCM2000 DSL and TSL series sounded too much like my old Marshall Valvestate VS100- they all sounded flat and lifeless.
Meanwhile Orange is making some killer amps if you want old Marshall tone- but they're hard to find in stores.
Basically if you want killer high gain, you have Mesa or Peavey. Marshall is now focusing on their classic tone rather than trying to compete for the Mesa/Peavey crowd.
The problem is when you walk into a Guitar Center or Sam Ash, or any major store, you see Marshall, Mesa, Fender, Crate, Peavey. You don't see Splawn, Bogner, Engle or the other boutique builders. As long as Marshalls are in stores and people have to choose between the 5 mentioned above, people will still buy Marshall.
I had a JCM 2000 401 and hated it. Traded it in towards a JCM800 combo and never regret it. The JCM2000 DSL and TSL series sounded too much like my old Marshall Valvestate VS100- they all sounded flat and lifeless.
Meanwhile Orange is making some killer amps if you want old Marshall tone- but they're hard to find in stores.
Basically if you want killer high gain, you have Mesa or Peavey. Marshall is now focusing on their classic tone rather than trying to compete for the Mesa/Peavey crowd.
Hot _Grits
Buttery Toneologist
Re: Marshall Petition
Better quality PCBs, transformers and chassis mounted pots would go a long way...
Better quality PCBs, transformers and chassis mounted pots would go a long way...
Hot _Grits
Buttery Toneologist
Re: Marshall Petition
As a rule, the more knobs you put on ANY amp, the worse it sounds.
As a rule, the more knobs you put on ANY amp, the worse it sounds.
barbarianbrute
New member
Re: Marshall Petition
i've heard people talk about the plexis and 800s compared to this amp, but i must say that the dsl does get a good range of sounds and sounds great. marshall had this to say about the dsl in the owners manual:
"The Marshall 1959 Super Lead Plexi head and the JCM 800 Master Volume 2203 are recognised the world over as
benchmarks in tone, feel, musical power and sheer size of sound. Imagine then, an amp which is like two footswitchable
1959 Super Leads in one, with the addition of reverb plus extra gain to take you into 2203 territory and beyond. If this
sounds like a dream, it is no longer - now that the JCM 2000 Dual Super Lead range is here."
so apparently they combined the best of marshall amps to come up with the dsl. also, it seems that the new jvm is supposed to be a replacement for the dsl/tsl series and do even more than that while sounding better. it does sound great
i've heard people talk about the plexis and 800s compared to this amp, but i must say that the dsl does get a good range of sounds and sounds great. marshall had this to say about the dsl in the owners manual:
"The Marshall 1959 Super Lead Plexi head and the JCM 800 Master Volume 2203 are recognised the world over as
benchmarks in tone, feel, musical power and sheer size of sound. Imagine then, an amp which is like two footswitchable
1959 Super Leads in one, with the addition of reverb plus extra gain to take you into 2203 territory and beyond. If this
sounds like a dream, it is no longer - now that the JCM 2000 Dual Super Lead range is here."
so apparently they combined the best of marshall amps to come up with the dsl. also, it seems that the new jvm is supposed to be a replacement for the dsl/tsl series and do even more than that while sounding better. it does sound great
JeffB
Let it B
Re: Marshall Petition
+1, and I think/feel thats where they are heading with the VM and even the JVM to a certain extent.
IN thier defense, D/TSL are unmercifully dependant on good speakers for "good" marshall tone, and standard 75s and v30s are not what I'm talking about. H30s, GBs, and the like go a long way to making them much more palatable.
And they really need a good low powered small all tube combo ala the DSL201 in the lineup (without the reliability issues).
+1, and I think/feel thats where they are heading with the VM and even the JVM to a certain extent.
IN thier defense, D/TSL are unmercifully dependant on good speakers for "good" marshall tone, and standard 75s and v30s are not what I'm talking about. H30s, GBs, and the like go a long way to making them much more palatable.
And they really need a good low powered small all tube combo ala the DSL201 in the lineup (without the reliability issues).
Axl H
Blowthebloodydoorsoffologist
Hot _Grits
Buttery Toneologist
Re: Marshall Petition
How?
In the case of the JVM (and ato a lesser extent the DSL), how on earth do you take a plexi, make it with lower quality components, push it through a bunch of other circuitry and then add a totally respecced OT and expect it to sounds as good? -I'm afraid to say that's impossible.
How?
In the case of the JVM (and ato a lesser extent the DSL), how on earth do you take a plexi, make it with lower quality components, push it through a bunch of other circuitry and then add a totally respecced OT and expect it to sounds as good? -I'm afraid to say that's impossible.
