NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

[blind1]

Just picked up my dream amp recently for a pretty good deal. Marshall JVM 410h.

Awesome Marshall goodness in every aspect. It is heavy for a head!!! I've removed two overdrives and a booster from my pedal board since getting the amp because its versatility meets all of my needs. I've been eyeing one of these for a few months now.. glad to have one!

Question for fellow JVM users: do you prefer using a multi fx pedal with midi controls? If so, what do you use and what is your opinion of it?

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

I use pedals. Lots and lots of pedals.

 

[Gone_Shootin]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Congrats, crank it!

And I used to use my old Boss VF-1 and Roland MIDI controller with it. But these days I just use the amp by it's self. Maybe I'll throw a drive in front of it occasionally, but that's about it. My Helix and poweramp setup have taken over as my main rig.

 

[B2D]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

I recently sold my 100W JVM210H... I plan on re-buying the 50W version.

I like the supplied foot controller but it's definitely a tap-dance getting some patches/channels changed. On my next pedalboard rebuild I'll likely use a MIDI pedal to control channel changes and delay/mod pedal changes OR get something like a MusicomLab switcher for it all.

The JVM series is definitely my favorite 'out of the box' modern Marshall.

 

[Sirion]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Congrats! I have a 205 combo, and I'm really happy with it. The 2-channel version works well for me, but the 4-channel one should definitely have all the Marshall tones you'll be likely to need. I, too, have ditched all gain pedals: whilst I am sure you could crank some more tonal nuances out of it, it just has more gain than I could ever need (I never go as far as noon on the orange overdrive). I might get a head version myself at some point.

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

How do these JVMs sound?

 

[Sirion]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

They are basically every Marshall rolled into one. Somewhat modern sounding, so you might not get a plexi 100% (it is possible to mod it to get closer), but if you need a one-size-fits-all Marshall, this is the one to get in my opinion. It has enough gain that you don't need any extra pedals for it.

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Gain is a vector quantity. In the metaphysical sense.

 

[Van Noord]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Love my 210H.
OD Orange is heavily.
Run the Master higher than the Channel...

 

[B2D]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

They are basically every Marshall rolled into one. Somewhat modern sounding, so you might not get a plexi 100% (it is possible to mod it to get closer), but if you need a one-size-fits-all Marshall, this is the one to get in my opinion. It has enough gain that you don't need any extra pedals for it.

Pretty much. If you need a do-it-all Marshall, this is the one to get. It can be improved with some subtle tweaks but out of the box its a pretty damn good amp.

 

[Adieu]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Gotta love it when brands don't respect their own field's naming conventions.

410 is supposed to mean 4x10" speaker combo or 4x10" cab, what the hell Marshall??

 

[Sirion]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

10" speakers are rare enough that I don't think anybody is going to be seriously confused by that

 

[Adieu]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Lol i was... I'm like whoa dude a 4x10 Marshall, wait what that ain't no 4x10

It's still obnoxious. Like if Fender issued something called an HSH Strat, and sold it with 3 single coils because they said it stood for Her Stratty Highness or something...

 

[Sirion]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Well, for future reference:

410H: Head, 4 channels, 100 watts
205C: Combo, 2 channels, 50 watts

That should cover most eventualities in JVM land. The one entry in the series that IS a little confusing is 215C, which is a 2-channel, 50 watt combo with one speaker, as opposed to two, which is found in all the other combos.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Well, for future reference:

410H: Head, 4 channels, 100 watts
205C: Combo, 2 channels, 50 watts

That should cover most eventualities in JVM land. The one entry in the series that IS a little confusing is 215C, which is a 2-channel, 50 watt combo with one speaker, as opposed to two, which is found in all the other combos.

Don’t forget the:
210H-100w-2 channel head

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Where’s the 405H? C’mon Marshall....

But seriously, does it really do the best of JCM800 - DSL2000? (It seems the JTM and Plexi sounds need some help. The Clean Green is pretty good for a Marshall though.) With all the presets you can save, it’s too bad the knob positions can’t be saved as well. Being able to access the Green/Orange/Red mode of each channel is cool, I’m sure my desired EQ settings for Clean Green and Clean Orange wouldn’t be the same.

 

[Van Noord]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

I can get a more satisfying JCM800 tone out of my 210H than I could out of my JCM 800KK Lol!

 

[Sirion]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Don’t forget the:
210H-100w-2 channel head

Yes, I just gave the extremes, so that the remaining models should be easy to extrapolate.

 

[Sirion]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

Where’s the 405H? C’mon Marshall....

But seriously, does it really do the best of JCM800 - DSL2000? (It seems the JTM and Plexi sounds need some help. The Clean Green is pretty good for a Marshall though.) With all the presets you can save, it’s too bad the knob positions can’t be saved as well. Being able to access the Green/Orange/Red mode of each channel is cool, I’m sure my desired EQ settings for Clean Green and Clean Orange wouldn’t be the same.

I agree. Unfortunately, at some point during the 90s people decided that we couldn't have good things and went away from rack designs. I think it is possible to use both clean green and either orange or red by dialing in the green first, and then using the master volume (which is out of the equation with the green) to put the higher-gain channel at the same volume level. Still won't help with the EQ, though. I guess having a programmable parametric EQ or the like could help, but that adds a lot of complexity you might want to avoid.

 

[dystrust]

Re: NAD: Marshall JVM 410h

I agree. Unfortunately, at some point during the 90s people decided that we couldn't have good things and went away from rack designs.

As someone that's owned a few heads and rack systems, I think racks fell out of favor for a few reasons. The biggest may be barrier to entry; it was extremely expensive to build anything resembling a professional rack system and that was before taking backups into account. Rack systems tend to be large and heavy, and they're typically rather impractical to move from one place to another. They can also be difficult to program or troubleshoot if you're not technically minded. Another factor is that general tonal tastes changed between the mid/late 80s and the 90s with a shift toward less processed tones that racks tend to not do so well. That was my #1 complaint with all of my rack systems; as great as the processed tones were, the dry ones never compared to my favorite heads. These days if you want tones like the rack systems of yore, the best bet is something like an AxeFx or Kemper as they don't really make high end rack preamps anymore.