Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by Cheap guitar guy, May 30, 2019.
Haha.... I don't know. I guess. All I know is that both of them roared.
I can't personally comment on the various 800 models. I had the early 2204 800 as my gig amp for some years, and it was killer. I did have a Dual Reverb 900 later on, worked with it, did a few gigs, but I never bonded with it like my early 800. Did diodes have something to do with it? Beats me. I just didn't like it as much, although some do love them. Each to his own...
Let's get real for a moment: things like "tube vs. digital vs. solid state analog", NOS tubes, tonewood, name brands of capacitors, etc. are far more important to guys sitting in their bedrooms who will never play out than they are to actual gigging musicians who don't have the time to sit around and obsess over these things. A high-dollar vintage Marshall Bluesbreaker combo might sound better to you in your house than a digital emulation of the same amp, side-by-side, but take that Bluesbreaker into a nightclub where you're playing in a band with 4 other guys, 200 people in the room, a questionable sound guy between your amp and the P.A. system, and voila.... the Katana emulation of your amp sounds and reacts just as good, and you're not taking a high-dollar amp into a smoky nightclub. It has nothing to do with "settling for almost good enough"; it has to do with being realistic.
Oh, the JCM 900. I had two of those, both were heads/half stacks. The single-channel JCM900 sounded awesome, which I sold like an idiot. Later I bought a High-Gain Dual Reverb two-channel amp, and it was lacking... everything. I don't know why it was called "high gain"; it had less than my other 900 and less than one of my 800's. Someone once told me that when they added that second channel, they sacrificed some of the gain. I don't know if that's really what happened, though.
There were three different JCM 900s.
The MkIII - maybe the best one
SL-X - arguably the 2nd best
The MkIII and SL-X are generally well regarded. They're not the "problem" 900. That one is the Dual Reverb. But in reality, it's probably the most popular rented backline Marshall head on earth and tons of dudes have no problem sounding great with one.
How can that be? Some guy on the web said they suck and it was repeated 3.7 million times, so it must be true.
On a serious note did they do a 50w 1x12 Mk3 Combo and do you happen to know the model number?
I plugged into one at a shop years ago. Glorious fat, shimmering cleans to beautiful breakup. went home to ponder and grab triad bait. Went back 2 days later and it was gone. Still haunts me.
It's not my favorite amp, but I see them used about a billion times and they sound great in capable hands.
SLX is my fav...responds old school & modern. Today a VM 2266 recorded very well. Nothing like dimed amps for tone into 4x12's all day
I'm not sure. I doubt it would have been a 1x12, but maybe a 2x12. It would have been named 250-something. Maybe 2501? 2505? The 50w heads were 2500.
Just googled it - 2501. 50w MkIII 1x12 combo.
I had both 50w and 100w MKIII heads at different times.
And why has it not been moved to Amp Central Station?
Because you don't put the toilet in the living room, that's why!
Thanks I don’t know Marshall enough to decipher the models.
Marshall's model numbers make less sense than.....well, anything. It takes some real in depth nerdery to really get to know Marshall's numbering system. I'm about 75% fluent in Marshall model numbers.
I stayed out of this until now.
It *appears* that most have now understood the OP's poorly-stated original question/comment. I do not know if he did not understand the technical differences between "solid state" and "digital" but hopefully - by now - realizes that while both are "non-tube" they are NOT in the same category
If you look at my age- yeah, I'm a friggin' old guy that grew up with tube amps and - as both a player and tech - managed to experience the WORST solid state amps the market had to offer (or at least some had to be close!).
And discrete analog solid state is still a poor platform for reproduction of guitar amp tones. Even clean tones.
It takes some level of "digital intervention"/modeling to hit the tonal targets most experienced players are looking for.
So I am *still* a tube amp guy - BUT I've played Class D bass amplifiers for years, that generally combine some digital preamp circuitry with class D power amps for a wide frequency range with tremendous headroom. Are they also good guitar amps?
Errr - no. Decent for clean pedal steel, but lack the warmth and breakup for 6-string, and have generally very harsh high end tones.
AND I own an Atomic Amplifire - a very intriguing, somewhat less expensive digital emulation system like the Kemper and Fractal Audio units. These devices can put some stunning sounds onto a studio track - or even onto a live stage.
But they take a HUGE amount of research, reading, and programming on a good computer system by someone who understands not just "amplifiers" - but all the add-ons and how THEIR individual parameters affect every other one in the "amp" signal chain...plus speakers, PLUS cabinets, PLUS how to mic them. ALL of this to "fine tune" EACH preset.
Which means you really need to understand live sound support and studio operations as well!
And after the purchase price, plug in purchases, purchase of a quality FFR (flat response, powered speaker system that doesn't foul the final result - especially "output stage saturation" and "speaker response, sensitivity and breakup" emulation) what is the target you're trying to achieve for each preset?
99% of the time - it's the sound of a particular tube amp!
Now, granted - the cool thing is that you can - with the right programming, add-ons and a LOT of work - "sort of" own dozens of different amps. THAT's the kicker. THAT is what "digital" has to offer - not the same emulation as a Line 6 POD version 8 zillion (which still can't cleanup a distorted guitar by rolling back the volume).
But trust me when I say it takes a HUGE amount of work, and not a small investment.
So I generally play through my Hollands and blonde Fenders, and experiment with the Atomic unit. I may not figure it completely out before my skills degrade too much from age for it to be of much use!
Just offering a little perspective - if you don't take the learning curve into account you will be frustrated beyond all comprehension!
McDonald's is the most popular hamburger on earth, too. I can't say I've never eaten there, but given the option I'd prefer something else.
Of course, but that doesn't mean you can't eat it.
This gets my vote for post of the week.
I don't have a preference either way as I use the Kemper in the studio and my amps for live performances. I have to say though that the Kemper saves a lot of hassle in the studio.
I put these clips together to demonstrate a comparison between the captured Kemper profile of my live rig and the actual tone using an SM57, MI Audio effects and a Marshall JCM2000 TSL. I thought that this demo might be of interest in light of this particular thread's discussion topic.
I’ve been using this rig live for a number of years and always wanted to capture it’s tone and character to make life easier in the studio.