I'll chime in here. First off, tubes are made nowhere near as well as they used to be. Marshall nowadays cuts corners on their newer designs. There's no debating that, as the price of a DSL is just too low for the transformers and filter caps (and manufacturing process) to be the same quality as vintage Marshalls. Open your Beloved DSL up for proof; take a look at the brands and see 1) where they're made and 2) what price they sell for. You WILL be disappointed.
Correct, but cheap parts weaken and break before better made ones will. Don't argue that. Your PCB will likely be just fine. I really doubt anyone could even tell the difference between two amps made with identical parts, where one has PTP and one has PCB. However, nobody is going to put lousy parts if they're wiring it PTP, hence PCB can get a bad name.
There's nothing digital about a TS9, OD808, OCD, etc. I'd bet money that given the same speaker cab and mic setup, I can make an old Marshall with a pedal sound and play far better than a DSL.
The MG is a Marshall too; does that sound good? The only thing that matters is tone, and the fact is that the biggest similarity between a 1959 SLP and DSL100 is the appearance. Parts, manufacturing, design, and purpose are all different, and if you spent 6 months with something like a 2203 and a pedal, you'd probably have a hard time going back to your DSL.
which has absolutely nothing to do with Marshall.....you need the same Valves us DSL users need
i have been all over my amp modding it to my personal needs.....yes some parts were better then.....some are better today
Was just an example. I was thinking of acknowledging that it has nothing to do with Marshall but didn't bother. You're right though.
I'm sure you're right about them cutting corners back then too. It is my belief that they're cutting more corners now - for more important parts (transformers) - than they were in the past. Caps? Depends which ones I guess. Filter caps, sure; not positive about signal caps.
I don't own a vintage Marshall now, but I did have a 2203 for a while. Don't know what replacement parts would cost because I never had to fix it. Your DSL probably sounds better than a stock version, and it's the subtle differences that we're talking about here anyway. The average listener will probably not know the difference between a DSL and 2203 on a recording, but they're still there. I think a 2203 is flat out better for any style (assuming a boost is available) than a stock DSL, and since I own neither, I'd consider myself less biased in this argument. As I've said before though, if it makes you happy as a player and listener, that's far better than many guitarists can say and trumps any argument against your gear IMO.
Your DSL sounds awesome. I wonder how much of a difference the MM transformer and mods have to do with it; I know the trannies aren't cheap upgrades. Still, if a stock DSL sounded like yours, I might own one.
I'm impressed! The DSL I tried wasn't anything like that.
Don't know how much of my words I'm eating, but that DSL and your playing are very nice indeed! How noticeable was the transformer swap?
40 Watts, still loud enough for most venues I play. But when I get the chance, it's the 100 that comes with me.+1...it seems a lot of people expect to much from the tranny swap....while it does add some low end (a tighter low end) it does not change the amps voicing
