Marshall Jcm 800

[GibsonSlash]

No, it's not mine.
Just found the pic online to show what a vert. inputs JCM800 look like.

@ GibsonSlash: I meant the pic of the JCM 800 w/ vert. inputs

 

[Ken]

Mercury Magnetics

Granted these people have an ax to grind, but they have a rather detailed explaination of how transformers work, what deteriotes with age, and of course why you should by their new transformers! LOL

But it's a good read, and it supports my contention that old amps get worse and worse as they age. This is NOT to say old Marshalls are bad, but rather the compoents need maintanence from time to time to keep them sounding as good as they are. New caps, new tubes, new resistors and of course new transformers are all a good idea when age starts bringing your amp out of spec. I had a nice rant about how only collectors should spend many thousands on old amps, because a new clone amp will always be better as far as the sound goes. I stand behind that contention.

Ken

 

[Chadman]

Just to stick up for the re-issue's here, I have one (2203) and I play loud and heavy music....I've had it for almost a year and it makes my balls flap evey time I go for the big "E"!!! (I'd like to put 6550's in it for even more BOOM!)

 

[Doomhawk]

Mercury Magnetics

Granted these people have an ax to grind, but they have a rather detailed explaination of how transformers work, what deteriotes with age, and of course why you should by their new transformers! LOL

But it's a good read, and it supports my contention that old amps get worse and worse as they age. This is NOT to say old Marshalls are bad, but rather the compoents need maintanence from time to time to keep them sounding as good as they are. New caps, new tubes, new resistors and of course new transformers are all a good idea when age starts bringing your amp out of spec. I had a nice rant about how only collectors should spend many thousands on old amps, because a new clone amp will always be better as far as the sound goes. I stand behind that contention.

Ken

so basically your saying you would rather buy a new, COPY, of a - going to be a piece of shit amp - then the REAL amp thats already a piece of shit? hahaha just kidding, but... the components they use to build amps today aren't made any better then they were 40 years ago. actually they are made from materials that will last probably, and sadly, much less. so you'll be doing upkeep on your amp anyway, right? so i guess for me when it comes time to do work on my amps - i would rather invest the money in a vintage marshall head, instead of a clone that may or may not hold its value in a couple years.

as far as a newer clone or reissue always sounding better... if i plugged into my 75 JMP 1987 and then into a newer 1987 model or a clone of that amp built by WHO EVEN KNOWS - because alot of these small amp companies just send out the amp kits to be built by some dude in his basement. - im willing to bet mine sounds better.

 

[Ken]

so basically your saying you would rather buy a new, COPY, of a - going to be a piece of shit amp - then the REAL amp thats already a piece of shit? hahaha just kidding, but... the components they use to build amps today aren't made any better then they were 40 years ago. actually they are made from materials that will last probably, and sadly, much less. so you'll be doing upkeep on your amp anyway, right? so i guess for me when it comes time to do work on my amps - i would rather invest the money in a vintage marshall head, instead of a clone that may or may not hold its value in a couple years.

as far as a newer clone or reissue always sounding better... if i plugged into my 75 JMP 1987 and then into a newer 1987 model or a clone of that amp built by WHO EVEN KNOWS - because alot of these small amp companies just send out the amp kits to be built by some dude in his basement. - im willing to bet mine sounds better.

Oh I'd take a real Marshall over a clone, all things being equal! That's history and art all in one. But who has $5000?? Or whatever...

A clone WILL sound better and cost $1000 IF assembled by a reasonably experienced person. I'd take that bet! Yet I agree: who knows what you get on eBay as far as who built it, what skills they had, etc. but I'm talking theory, not practice. Yes, a clone will also will need upkeep over the years as well...and if it's stolen it's replaceable!

I can't say if modern components are better. A techie might know what the tolerence on the original ones are: 10%? 5% on resistors and capacitors? I know modern transformers will be better if you pony up the money because no one used top shelf stuff back then. They wanted to keep the cost down. Remember, Marshall was a new company with a unique product, selling everything they made easily, so they didn't feel the need to use top flight parts. A clone can be made today with better parts and WILL SOUND BETTER! I know that's upsetting to some...

Ken

 

[steelhorse]

in your opinion....

 

[Doomhawk]

all the marshalls i own right now cost me less than 700 bucks a piece (all bought in the last 3 years). i haven't seen a new clone for that money. and this 1000 dollar clone you speak of, made buy a quality amp builder, who knows what he's doing, with all the best parts available. it won't sound BETTER!!!! just different.

 

[Unknown3]

What's this talk about guys building amps in basements? Are you talking about privately-built amps or amps built by small companies that are based on already-existing popular amps?

 

[Doomhawk]

this doesn't apply to all companies, but there are a few semi-popular - but small - amp companies, that i know of, that don't build their own amps. they have one, two, maybe even a small team of techs/builders spread around the county that actually build the amps they design. some of them good accomplished amp builders, others maybe not at the same level. other times the company's name sticks around on amps after the original builder/creator/designer leaves. while the company may continue to make amps under the name with the same look, they are not to the same quality as before.

same thing goes for some, not all, cabinet builders - they start off inhouse until they get enough work to send to bigger shops to fill the orders more promptly.

its just business growth. which is great. but that can be where the quality falls off too. if they go through the wrong shop for a time. thats where you see the inconsistence in the product. some amps/cabs turn out great with no problems, others may leave to the costumer before fully tested/fixed if needed. no one cares about your product as much as you do. once its out of your hands...

 

[stax]

Mercury Magnetics

Granted these people have an ax to grind, but they have a rather detailed explaination of how transformers work, what deteriotes with age, and of course why you should by their new transformers! LOL

But it's a good read, and it supports my contention that old amps get worse and worse as they age. This is NOT to say old Marshalls are bad, but rather the compoents need maintanence from time to time to keep them sounding as good as they are. New caps, new tubes, new resistors and of course new transformers are all a good idea when age starts bringing your amp out of spec. I had a nice rant about how only collectors should spend many thousands on old amps, because a new clone amp will always be better as far as the sound goes. I stand behind that contention.

Ken

Tell that to my 1965 Princeton Reverb or my 1962 Tweed Champ!

I have to respectfully disagree, a new clone will not always be or sound better than the original, I say this from many angles including first hand knowleage. Part of the great sound comes from electrons flowing through the componates (caps, resisters, etc.) over decades of use. Many of the componates used were built to miliatary spec's and with regular use will last a life time. It's when it's not used that the gel in the caps start to dry, etc. Trannies don't just wear out like that, if they did, why are so many old original Fenders, Marshall's, Gibsons, Ampeg's, etc. et al. still alive?

I personally have never heard a clone sound better than an original, it might have happened, but not to me and I can promise you that no one is getting better componates than those used in the 50's to 70's (and just try and tell me your JJ's or Groove Tubes are better than original Mullards, Bugle Boys, GE's, etc) mustard caps anyone? My best friend owns an incredible collection of old amps, from Bassman's to Plexi's, many still have all or most of the original componates.

If you like your clones Ken, that is great. You are correct that for some it's a better deal than spending big dough on originals, but originals are big dough for a reason!

 

[stax]

P.S. JCM 800's are great amps, all of them. You are correct that the T is 1985 and it should be followed by numbers.

Here's a linky: http://www.korgnorthwest.com/DATING MARSHALL PRODUCTS.htm

 

[danielNoble]

thanks

amp arrives tommorow, ill post pictures as soon as it comes and ill record some clips

 

[Ken]

Tell that to my 1965 Princeton Reverb or my 1962 Tweed Champ!

I have to respectfully disagree, a new clone will not always be or sound better than the original, I say this from many angles including first hand knowleage. Part of the great sound comes from electrons flowing through the componates (caps, resisters, etc.) over decades of use. Many of the componates used were built to miliatary spec's and with regular use will last a life time. It's when it's not used that the gel in the caps start to dry, etc. Trannies don't just wear out like that, if they did, why are so many old original Fenders, Marshall's, Gibsons, Ampeg's, etc. et al. still alive?

I personally have never heard a clone sound better than an original, it might have happened, but not to me and I can promise you that no one is getting better componates than those used in the 50's to 70's (and just try and tell me your JJ's or Groove Tubes are better than original Mullards, Bugle Boys, GE's, etc) mustard caps anyone? My best friend owns an incredible collection of old amps, from Bassman's to Plexi's, many still have all or most of the original componates.

If you like your clones Ken, that is great. You are correct that for some it's a better deal than spending big dough on originals, but originals are big dough for a reason!

Let me clarify a few things. First, I don't own any clones and have no plans on buying any.

The point of old amps deteriorating is based on the fact that some compontents can go out of spec with age. This is not to say they will be so out of spec an old amp will sound bad; many sound wonderful. But...transformers in particular DO DEGRADE, yet that doesn't mean the amp still doesn't sound great. A 40 year old amp with all componets in spec will sound great if it's a great amp to begin with.

BUT...an amp made with modern components of the highest quality with the exact same circuit design, and assembled by someone who knows how to solder etc. will have superior components to the original. Manufacturers cut corners where they can to keep the price down. Modern botique amps do not, but look at the prices! A new clone (or boutique amp) will have better bass response because the output tranny will handle the power more efficiently. The power supply tranny will be more consistant as well. It will work to the optimum of the design. It will overdrive more smoothly and have better pick response. When people say an amp "sounds better" those are the things they really mean.

My original point was a multi thousand dollar vintage amp is a collertor's item for sure, but if one is touring, a clone is more replaceable, more reliable, and will cost a lot less. And MIGHT sound better based on the condition of your original.

Ken

 

[stax]

My original point was a multi thousand dollar vintage amp is a collertor's item for sure, but if one is touring, a clone is more replaceable, more reliable, and will cost a lot less. And MIGHT sound better based on the condition of your original.

Ken

I agree, but the sound of the "greats" have those "flaws" as part of what makes them sound great, when you clone it and give it better bass response for example, does it sound better or sound different? It's all subjective of course.

 

[Ken]

I agree, but the sound of the "greats" have those "flaws" as part of what makes them sound great, when you clone it and give it better bass response for example, does it sound better or sound different? It's all subjective of course.

Well, a really thin bass, fizzy overdrive and raspy highs will have a place for 1920-1930's era Delta blues I suppose...but let's not confuse good tone with a preference for which good tone is what one likes.

Most/all people will say a cheap solid state no name amp sounds worse than say a JCM 800, but between a JCM 800 and a Mesa Boogie, you will have a difference of opinion on which people like better...neither has bad tone. They're just different. The cheap amp WILL have bad tone. But okay, I conceed "bad" tone might have a place too for someone...!

Ken

 

[stax]

Many of our favorate classic albums contain "bad" SS amps. Jimmy Page recorded with some!

And a Tweed Deluxe or Tweed Bassman is far from "fizzy" or "thin bass". Have you ever heard a BF Deluxe Reverb? Of course you have, on half of every recording ever made!

Most every amp maker (past and present) has chased the "magic" of the old Fenders, including our beloved Marshall!

I can only say that a JCM 800 RI doesn't sound like an early 80's one, (maybe close, but no cigar)!

 

[Ken]

I can only say that a JCM 800 RI doesn't sound like an early 80's one, (maybe close, but no cigar)!

From what I've read, the 1988 and newer 800's used the same clipping diodes the 900 series used. They stopped using them for the 2000 series amps which might account for their success.

RI amps are NOT made with the same componets as the originals and in some cases even have different circuit designs, in spite of Marshall's implying they're identical. The differences in sound are not surprising!

Ken

 

[Ken]

Many of our favorate classic albums contain "bad" SS amps. Jimmy Page recorded with some!

)!

I know he used a lot of off brand stuff. You have to remember though that we was a master of production techniques for the time. In his case, the amp is not the whole story for his Zeppelin guitar tones on records. If you bought one of his amps and played it live, I doubt you (or he) could sound like the records.

Ken

 

[danielNoble]

thats my new baby!!

 

[Unknown3]

Interesting enough, there are high chances of me buying an amp just like that one in a few days. It's a 2205 from '86 xD That year means a lot to me. That is the year of Master of Puppets! Oh man... those amps make me so hard...