Marshall Major Reissue
- Thread starter marshallman116
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
MartyStrat54
Well-Known Member
It won't sound anything like the Major. The YJM and Major have completely different designs. The Major uses an ultra linear output transformer. The preamp section was designed like a hifi amp (which is basically what the Major is).
The power supply of the Major supports the four KT88's and runs them so they are putting out 200 watts. Your YJM has a 100 watt power supply and would be running the KT88's at 25 watts each. This means the operating conditions of the tubes in the YJM would be different than the Major. Not counting the other points I mentioned, this alone would result in a different sound between the two amps.
The power supply of the Major supports the four KT88's and runs them so they are putting out 200 watts. Your YJM has a 100 watt power supply and would be running the KT88's at 25 watts each. This means the operating conditions of the tubes in the YJM would be different than the Major. Not counting the other points I mentioned, this alone would result in a different sound between the two amps.
Ken
Well-Known Member
Majors are highly unstable amps that can't use most pedals. Blackmore always had 2 stacks with a foot switch in case one blew up mid set.
While I can appreciate the tone, I can't see the point of duplicating such an expensive and non user friendly amp.
Ken
While I can appreciate the tone, I can't see the point of duplicating such an expensive and non user friendly amp.
Ken
damienbeale
Well-Known Member
It's not even really the pedals that are the issue. It's not difficult to push this type of ultralinear amp into square wave clipping, which results in dead amp. There is also no way that modern tech will be able to stop this from happening. It is possible to re-design it to avoid it happening, but it wouldn't sound like a Major, either.
We're not talking about a standard Marshall that has been beefed up to run 200W here. The dual rail supply, and ultra-linear operation is a radical departure from normal Marshall designs, and is at it's best in clean amps. Distortion in the power-stage is where these things go wrong and die young. Unfortunately when ones preamp is already distorted, it is hard to hear when this is happening. This is why ultra-linear operation run to this level, with relatively low-specced transformers was never particularly well-suited to guitars. YES, they are a truly awesome beast, but unless you have respect for them they are just waiting to go wrong.
Given the unreliability of the amps, mostly down to people not really knowing how best to use them, I'd put a lot of money down on them never being properly re-issued. There just isn't the demand for a commercial venture to go all-out on such an amp.
We're not talking about a standard Marshall that has been beefed up to run 200W here. The dual rail supply, and ultra-linear operation is a radical departure from normal Marshall designs, and is at it's best in clean amps. Distortion in the power-stage is where these things go wrong and die young. Unfortunately when ones preamp is already distorted, it is hard to hear when this is happening. This is why ultra-linear operation run to this level, with relatively low-specced transformers was never particularly well-suited to guitars. YES, they are a truly awesome beast, but unless you have respect for them they are just waiting to go wrong.
Given the unreliability of the amps, mostly down to people not really knowing how best to use them, I'd put a lot of money down on them never being properly re-issued. There just isn't the demand for a commercial venture to go all-out on such an amp.
marshallman116
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 83
- Reaction score
- 39
I still personally think there could be some way to give that tone without the amp being unstable. Maybe a printed board of some sort but hey, I'm only 14 and I dont have a degree in that kind of stuff.
damienbeale
Well-Known Member
How would a printed circuit board stop an output transformer blowing as a result of square wave distortion occurring naturally at heavily overdriven levels due to the type of circuit? Printed circuit boards don't make a stuff of difference other than convenience, and consistency at mass production levels. They also can make it easier to avoid noise and oscillations when designed properly, but that certainly isn't the issue here.
The inherent risk of failure, is part and parcel of the design of this circuit. It's not an easy fix, because to avoid it would require a pretty comprehensive redesign. And like I said, it would not sound the same.
It's all good and well thinking that there could be some way of doing it, without having any understanding of what is actually occurring inside the amp.
If it was feasible, and the market was there, there would be a healthy clone market going like there is for other vintage Marshalls.
Also, it's worth mentioning, that the quality and the sound of modern KT88's as compared to original GEC KT88's (now prohibitively expensive except to the well-heeled) is so vastly different, that this is just going to disappoint as well.
As for a petition, well, unless you and every other likely candidate have an absolute minimum of £3.5K to hand, there is absolutely no way on this earth that this would ever happen. Petitions don't mean anything. People signing up are neither commiting to purchase, or necessarily representative of those who actually have any intention of purchasing. Unless you're lobbying parliament, petitions don't mean jack.
It's not all that difficult to make an ultra-linear amp that won't have these issues however, but it is costly (required transformers would be particularly expensive), and would end up sounding somewhat different.
Given how fragile that Marshalls transformers seem to be in their current re-issues, attempting to recreate the Major at the price they would have to pitch them at would be commercial suicide.
The inherent risk of failure, is part and parcel of the design of this circuit. It's not an easy fix, because to avoid it would require a pretty comprehensive redesign. And like I said, it would not sound the same.
It's all good and well thinking that there could be some way of doing it, without having any understanding of what is actually occurring inside the amp.
If it was feasible, and the market was there, there would be a healthy clone market going like there is for other vintage Marshalls.
Also, it's worth mentioning, that the quality and the sound of modern KT88's as compared to original GEC KT88's (now prohibitively expensive except to the well-heeled) is so vastly different, that this is just going to disappoint as well.
As for a petition, well, unless you and every other likely candidate have an absolute minimum of £3.5K to hand, there is absolutely no way on this earth that this would ever happen. Petitions don't mean anything. People signing up are neither commiting to purchase, or necessarily representative of those who actually have any intention of purchasing. Unless you're lobbying parliament, petitions don't mean jack.
It's not all that difficult to make an ultra-linear amp that won't have these issues however, but it is costly (required transformers would be particularly expensive), and would end up sounding somewhat different.
Given how fragile that Marshalls transformers seem to be in their current re-issues, attempting to recreate the Major at the price they would have to pitch them at would be commercial suicide.
marshallman116
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 83
- Reaction score
- 39
Like I said before man, I'm only 14. There might just be a way to do it in the future but as of now it seems its impossible. It would be a collectible item, like a piece of furniture in addition to being an amp.
damienbeale
Well-Known Member
There might just be a way to do it in the future?
There hasn't been any technological advance in tube technology in over 50 years? What are you expecting?
The best you could hope for is either a clone, or a modelling amp. It really ISN'T going to happen.
There hasn't been any technological advance in tube technology in over 50 years? What are you expecting?
The best you could hope for is either a clone, or a modelling amp. It really ISN'T going to happen.
marshallman116
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 83
- Reaction score
- 39
We can always hope can't we?
I've had a LOT of amps over the past several years, from cheap Chinese lunchboxes (Egnaters, Jet City, etc) to boutique amps like Bogners (XTCs, Shiva, Uberschall) and even one-off prototypes built by single builders. I've also had an Eleven Rack and there's a rackmount Kemper Profiler sitting in my man cave right now (that's for sale).
I can honestly say that NO lunchbox or modeler/profiler can do what the "big iron" does. NONE of them. There's something about pushing 50-100+ tube watts through a 4X12 or two that gives a huge, breathy, grunting tone. My Egnater Rebel 20 (gig backup to my 2203X cause it's small and handy) gets PLENTY loud. And it even sounds pretty good when I hit the front end with my OCD (like I do with my 2203X). But it doesn't have that girth that the big amps have. And nor do the modelers and profiler. They just DON'T. So even though big amps aren't in vogue right now... they can NEVER be replaced by other gear when you want that huge, responsive tone. I've been gigging since the 80s and have owned, gigged or tried nearly everything out there. Despite all of the hype I've been reading in ads in guitar mags for nearly 30 years... non-tube amps and lunchbox amps CANNOT replace the big amps for the features that many (like me) desire. If they had been able to... I wouldn't still be bothering with amps loaded with 4 large power tubes.
I can honestly say that NO lunchbox or modeler/profiler can do what the "big iron" does. NONE of them. There's something about pushing 50-100+ tube watts through a 4X12 or two that gives a huge, breathy, grunting tone. My Egnater Rebel 20 (gig backup to my 2203X cause it's small and handy) gets PLENTY loud. And it even sounds pretty good when I hit the front end with my OCD (like I do with my 2203X). But it doesn't have that girth that the big amps have. And nor do the modelers and profiler. They just DON'T. So even though big amps aren't in vogue right now... they can NEVER be replaced by other gear when you want that huge, responsive tone. I've been gigging since the 80s and have owned, gigged or tried nearly everything out there. Despite all of the hype I've been reading in ads in guitar mags for nearly 30 years... non-tube amps and lunchbox amps CANNOT replace the big amps for the features that many (like me) desire. If they had been able to... I wouldn't still be bothering with amps loaded with 4 large power tubes.
Similar threads
