Modern Marshalls - Flubby Compared to Older Circuits?

[TwinACStacks]

Yup me as well.
No matter how many times you say it though, there will be 13 people who will tell you their dsl will do the 800 thing perfect, but they have never actually OWNED a 800.....

Ill stick with old marshalls..

Who told You that a DSL sounds like an 800? No way. DSLs are much brighter and better. Just like their owners.

TWIN

 

[triftstrassa]

ive never claimed my DSHell nails an 800.....what i claim is it nails a hot rodded 800.....no i have never owned an 800....but i have sat in front of them more times than i could ever count
and i dont need no stinkin pedals......green channel not red.....in fact i may never use the red again
and you have never owned a DSHell so you cant compare either.....in fact i probably have a better clue how they compare than you would.......and i did not say DSL.....i said DSHell

Hey! #14, glad you could make it!

 

[MartyStrat54]

Thanks Matt and Marty. I'll try the EH6CA7's in the JVM.

EDIT: Hahahaha! I have EH6CA7's in my 800! Awesome!

They may sound the best in a JMP or 800. I have NOS Sylvania Fat Boy 6CA7's in the hot rod 2204 and I have the EH6CA7's in the JMP 2203 and my TSL100. I may go back to RFT's in the TSL, but it's still not determined.

 

[MartyStrat54]

LOL !!!

Tight ......like fucking a pop bottle !!

That's the difference between us Tubes. You "can" and I "can't."

 

[HOT TUBES 70]

That's the difference between us Tubes. You "can" and I "can't."

LOL !!!!

 

[Doadman]

This is a bit worrying as I was looking at investing in a JVM but the one thing I really don't want is flubbiness. I want to be able go from cleans to high gain and retain a highly articulate distortion. If the JVM can't do that, it's no good. It's the same reason I'm selling my DSL401; it just isn't tight enough unless I'm running an overdrive in front of it with the gain on zero and the level maxed out. I love the basic Marshall tone but fear I may need to look elsewhere for a new amp instead. The Bugera 333XL looks good but the reliability is concerning and the Blackstar HT Stage 100 also looks like a good option, with the added bonus that with those amps I can buy new for less than a good used JVM would cost.

 

[JamesD]

This is a bit worrying as I was looking at investing in a JVM but the one thing I really don't want is flubbiness. I want to be able go from cleans to high gain and retain a highly articulate distortion. If the JVM can't do that, it's no good. It's the same reason I'm selling my DSL401; it just isn't tight enough unless I'm running an overdrive in front of it with the gain on zero and the level maxed out. I love the basic Marshall tone but fear I may need to look elsewhere for a new amp instead. The Bugera 333XL looks good but the reliability is concerning and the Blackstar HT Stage 100 also looks like a good option, with the added bonus that with those amps I can buy new for less than a good used JVM would cost.

I just bought a JVM410H and I like it much more than the JVM205H for that very reason, well, and for a few others as well. The 410 doesn't have that same 'flub' - to my ears it sounds quite a bit better. I found this one on Craigslist for $1200. It's in near-mint condition, so I couldn't be happier. I'll be returning the 205 tomorrow.

 

[Doadman]

LOL, you're helping my faith in Marshall to return

 

[lewis_grey]

I've been having the same problem with my Vintage Modern. It has a GREAT blues/classic rock sound in the Low Dynamic Range, but when I switch to the High Dynamic Range the tone thins out a bunch. The Vintage Modern has two preamp controls; Body(for low end)and Detail(for high end). If I dial the Body to match the Detail, I get flub. Nothing I do can fix it.

KT-66's as found in the Vintage Modern have an inherently loose bass response which may be what you're hearing to a certain degree but having the body too high in relation to the detail is probably the largest factor.

If you want to tighten it up in the HDR try having the body control at least 3 below the detail, leave the mid boost off and put the master volume above 4 or 5, then EQ it to your taste. You should get a nice hot-rodded JTM sound free of any 'flubbyness', just the natural looseness of the KT-66's

 

[Large_Filter_Cap]

I've played the jvm 410 many times, it is not flubby at all unless your gain is too high. It is a tight in the low end. What kind of speakers are you using? Speakers can make a big difference.

 

[j2112c]

I've played the jvm 410 many times, it is not flubby at all unless your gain is too high. It is a tight in the low end. What kind of speakers are you using? Speakers can make a big difference.

Hey LFC +1

This afternoon after people were saying the JVM was flubby I messed about and found exactly that..... turn down the channel gain until it disappears - still more than enough gain and very crisp.

I still have not fully got to handle the 410 it does unusual things when dialing it in I would say it is definitely an amp for the disciplined player.
One that can close their eyes and use their ears not the dials.

You will be really surprised by the range of tones - and even more so by the settings you have to achieve those sounds.

You simply cannot say ok on the JCM800 I set it like this. Therefore the JVM on the correct JVM channel and same settings it will be fine - nope it is an amp in its own right with its own character.

As it is very versatile I think people forget that it is an amp in its own right and I often think of it as a one stop box for the whole history of Marshall (and Fender tones).


Personally, all that said I still cannot yet get the clarity, tightness or harmonic shimmer that get from my reissue 2204. Only keep one? Then a 2204 or a 2203 for me. It is my sound now - I love it!!
Different beasts I suppose.

 

[JamesD]

I've played the jvm 410 many times, it is not flubby at all unless your gain is too high. It is a tight in the low end. What kind of speakers are you using? Speakers can make a big difference.

Exactly, and that's what I meant to say in my post regarding the JVM410 that I just purchased to replace the JVM205; the 410 is not flubby at all. What a huge difference there is in the bottom end of the 410 vs. the 205. I LOVE the 410! Also, the clean on the 410 is amazing, and having OD1 is exactly what I was missing in the 205 OD channel. I also noticed that the 410 isn't quite as bright as the 205.

For gain questions/comments, I'm below 5.

As far as JVM's go, my hands-down vote is for the 410.

BTW, I'm just playing through a standard 1960A with the 75's in it.

 

[j2112c]

For gain questions/comments, I'm below 5.

Exactly JamesD!
It is discipline.
For these amps 5 on the right channel is rocking - it is not like many other amps that need 10 - it has so much drive.

James also illustrates my point - most amps you may set at 8-10 on the dial here you may only need 4-5 to get the same sound - this amp needs tuning with the ears not the dials.


I am not an expert on these amps by any way, Big Dooley or Monsters of Midway have more experience of them but from a learning novice they are a challenging amp - not because of the 4 channels which are dead easy to navigate - but to tailor a sound you need, somehow you need to avoid applying what you know of other Marshall setting.

I know Marshalls demo from Chris George tries to describe different channels as a plexi 'type channel' or a JCM 800 'type channel' but it does not really work that way - you can get similar sounds but not always in the way you think - like cranking the master volume and gains on the cleaner channels - just like a plexi!

 

[wkcchampion]

Absolutely. Now that I have an old 1959, I compared the old recordings made with the JVM. Just one league above.

The key is not necessarily a lower quality, but a change i ndesign. Modern amps get most of their gain from the preamp, while vintage ones had to be cranked up because the sound was almost all power valve distortion. And to my hears the latter sounds much better!

 

[big dooley]

Absolutely. Now that I have an old 1959, I compared the old recordings made with the JVM. Just one league above.

The key is not necessarily a lower quality, but a change i ndesign. Modern amps get most of their gain from the preamp, while vintage ones had to be cranked up because the sound was almost all power valve distortion. And to my hears the latter sounds much better!

play the JVM in crunch green or orange, dime all the volume's and use the gain to set up the volume will give you the same powervalve distortion...
do the same on OD orange or red and you'll get mud... for that amount of gain you want the powersection as clean as possible...


by the way, how's that old 800 doing now?

 

[charveldan]

Flub....yes.

 

[wkcchampion]

To Dooley... one word: GREAT. It just came back from the tech. It's a monster. I'm posting clips... check out the Cellar!

 

[big dooley]

To Dooley... one word: GREAT. It just came back from the tech. It's a monster. I'm posting clips... check out the Cellar!

yeah i know... someone i know has that same monster...
we have our own band specially for the village live in (very small village, only 400 people or so ) we play only on queensday (april 30th), where everybody from the village can sing a song if they feel the need to... they have to fill in a form, where they can opt 5 songs, which we choose 1 from and we rehearse that... it's a great project and lots of fun...

anyway... we don't play that loud, as it would destroy the whole mix (around 9 people playing instruments) but he had a hard time dialing in the volume... in the end, the volume was just around 8 o' clock ..
when we were setting up the whole thing, we turned it up a little, but it was getting scary...

 

[Bieling3]

I've only had my TSL 100 a short time but it is without a doubt no where near as flubby as my old JCM 800 or a Vintage Modern (unboosted, when boosted it's a matter of voicing but the actual punch is just as responsive as a TSL). I think a lot has to do with the speakers in most cases.

 

[JamesD]

I've only had my TSL 100 a short time but it is without a doubt no where near as flubby as my old JCM 800 or a Vintage Modern (unboosted, when boosted it's a matter of voicing but the actual punch is just as responsive as a TSL). I think a lot has to do with the speakers in most cases.

Wow! There must have been something amiss with your 800, because they're anything but flubby - at least all that I've played and listened to were very tight in the low end.