NAD DSL100H...again.

[Gunner64]

If that version is anything like the 2000 version Red channel, gain down volume up..a little clean boost.. can get very close to jmp/ jcm 2203/04 tones.

Fwiw I've had 5 JCM2000 DSL's in my life time, 2 out of 5 had the board drift condition. Absolutely. It is a thing, but way overblown most of the time.

2 of the non drifters were 50w.

 

[dslman]

Yesterday another DSL100H in excellent condition fell into my lap for 400 dollars US. How could I say no?

No photo needed, it looks just like any other DSL100H in excellent shape.

It works fine. But it's going to take some getting used to. It's tonally very much a different animal from my Superleads, my 2203, or any of my Mesas.
I already found that the effects loop settings that work on my Mesas don't work well with this amp. I'll have to start tweaking, especially the EQ, to find what works.

It has a lot of potential. The base tone is good. But I'll have to spend time finding the amp's best tones.

And if it doesn't quite make it for me, I can easily get my money back out of it, or even make a few bucks off it.

This is my second DSL100H. The first one came to me making no sound. Found open cathode resistors on the power tubes. Replaced them, good to go. Didn't tonally "bond" with that amp, and sold it.

Congratulations on the amp, and what a great price. I paid 600 for my 2014 100H.
Enjoy

If that version is anything like the 2000 version Red channel, gain down volume up..a little clean boost.. can get very close to jmp/ jcm 2203/04 tones.

Not in my experience, the 100H is too high gain for that, and not organic enough to really pull it off.
The 2000 series—another story.

 

[LPMarshall hack]

No, the 2000 series heads are richer, more organic—vintage if that makes sense.
The 100H is a thick heavy high gainer, that is more modern sounding and very full, not thin at all, but still retains some of it’s predecessor heritage.
It’s a beast if it’s running right, no transformer hum like the 2000 100 waters.
Channels match better also.
I think I put a lower gain preamp tube in my 100H and use Lead 1 , and clean channel only, don’t mess with Lead 2 much.
I’ll never mod it.

I'd prob lean toward the HR simply for the two MVs and better EQ between the channels.

Or is the shared EQ on the old DSLs not really an issue...internet lore?

 

[dslman]

I'd prob lean toward the HR simply for the two MVs and better EQ between the channels.

Or is the shared EQ on the old DSLs not really an issue...internet lore?

The shared eq on the 2000 series heads can present problems. Some heads more than others, but L1, and L2 "ultra gain channel" are somewhat thin at lower volumes compared to the clean channel, which is IMO a perfect clean channel. Marshall got it right, so many try to use gain pedals on the clean channel, and forget the gain channel. I don't think this is the way to use this amp at it's fullest, but to each their own. There is a capacitor that helps the Ultra Gain- L1-L2 channel only, if I remember correctly, helps add fullness to the Gain channels, and makes channel switching more seamless.
The newer 100H, and 100HR don't have this issue.