New Marshall modeling amp? 2024???

[MaskingApathy]

It's interesting how perception works. First, I don't work for Marshall anymore for some time already, second is that one of the main reasons why I left in 2016 is because I wanted to do more modeling and "modern" amps and the company didn't agree, not just another plexi reissue again and again.
After that I have at least 5 designs that include modeling or digital processing in the market, just not under M brand.

Can you tell us about the Super 800?

 

[giblesp]

Why though? They make the real thing. There are countless Marshall type plugins and modellers.

 

[giblesp]

It's interesting how perception works. First, I don't work for Marshall anymore for some time already, second is that one of the main reasons why I left in 2016 is because I wanted to do more modeling and "modern" amps and the company didn't agree, not just another plexi reissue again and again.
After that I have at least 5 designs that include modeling or digital processing in the market, just not under M brand.

The JVM is 'modern,' and there is little to improve on. There have been various new incarnations of the DSL series.

The Studio series are modern versions of timeless classics.

I've been relieved that Marshall continued to make pure tube amps, in an age of digital gadgets that will mostly be obsolete within 5 years.

 

[PelliX]

It's interesting how perception works. First, I don't work for Marshall anymore for some time already, second is that one of the main reasons why I left in 2016 is because I wanted to do more modeling and "modern" amps and the company didn't agree, not just another plexi reissue again and again.

Ah, I didn't know that. Cool, man. I wasn't trying to imply you were a dinosaur, hehe! I'd be curious as to some of those ideas you had, just in rough outlines, but I also don't want to derail the thread...

After that I have at least 5 designs that include modeling or digital processing in the market, just not under M brand.

...curiouser and curiouser said Alice...

 

[santiall]

Can you tell us about the Super 800?

it was a 100W head, two channels. A simple clean based on the 18W marshall amps, OD was based on a 2203 with an extra gain but not like an AFD, much rounder. I think it had a tube boost, switchable FX loop, noise gate and 2 masters. Something like that.

 

[santiall]

The JVM is 'modern,' and there is little to improve on. There have been various new incarnations of the DSL series.

The Studio series are modern versions of timeless classics.

I've been relieved that Marshall continued to make pure tube amps, in an age of digital gadgets that will mostly be obsolete within 5 years.

yes, I'd agree that the concept of the JVM is modern, it has aged very well but the amp itself is old.
Also agreed on the life span of modelers and the likes, specially in the lower ends of the market, but my point wasn't ditching tube amps at all, it was to keep exploring the modeling market once the CODE was out and could be used as a starting poing from the R&D side. I bet some people were more interested in having a comfortable life by then than expanding the portfolio...

 

[santiall]

Ah, I didn't know that. Cool, man. I wasn't trying to imply you were a dinosaur, hehe! I'd be curious as to some of those ideas you had, just in rough outlines, but I also don't want to derail the thread...



...curiouser and curiouser said Alice...

curiosity killed the

 

[Frodebro]

yes, I'd agree that the concept of the JVM is modern, it has aged very well but the amp itself is old.
Also agreed on the life span of modelers and the likes, specially in the lower ends of the market, but my point wasn't ditching tube amps at all, it was to keep exploring the modeling market once the CODE was out and could be used as a starting poing from the R&D side. I bet some people were more interested in having a comfortable life by then than expanding the portfolio...

What complicates things is that Marshall is a legacy brand, much like Fender and Gibson. All three companies have tried pushing the envelope with innovative new products, but none of them have been successful at it. The people who buy from those companies want the legacy products.

 

[V-man]

At this point, who wants a “brand modeler?” I don’t FW them, but at this stage in the game, don’t the typical brands (Fractal, Helix, etc) give you ”convincing tones” of 30+ brands from Ampeg to Dr Z?

I don’t FW modelers as stated. OK… something suddenly convinces me to get one in ‘24. Why am I buying the Marshall? Why would I get that above the ToneX or the Fractal, etc? Unless the end product is “The most realistic and definitive ‘M-collection’” with like a dozen “Plexi” circuits, small watt oddballs and PAs of the 60s-70s along side the Major(s) and the Bass amps, not to mention every nuanced amp of the JCM line (800 900 25/50 and 2000), why even bother?

And this is where Marshall would pop its head out of its arse on this (assuming the powers that be even give a shit, which I wager confidently they do NOT): the money for this is NOT hardware. It is all software/licensing. This is where you get fractal eggheads, and Helix, etc and you write the ”official licensed codes” for these units from an archive of rare and expansive Marshall circuits.

Everybody in this game wants the Marshalls amidst the Mesas, Voxes, Oranges, Fenders, ENGLs, Bogners, Soldanos, etc. They do not want some bullshit proprietary box from a single brand today, and the same would be said of a Peavey or Mesa Unit. Make the best code mousetrap and license that shit in everything that has a fucking preset. Game, set, match…

 

[Lo-Tek]

What complicates things is that Marshall is a legacy brand, much like Fender and Gibson. All three companies have tried pushing the envelope with innovative new products, but none of them have been successful at it. The people who buy from those companies want the legacy products.

Fender has six amps in Reverb's Top selling list- 5 are modelers.
Imo, Fender has done a pretty good of catering to that market- better than Marshall.
We will have to wait and see how their new product does

 

[PelliX]

curiosity killed the

To be fair, we did warn the cat that it was supposed to discharge the caps...

 

[giblesp]

yes, I'd agree that the concept of the JVM is modern, it has aged very well but the amp itself is old.
Also agreed on the life span of modelers and the likes, specially in the lower ends of the market, but my point wasn't ditching tube amps at all, it was to keep exploring the modeling market once the CODE was out and could be used as a starting poing from the R&D side. I bet some people were more interested in having a comfortable life by then than expanding the portfolio...

In fairness, all the amps modelled are old amps. For some it doesn't have to be a new. The JVM is a timeless classic, like the Marshalls that came before.

I won't be buying anything from the sold out, foreign owned Marshall anyway.

 

[TassieViking]

I personally think that Marshall would benefit if they start researching modelling and other newer solid state designs, just make them a new type of amp without trying to imitate the superb Tube amps they have.
They could find good footing in the bass amp market if they tried, and most of that market is solid state due to the high power involved.
700watt bass amps have become small enough to slip into the pocket on the soft guitar case and who can argue with something that portable, with the DI out on the amp you can just hook into the FOH mixer.
I think the future of gear will be smaller and more portable for most people, but tube amps will be around for as long as there are tubes made.

 

[PelliX]

If Marshall wanted a quick buck, they could always reissue the PowerBrake. Plenty of people that would get one, certainly if it featured just a little more than the old ones (add a line out, headphones, whatever people want most).

 

[LyseFar]

Funny discussion.
Back when Ibanez made the Tubescreamer and BOSS made the original Overdrive pedal, these were designed as tube-simulators because amp manufacturers were going away from tube circuits towards transistors. So these were kind of the first modellers.
But what all these modellers share is the urge to sound like a real tube amp. Maybe they will someday eventually succeed.
The percentage from this old Marshall add is probably still valid

 

[marshalled]

I think there are 2 different worlds

- guitar player on the room, apartments or house that prefer modeler, or similar
- guitar player live stage like pub, club or open space prefer the valve

When play guitar with the band (live stage) i wanna feel dynamics, sound grow with my pick or simply more volume and gain...in apartaments o little room not necessary especially when study guitar.

For me are two differents situations.

 

[V-man]

In fairness, all the amps modelled are old amps. For some it doesn't have to be a new. The JVM is a timeless classic, like the Marshalls that came before.

I won't be buying anything from the sold out, foreign owned Marshall anyway.

Except it isn’t. The JVM is basically TSL 2.0… a much better mousetrap, but if it was deemed to be in Marshall’s best interests to make the JVM 2.0 (and do it right) the JVM‘s esteem would be held somewhere between the DSL and TSL. Respected but not wanted unless remanufactured in Asia for a cheap(er) bells and whistles box.

 

[MaskingApathy]

it was a 100W head, two channels. A simple clean based on the 18W marshall amps, OD was based on a 2203 with an extra gain but not like an AFD, much rounder. I think it had a tube boost, switchable FX loop, noise gate and 2 masters. Something like that.

Thanks for the reply!

 

[Frodebro]

I think there are 2 different worlds

- guitar player on the room, apartments or house that prefer modeler, or similar
- guitar player live stage like pub, club or open space prefer the valve

When play guitar with the band (live stage) i wanna feel dynamics, sound grow with my pick or simply more volume and gain...in apartaments o little room not necessary especially when study guitar.

For me are two differents situations.

I’m guessing you haven’t experienced a good modeler at band volume levels, because the dynamics are right up there with tube amps.

 

[marshalled]

I’m guessing you haven’t experienced a good modeler at band volume levels, because the dynamics are right up there with tube amps.

Sure but if you have a bad audio P.A the modeler, won't sound its best.

it will always be an unknown.