• We are looking to make improvements to the Classifieds! Help us determine what improvements we can make by filling out this classifieds survey. Your feedback is very appreciated and helpful!

    Take survey

The invention of super-high-gain - why did it take this long?

  • Thread starter turbo
  • Start date
  • This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.

turbo

New Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2020
Messages
7
Reaction score
8
I wonder why it took so long for amps to get to the high gain territory. So very guitar amps were designed for clean sounds, then people discovered that they distort when at max volume - power amp distortion. What happened next? When was pre-amp distortion invented? From what I understand, it's the pre-amp distortion that allows all this JVM-level high gain. JCM800 was pre-amp distortion for the most part, wasn't? Players were always shooting for more and more gain, and they used stuff like Tubescreamer to push their JCM to get more gain. So why did it take so long for Marshall and other amp makers to get get to DSL/JVM levels of gain?
I just wonder why they didn't make a truly high-gain amp in the mid-eighties?
Is it because of technological limitations at the time, or is it that they simply didn't see the point in super-high-gain?
 

Jethro Rocker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
12,304
Reaction score
21,995
Location
Saskatoon, Canada
I wonder why it took so long for amps to get to the high gain territory. So very guitar amps were designed for clean sounds, then people discovered that they distort when at max volume - power amp distortion. What happened next? When was pre-amp distortion invented? From what I understand, it's the pre-amp distortion that allows all this JVM-level high gain. JCM800 was pre-amp distortion for the most part, wasn't? Players were always shooting for more and more gain, and they used stuff like Tubescreamer to push their JCM to get more gain. So why did it take so long for Marshall and other amp makers to get get to DSL/JVM levels of gain?
I just wonder why they didn't make a truly high-gain amp in the mid-eighties?
Is it because of technological limitations at the time, or is it that they simply didn't see the point in super-high-gain?
Not sure why Marshall didn't. Slow on the draw because they count on all the old guys that like the classic Marshall sounds. Not sure. The 2205 was apgainier, the 900 more still then the DSL TSL etc.
I didn't type fast enough, Mesa certainly had higher gain at that poimt. Sometimes Marshall seems more reactionary to me.
EDIT - the 1987 Jubilee while not DSL or JVM OD2 levels of gain, is a quite gainy amp for the late 80s, certainly a more useful gain than the extreme gain machines. No one can use a DSL on OD2 with gain pinned.
 

Frodebro

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
5,808
Reaction score
9,439
Location
Seattle
Not sure why Marshall didn't. Slow on the draw because they count on all the old guys that like the classic Marshall sounds. Not sure. The 2205 was apgainier, the 900 more still then the DSL TSL etc.
I didn't type fast enough, Mesa certainly had higher gain at that poimt. Sometimes Marshall seems more reactionary to me.

They cornered the market on mini refrigerators, though. :agreed:
 

ibmorjamn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
11,548
Reaction score
12,260
Location
North
Different strokes ! High gain was a evolution from the high power stadium amps , non master volume on 5 will hurt you indoors. Along came the modern metal players and or thrash (Metallica) and once mesa and peavey added extra gain stages the race was on to the metal monster Diesel , Engl and the hordes of amps dedicated to splitting atoms . LOl
 

Filipe Soares

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
5,964
Location
RIO!
lack of vision of a number of manufactures, but there are so many other that did that... I think it was some sort of corporate blindness from marshall.

Mesa, Engl, Soldano, Peavey and many other did it a long... long... loooooooong time ago.
 

anitoli

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
12,335
Reaction score
21,311
Location
Lewiston, Maine U.S.A.
Umm don't overlook the 6100 especially channel 3, that was ultra high gain for 92. It's not so much the gain it's the voicing of the circuits. Marshall made huge efforts to try to stick with a sound that was heavy, crunchy, kept up with the flow but still sounded good. There are other makers who may have higher gain models but do they really sound that good? After a certain point it a mason jar full o' bees.
 

Kinkless Tetrode

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
2,406
Reaction score
4,015
The emphasis on creating gain and distortion in the preamp came as a result of the need to get such at more reasonable volume levels. If you look at the waveform of a cranked plexi it is pretty squashed. The gain as well as the distortion was there, because these amps don't sound plinky. As Anitoli alluded to, it was a superior tone. The sound of rock. Stick a boost in front and it is high gain. The volume is really high though.

The JMP and JCM800 master volume amps got real close to the same tone quality but it could be had at a lesser volume level. It was a mixture of preamp and power amp distortion and gain.

Then came the modded Marshalls craze, primarily in California, which gave much more gain and distortion; such as a totally cranked and boosted amp gets but at whatever band volume you needed. Make no mistake, the late model 2210, the Jubilee, and the Mk3/SLX 900s were heavily influenced by the modded Marshalls.

In my opinion, the landmark amp for high gain was the Soldano Super Lead Overdrive. The Rectifiers and many others were based on the SLO, if not straight copies.
 

tallcoolone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
4,527
Reaction score
10,042
Location
NH
I started to play in the mid 80s—back then the high gain guys were all using rack preamps. The first ‘high gain’ Marshall that was marketed that way was the SLX IIRC.
 

marshallmellowed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2009
Messages
6,513
Reaction score
11,761
More gain doesn't necessarily translate to a better guitar sound. Too much gain can squash the signal, and result in a loss of dynamics and definition. A square wave, which is what a heavily over driven signal approaches, is not very musical. The key (IMO) is finding that balance, where you maintain that musicality, while obtaining a level of sustain needed. I much prefer the tone of early Judas Priest, which used much less gain, than later Judas Priest. Just my thoughts, I know there are tons of ganiac's out there.
 
Last edited:

El Gringo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
4,919
Reaction score
6,757
Location
Shakedown Street
Not sure why Marshall didn't. Slow on the draw because they count on all the old guys that like the classic Marshall sounds. Not sure. The 2205 was apgainier, the 900 more still then the DSL TSL etc.
I didn't type fast enough, Mesa certainly had higher gain at that poimt. Sometimes Marshall seems more reactionary to me.
EDIT - the 1987 Jubilee while not DSL or JVM OD2 levels of gain, is a quite gainy amp for the late 80s, certainly a more useful gain than the extreme gain machines. No one can use a DSL on OD2 with gain pinned.
So the DSL & the JVM OD2 have more gain than the 2555X ?
 

trax1139

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
492
Reaction score
1,349
Because, unless you’re doing F..ck everybody and everything Grim Reaper Metal, it’s mostly not needed. On anything else, in a real world band context, it sounds like ass. It’s offensive to the ears and is perceived as too loud. It’s OK for the .0005 watt bedroom volume gigs playing alone, so you can get some semblance of a Rock God concert hall sound. Oh, I almost forgot...master volumes ruin everything, IMO
 

Gaz Baker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2017
Messages
580
Reaction score
1,960
And yet now, with all the gain in the world built in to some amps, most high gain players/bands prefer to still use an OD of some sort to achieve their sound.
Admittedly, clean boosting more often than not.
 
Top