software

Say.. why is the JCM800 so much more expensive than the JC2000 DSLs amp; TSLs?
How are those three Series compared to each other?
thanks alot

800s seem to be the marshall of choice for most toneheads... 2000 will give you a contemporary sound (and are pretty good, IMO), but for those who are into Bogner, Matchless, Soldano, and that level of amp, there are certain JCM800s that are in there. I'm not one of those guys, but that's what they say, anyway....

I've never heard or played through a 900, but I've heard good and bad things about them... (sorry for that useless sentence)

I love the 800. The perfect crunch Nice and balanced by my ear, maybe mid heavy or harsh to people who aren't into that sh!t. But they take a bit til they distort... maybe that's why I like em nice and clear

I really don't like 2000s. Scooped, bassy, contemporary as has been said.

slade

i would kill for a bogner head, but theyre expensive and i dont have the balls to kill anyone. so im saving up for a dsl50. its everything i need. only 2 channels, no cheap effects come with it, it has good cleans, and the distorted channels could be ballsier but they rock. better than other amps i played through(peaveys, boogies, line 6's ect.) never played a 800, i probably should but i havent yet seen one in a store.

anyone wanna loan me a MILLION FRIGGIN DOLLARS for a bogner?


Originally Posted by danglybangerI really don't like 2000s. Scooped, bassy, contemporary as has been said.

Not completely true. The 2000s have a mid shift that does scoop the sound quite a bit. Dial in the bass and treble at 12 o'clock, do not use the mid shift, and they are fairly balanced. Maybe a little scooped, but definatly not as bad as a lot of vintage Marshall purists will have you believe.

When I bought my marshall, I tested all three (JCM800, JCM2000 DSL amp; TSL). Couldn't justify the added cost of the extra channel in the TSL, which, IMO, has WAY too much distortion for me. The JCM800, while very nice, was more expensive than the DSL50 and fell a bit short in the versatility department.

Dangly - I think the first 3 oasis albums largely used 900s, basically cos that's what was around at the time. Could be wrong, but give Definately Maybe a listen.

I have owned a couple DSLs (100 and 50 watt versions) and think they are very good heads. I still own a DSL50 which is very nice. With a DSL50 or 100 you can get pretty close to a JCM800 tone (IMO) whereas an un-modded JCM800 won't get into DSL gain range. The DSLs also have a very usable clean channel which works well in a rock environment. Don't get me wrong I really love the JCM800 also... It is also a great rock head. If I had to pick between a stock JCM800 and a stock DSL50 I am taking the DSL50. I'd take the nice clean channel and you dial in some cool sounds with the shift/deep, etc...

forget about those, just get a plexi. same price as the 800 almost, and will whoop it for a REAL classic rock tone.

Will you be playing big concerts?

I've got a DSL50 and been playing it for 7-8 years. It is a very versatile amp and noticed that i need to find the right settings with different pickups. I've used it with C5/aph-2n combo and JB/Jazz combo and find that in a band environment, it really cuts through, especially with 500k pots in my guitar. The clean/crunch channel sounds full enough for hard rock/classic rock verses choruses... I normally use the crunch channel for my choruses and the Lead channel for soloing... which it really cuts through with the JB (simply sings).

It is a very versatile amp and have tried the 900 and the 800. I am not much of a fan of the 900 but LOVE the 800... the only thing that made me choose the DSL50 instead of the JCM800 was the lead channel on the DSL. both amps sound similar, IMO...

REMEMBER THIS: its the cab you plug the head into that makes a huge difference... the modern sound that the DSL is known for could be because they are plugged into Celestion 75s speakers instead of Vintage 30s.

I lt;heartgt; my DSL

Many, many quot;Marshall Expertsquot; if you will, claim that the DSL50 is the best amp Marshall has put out in years, and the best channel switcher ever. Even the founder of the Marshall forum makes this assertion, last time I checked in there.

The DSL definately has more gain available. It may not have the low end meaty rumble of a JCM 800 at full throttle, but not many have the space to open up a JCM 800 anyhow...I know I dont. As far as stock vs stock goes, the DSL is much more versital than the 800...comparing channel switching to channel switching. The cleans of the DSL are much better (stock) and the OD will go from milder to wilder.

The DSL definately has more of a quot;modernquot; voice, but you can still dial in a lot of the older sounds if you work at it. If I were to buy a stock Marshall, it would either be the Silver Jubilee or the DSL50.

Both April Wine guitarists use DSL 100 heads and sounds great.
Beside, DSL offer more options compare to the 800.
A Plexi would be my first choice but DSL would be thew second one.


Originally Posted by Quencho092forget about those, just get a plexi. same price as the 800 almost, and will whoop it for a REAL classic rock tone.

Will you be playing big concerts?

Hmm does the plexi have a master volume? cause I won't really be able to turn it up full all the time... that's just too loud... this is mainly the reason why I'm looking into the JCM800 amp; JCM2000s.. the vintage series need to be cranked too much to sound good


Originally Posted by Jeff_HMany, many quot;Marshall Expertsquot; if you will, claim that the DSL50 is the best amp Marshall has put out in years, and the best channel switcher ever. Even the founder of the Marshall forum makes this assertion, last time I checked in there.

The DSL definately has more gain available. It may not have the low end meaty rumble of a JCM 800 at full throttle, but not many have the space to open up a JCM 800 anyhow...I know I dont. As far as stock vs stock goes, the DSL is much more versital than the 800...comparing channel switching to channel switching. The cleans of the DSL are much better (stock) and the OD will go from milder to wilder.

The DSL definately has more of a quot;modernquot; voice, but you can still dial in a lot of the older sounds if you work at it. If I were to buy a stock Marshall, it would either be the Silver Jubilee or the DSL50.

Good post Jeff. Def agree.

DSL can get some classic or 80's sounds if as stated you don't get into the mid shifts/scoops. As Jeff said It doesn't quite rumble (or sparkle) like an 800 or previous series Marshall, but it's a good amp. And the DSL IMO is a better amp than 99% of the 900 series amps I've played/heard.

I don't care for the TSL at all though. They do NOT sound the same as the DSL.


Originally Posted by KommerzbassistHmm does the plexi have a master volume?

No it does not.

...the vintage series need to be cranked too much to sound good

So do the 800 series. MV or not, they still need to be opened up a little. Most tube amps do. Buy a power attentuator of some sort, that will help.


Originally Posted by KommerzbassistHmm does the plexi have a master volume? cause I won't really be able to turn it up full all the time... that's just too loud... this is mainly the reason why I'm looking into the JCM800 amp; JCM2000s.. the vintage series need to be cranked too much to sound good

Nope, but you can put an attenuator between the amp and cab...if you have the money for one after dishing out the cash for a plexi. That's what I'm wanting to do, but it'll be a while.

Dang it! Jeff beat me to it.


Originally Posted by JeffBGood post Jeff. Def agree.

DSL can get some classic or 80's sounds if as stated you don't get into the mid shifts/scoops. As Jeff said It doesn't quite rumble (or sparkle) like an 800 or previous series Marshall, but it's a good amp. And the DSL IMO is a better amp than 99% of the 900 series amps I've played/heard.

I don't care for the TSL at all though. They do NOT sound the same as the DSL.

whats so bad about the TSL range?


Originally Posted by shredaholicwhats so bad about the TSL range?

Different voicing. Darker. Mids are focused differently. All gain, no personality. Less Marshall-like.

Just not my thing. The DSL is voiced a bit more to my liking. Honestly though, my Rivera and a whole bunch of other amp companies do the Marshall thing better than Marshall 2000 series amps do. The only Marshalls I really like being produced today are the RI series (HW, 19XX, 800 etc).

which is the best head from marshall that is for speed metal, thrash, 80s metal?


Originally Posted by guitarsrock5which is the best head from marshall that is for speed metal, thrash, 80s metal?the TSL and DSL have the lead output PLUS an extra quot;lead 2quot; button for extra saturation, if that's your thing...

I prefer the lead channel for soloing and the clean channel for most guitar work. The Crunch button puts the amp in perfect tube overdrive mode and with the band, it's perfect. I find that when I use the lead channel for hard rock rhythm parts, it muddies the overall sound of the band. The Crunch button just adds the right amount of dirt, and when the volume on my guitar is put down about half way, the DSL cleans up real well. The thing with my DSL is that I can play a variety of styles with it; everything from classic, new rock, pop music and Ramp;B/hip-hop.

well then which one is cheaper?