Let's talk Marshall

[foomanfat]

So, my interest in Marshall has been sparked recently, but I really have no idea about them.
JCMs, JMPs, Plexis, stuff based on the aforementioned, I'm lost.
I realize this is probably like saying, "School me on Tubescreamers & derivatives/clones," but... come on...

What are some sonic characteristics of the big Marshalls?
What are the hidden gems, over the years?

Please halp.

[GardenoftheDead]

In my experience, the character of big Marshalls is being too trebly.

Unless it's the JTM45, which is a tweaked Fender Bassman.

[BlindtoFaith]

JMP.JMP.JMP

[Jeff-7]

A JTM45 would be an awesome rig but with how much they are sought after you'll pay pretty dearly. The early JCM800 2203s are pretty nice also. A lot of people are digging the AFD (Blech) 100 and the JVM series if you're looking for something newer.

[D.o.S.]

JCM800's and 900's. Classic tone. Seriously, one of those with the fairy dust will make you go "damn! this is the sound of _________"

[Mudfuzz]

My guitist uses a 84 JCM 800 50watt for recording and a JMP-1 for live. They are both awesome. They both kind'a sound.. like.... Marshalls..

[Gone Fission]

Quick, very back-of-the-envelope version of the major models generally deemed worthy:

The first Marshall was the JTM-45, in combo form known as the "Bluesbreaker" because Clapton used them when with John Mayall. Roughly electronic copies of the Fender 5F6A tweed Bassman amplifier, with an early change to KT-66 output tubes from the American 6L6. Tube rectification means that there's a fair amount of compression to the attack (squishy, spongey character to the attack), generally more midrangey and bluesy than later Marshalls, but still pretty low gain. Takes pedals well.

JTM-50: next step, hensteeth rare IRL though possible through cloning or maybe modding another more common amp. Short version is that it's a JTM-45 with EL-34 output tubes. Some of the chime and grind of later models but retains the tube rectifier and the softer output compression.

"Plexi" heads: next step from the JTM-50 with solid state rectification. "Plexi" is for plexiglass -- the screen printing for the controls was done on the back side of plexiglass, with gold paint behind the lettering. Tighter sound than the JTM-50. Also available in 100 watt versions.

JMP's: the 70's models. Panels changed to being print screened right onto gold finished aluminum. Subtle changes tweaked the Lead versions to brighter sound over time, and plate voltages to the power tubes also crept up to get more output and collaterally a more dynamic and aggressive character. Later in the 70's master volume models emerged in the 2203 and 2204 models which gave up the "Normal" inputs for a high gain/sensitivity input that cascaded an extra gain stage into the low gain/sensitivity input. The low input is pretty close to the classic non-master sound, the high input gave more crunch. Most US-sold models in the 70's came fitted with 6550 tubes because they had a lower failure rate -- the distributor didn't want warranty trouble. All you need is a bias change to go to EL-34's.

JCM-800: the 80's. The 2203 and 2204 from the previous paragraph get new cosmetics. El-34's came back in the US distribution. The more functional channel switchers than the 2203 and 2204 have the reputation of not sounding as good. The 25th Anniversary model amps with the silver tolex are channel switchers that have a good reputation for tone, though.

JCM-900: the 90's. Bad reputation is probably mostly due to the Hi-Gain Dual Reverb models, which had a lot of solid state components in their gain circuits as well as their reverb components. The Mark III/High-Gain-Master Volume models and later SL-X versions have a better rep. The Mark III is an extension from the JCM-800 2203/2204 but with diode clipping for more gain. The SL-X added a tube to get the more crunch through the extra gain stages.

From there, I get hesitant to say anything. I think things were already on a down-slide with the JCM-900 models, although those aren't necessarily unusable. The more complicate the later amps got (Triple Super Lead, Vintage Modern, et al.) tend to take construction shortcuts to cram everything in and serviceability gets worse. Marshalls have always had a reputation for being temperamental, even when more simply and serviceably built.

I ignore the 18 and 20 watt tube amps, which are worthy, but I cant' really speak well to.

[GardenoftheDead]

Avatar makes an 18 watt Marshall clone that's actually pretty good. Other than that, meh. I like Fenders better for pedal setups, and at the price of the really nice or vintage Marshalls I'd rather have a Mesa-Boogie for amp overdrive.

[Gone Fission]

Classic blackface or silverface Fender amps tend to have that big mid scoop that sometimes doesn't get on well with pedals, especially some drive, dirt and fuzz. IC Muff and Rat didn't get on well with a Bandmaster Reverb I had. I find the lower gain old Marshall designs are often surprisingly good clean pedal platforms.

[GardenoftheDead]

Considering it's gonna be a while until I could afford something like that, I'll stick with the modern day Fender gear which is perfectly fine.

[WeHuntKings]

In my experience, the character of big Marshalls is being too trebly.

yep. haven't played a marshall that didn't gross me out with the ice-pick like treblez

[Zounds Perspex]

Avatar makes an 18 watt Marshall clone that's actually pretty good. Other than that, meh. I like Fenders better for pedal setups, and at the price of the really nice or vintage Marshalls I'd rather have a Mesa-Boogie for amp overdrive.

18 watt Marshalls kinda rule if you want a big rock sound at manageable volumes. That said, they don't take pedals particularly well, and for most here that's a deal breaker. An SG, 18 watter and a treble booster is a good time, though.

[Zounds Perspex]

Classic blackface or silverface Fender amps tend to have that big mid scoop that sometimes doesn't get on well with pedals, especially some drive, dirt and fuzz. IC Muff and Rat didn't get on well with a Bandmaster Reverb I had. I find the lower gain old Marshall designs are often surprisingly good clean pedal platforms.

RATs and blackface are a classic combo, dude. Dirt pedals of all kinds are pretty picky in regards to the rest of your rig and eq-ing of said rig.

[univalve]

In my experience, the character of big Marshalls is being too trebly.

Unless it's the JTM45, which is a tweaked Fender Bassman.

pretty much this ALL FKKING DAAYY
i play only Fender like guitars and my playing always sounds like shit through Marshall amps other than JTM45 or Plexi 100. On the other hans elwood said, that the divided by 13 amps are marshall based: the JTR is my favorite amp

[Gone Fission]

I didn't delve into Lead vs. Bass models of the Plexi and JMP: minor changes in the early preamp changes between what was sold as guitar and bass amps through the mid 70's. A lot of guitarists prefer the bass preamp architecture, with less bass rolled off and less aggressive efforts to boost the treble. If you have one of these amps or a reissue or derivative and like it but it's a hair to shrill, look into converting it over to the Bass (& Normal) preamp.