The thing is that couple percent difference (for me at least) is often that "it" factor that separates something being inspiring and addictive to play vs just "nice". I always find the more I live with the 2 (good clones vs real deal) the more the gap widens for me in enjoyment of the clones (whether it's been klons, Marshalls, etc). YMMV
thegame:
That's the thing. What if that IT factor is highly inconsistent? Some days it's just not there? If the clone is close and always delivers the tone, then the clone may be a more attractive choice. Not to mention, if the vintage amp's IT factor is partly due to unobtanium tubes and/or voltages never exceeding 110V, if those things go away or cannot be replicated, then "IT" may turn to something that rhymes.
Well in the case of the Marshall I get it, but I meant more generally. For example, my klon, '60's Blues, '57 LP Jr, PAF's (I'm borrowing) consistently sound equally magical to me everyday, but I get what you mean with respect to the Marshall's. My '72 though seems consistent so far, but I don't play it everyday or gig or anything like that. FWIW, I only would use my rare vintage tubes for a recording (like my friend's last album) or specific tube comparison. The other 99% of the time I just use regular stuff in my Marshall's and it still has the "it" factor for me (as do my other amps with common tubes). Those tubes to me are more like the icing on the cake. They are clearly better, but to me doesn't make or break the amp. Those Bugle Boy EL34's I've got are especially precious to me
Well I've probably not tried as many Marshall's as you (I'm younger than most on here), but I've had and played quite a few. The ones I've had have been very consistent. I didn't use any live, but used them extensively when re-amp-ing my friend's last album. So far the only bad sounding old Marshall's I've played just needed a trip to the tech (they weren't mine). Also I've yet to play ANY amp made before the mid-80's that didn't have that raw/organic sound that you just don't hear in any amp made in the last 25 years (even if the amp overall didn't sound that good), not even in a Gjika, Alessandro or Schroeder. It just doesn't seem to be in the cards for more recent gear. I've not heard yet exceptions to this in any category of gear (pedals, speakers, pickups, amps, guitars, etc). They can still sound amazing in their own way and even have some tonal things that are better in some ways than vintage stuff, but for warmth, rawness, organic not a chance IME. That's why I don't advise clones of vintage stuff generally. The non-vintage gear I've kept does stuff that my vintage stuff doesn't do. Not trying to just be like something that already existsthegame:
If the clone got 95 % there WITH easily available new production tubes AND offered increased reliability (from a maintenance standpoint AND the ability to retain it's tone/feel over several hours of playing time, which is something at least some old Marshalls have a problem doing), then I'd gladly take the clone.
You both make some very good valid points and I agree with all of them. I would also add the not every vintage Marshall has the "IT" factor either. I've played many "MEH" Marshalls in my day and even some dogs. So the vintage route is not always a guarantee of amp tone nirvana.
You see it alot with comments in video clips.... "My 100 watt Marshall never sounded like that"...............What are your settings??????.
I think it comes down to some amps have it and some don't and sometimes it's a function of the amp gods smiling when it was put together.....as frustrating as that statement is...........
