Marshall amp question

[BadCat]

Best lead tone at any volume i got from any amp was form a Marshall JMP from 1980 without an FX loop with a pedal in front of the amp in the low input channel. Should have kept that amp. Sold it due to what i considered too little headroom at that time. Do the newer Marshalls like the 1959 HW or the 1987x take pedals as good as the JMP from 1980?

 

[LPMojoGL]

Best lead tone at any volume i got from any amp was form a Marshall JMP from 1980 without an FX loop with a pedal in front of the amp in the low input channel. Should have kept that amp. Sold it due to what i considered too little headroom at that time. Do the newer Marshalls like the 1959 HW or the 1987x take pedals as good as the JMP from 1980?

Personally, I like the low input on a JMP or JCM mv Marshall better than a lead spec 4 holer, as a pedal platform.
However, bass spec takes pedals great. JTM45, or something like a Germino Club 40 or Rockitt bass spec would rock.
Still, I love the low input on my 4104, so much that it gets more use than a bf Fender Dual Showman, Vox Ac15 (which is sweet in its own way), or the very respectable clean channel on a Mesa .50 Caliber Plus.

 

[Searay]

The JMP and the vertical input JCM800 are the best version of the designs and component quality in my opinion. Once the amp industry discovered cost reduction, plastic connectors, clipping diodes, ribbon cables and PCBA started it has never stopped. Used to be able to get these cheap as guys wanted the updated cabinet designs (post Rose Morris).

 

[Racerxrated]

You’re talking 2 different circuits; with a NMV Marshall they can destroy a MV Marshall IF you find the right combination of boost pedals, and the right year NMV. Early 70s nmvs have an aggressive nature that are sought out…my 72 double boosted is a monster…but the gain isn’t super saturated like a boosted 2203 can get; it’s more clear like a Wizard at volume which some may not like.
A boosted 2203 can get heavier since it’s got more gain to start with; but won’t quite get the clarity of the stock NMV….not to say the 2203 doesn’t have clarity; of course it does but the NMV is even clearer sounding.
Most cases I’d pick the 2203 unless it’s an early-mid 70s NMV…then I’d go with that.

 

[braintheory]

All the amps you mentioned should take boosts great. That should be the least of your worries and more which flavor you want: NMV 1959/1987 or 2203/4’s. To me both are worth having, but I would pony up for the vintage version over the the reissues you’re mentioning to get a more raw, organic sound. The 1959/1987’s IME in many ways are superior amps with the much extra clarity, punch/push, responsiveness and so on, but even boosted stay smoother/less hairy or growly on powerchords vs JMP2203/4’s (not as much the case vs ‘80’s 800’s), so I feel both amps have their places of greatness

For lead tones in particular, I’d say the NMV’s all the way, although there are other non-Marshall amps that I feel do better in that area. That 1980 JMP you had should be able to coax great lead tones too, but hear a good vintage NMV at volume (even without a boost) and there imo should be a pretty big difference in quality for leads there imo, especially with feel and nuance

 

[Bxlxaxkxe]

I’ve never been able to get a NMV Marshall to sound good for any gain beyond 70’s tones.

Are you guys setting the amp up cleanish and then boosting? Or getting the volumes up to 4/5 and then boosting? 6-8?

I’ve just never achieved anything remotely close to a good high gain sound by boosting a NMV Marshall. To my ear, which is of course part of the equation. We all like different stuff

OP, I’ve have had the 1959hw and had no luck getting it to sound like my 1980 2203 or do a similar vibe. Too chaotic and untethered when boosted. 2203 stays together and crunches and grinds. Best hard rock sound there is IMO

 

[braintheory]

I’ve never been able to get a NMV Marshall to sound good for any gain beyond 70’s tones.

Are you guys setting the amp up cleanish and then boosting? Or getting the volumes up to 4/5 and then boosting? 6-8?

I’ve just never achieved anything remotely close to a good high gain sound by boosting a NMV Marshall. To my ear, which is of course part of the equation. We all like different stuff

OP, I’ve have had the 1959hw and had no luck getting it to sound like my 1980 2203 or do a similar vibe. Too chaotic and untethered when boosted. 2203 stays together and crunches and grinds. Best hard rock sound there is IMO

I just turn them up loud (it is overdriven on its own at that point) and boost it with my Klon. It is very raw, brash and I can see some arguably calling it chaotic, but that’s also what makes it great at the same time. Maybe not the sound for everyone, but those guys just have wimpy ears (kidding). The 1967 one I had and others I’ve tried from 1967 and earlier actually sounded dark, not brash or kerrang-y, but still I could see some maybe finding it too chaotic sounding. I think it’s just part of the NMV overdriven sound

 

[SpiderWars]

I’ve never been able to get a NMV Marshall to sound good for any gain beyond 70’s tones.

Are you guys setting the amp up cleanish and then boosting? Or getting the volumes up to 4/5 and then boosting? 6-8?

I’ve just never achieved anything remotely close to a good high gain sound by boosting a NMV Marshall. To my ear, which is of course part of the equation. We all like different stuff

OP, I’ve have had the 1959hw and had no luck getting it to sound like my 1980 2203 or do a similar vibe. Too chaotic and untethered when boosted. 2203 stays together and crunches and grinds. Best hard rock sound there is IMO

I typically play a variac’d Superlead (Ed-spec clone) and plugged straight in it gets all the gain I want and gets the sound I want. But it’s just VH1 levels of gain. And I rarely if ever get a better sound by boosting it, straight in sounds best to me on that amp.

If I want to chug then a boosted 2203 is still king for me. Overall I prefer the NMV but for chugs it’s the boosted MV.

It sounds like you are experiencing about similar but you like a little more chug-friendly gain.

 

[Bxlxaxkxe]

I typically play a variac’d Superlead (Ed-spec clone) and plugged straight in it gets all the gain I want and gets the sound I want. But it’s just VH1 levels of gain. And I rarely if ever get a better sound by boosting it, straight in sounds best to me on that amp.

If I want to chug then a boosted 2203 is still king for me. Overall I prefer the NMV but for chugs it’s the boosted MV.

It sounds like you are experiencing about similar but you like a little more chug-friendly gain.

I’m right there with you. Straight in on a NVM sounds best, maybe a rangemaster for a little extra sauce. But for anything “heavy”, boosted 2203 all day

 

[Racerxrated]

I’ve never been able to get a NMV Marshall to sound good for any gain beyond 70’s tones.

Are you guys setting the amp up cleanish and then boosting? Or getting the volumes up to 4/5 and then boosting? 6-8?

I’ve just never achieved anything remotely close to a good high gain sound by boosting a NMV Marshall. To my ear, which is of course part of the equation. We all like different stuff

OP, I’ve have had the 1959hw and had no luck getting it to sound like my 1980 2203 or do a similar vibe. Too chaotic and untethered when boosted. 2203 stays together and crunches and grinds. Best hard rock sound there is IMO

I think it’s amp/pedal dependent…you’ve heard my double boosted clip, it’s no different than any boosted 2203 gain-wise. But in the room vs an 83 2203 A/Bd, it’s much clearer/ballsy and just plain sounds better. But, I tried many boosts with it and none of them really did much more than a 70s rock thing…until I tried the cheapest pedal I have. Then it sounded killer.
Just one of those things where for no reason it just works well.
Lots of great 80s tones were recorded with a stock NMV and a boost….Accept, Ratt to name a few.
But, a 2203 and a boost is tried and true, much easier to get what you want vs a NMV + experimenting….I bought my 72 just to have a cool vintage NMV around. I didn’t expect it to react so well to my cheap pedals lol.

 

[braintheory]

I’m right there with you. Straight in on a NVM sounds best, maybe a rangemaster for a little extra sauce. But for anything “heavy”, boosted 2203 all day

I often like mine best straight in too, but my Klon is one of the few boosts that really also makes it sound great (very picky amp). I’ve got a real vintage rangemaster too and it does sound great with it, but it’s a much more specific sound that I’d argue makes it sound more old school than unboosted. It’s good for Blackmore I guess and maybe Scorpion’s stuff, but hard to use for too many styles with that boost. They’re not really the amp to use for heavy stuff. The 2203’s work better for that since the low end is denser and there’s more growl to those amps, but the overall tonal quality and clarity is higher in on these NMV Marshall’s

 

[Kyrpajyra]

Best lead tone at any volume i got from any amp was form a Marshall JMP from 1980 without an FX loop with a pedal in front of the amp in the low input channel. Should have kept that amp. Sold it due to what i considered too little headroom at that time. Do the newer Marshalls like the 1959 HW or the 1987x take pedals as good as the JMP from 1980?

Seems so, dude here nails AFD tone with a 1987x + boost.

 

[LPMojoGL]

A lot of y'all are talking boosting, but OP mentioned pedal into the low input.
So I was thinking something like a Big Muff ala Smashing Pumkins.
Basically any good pedal for leads sound great in the lo input. Fuzzes rock here!
I think the low input sounds more natural for pedals than a bf Fender. Think Gilmour, Cobain, anyone that used a good base clean sound and pedals for dirt, that's how I use the low input on the 2204/3s. No effects loop needed is a bonus.

 

[LPMojoGL]

The rest of his rig is interesting. Ppimv, boosting with a Fender Engager(?) and into a g12-65.
I've added a ppimv to almost every 4 holer I've had. Much prefer to attenuating or reamping. Let's you get all the dirt and shape the tone at lower volumes.
Also interesting to note he sold the 87x and kept the 2203.

Seems so, dude here nails AFD tone with a 1987x + boost.

 

[Racerxrated]

The rest of his rig is interesting. Ppimv, boosting with a Fender Engager(?) and into a g12-65.
I've added a ppimv to almost every 4 holer I've had. Much prefer to attenuating or reamping. Let's you get all the dirt and shape the tone at lower volumes.
Also interesting to note he sold the 87x and kept the 2203.

My 72 is the first NMV I’ve owned that wasn’t modded in some way. Others all had at least a MV added; I didn’t care for them at all and quickly sold/returned them. They sounded like a sterile low gain 2203.
Maybe those MVs they used were not the right kind?
I’d never even consider putting a MV on my 72.

 

[LPMojoGL]

My 72 is the first NMV I’ve owned that wasn’t modded in some way. Others all had at least a MV added; I didn’t care for them at all and quickly sold/returned them. They sounded like a sterile low gain 2203.
Maybe those MVs they used were not the right kind?
I’d never even consider putting a MV on my 72.

Sounds like I want to play your 72!

 

[jtgainor]

I’ve never been much of a gain from pedals guy so I’m not a huge help, but a healthy 2203 with a Suhr koko in front of it is a killer amp that will do just about everything except for chugs. I could see the low input working well for op’s needs.

 

[Kyrpajyra]

The rest of his rig is interesting. Ppimv, boosting with a Fender Engager(?) and into a g12-65.
I've added a ppimv to almost every 4 holer I've had. Much prefer to attenuating or reamping. Let's you get all the dirt and shape the tone at lower volumes.
Also interesting to note he sold the 87x and kept the 2203.

PPIMV is a game changer for sure as you need to have the thing cranked to make it sound good with a boost. Tho recording loud sounds even better and that's how it was done back in the day if you listen to old isolated guitar tracks.