D
Deleted member 8761
Guest
Slaved into Marshalls.
Sell your mark IIC+: the black album was a mark 3.
- Thread starter VESmedic
- Start date
NineShallDie
Well-known member
No, that was only for some solos according to Flemming Rasmussen.
Attachments
D
Deleted member 8761
Guest
That is cool info. Thx. However, in earlier interviews they were firm in their statements about using the power section of the Marshalls. Doesn't matter to me, because it will sound different due to the outboard EQ equipment and studio magic.
panhead
Well-known member
Well boogie woogie doesnt know his ass from a hole in the ground for starters.
NineShallDie
Well-known member
Never seen any interviews stating that, but I’d like to see if you can find them
However Kirk said this after the release of Puppets.
Attachments
riffsfordaze
Well-known member
Indeed! Right in Flemming's studio notes on the recording of Master if you care to look them up on his website. Also says the serial numbers of the two Marshall JCM 800 4x12s, both he wrote as 300 watts. Is it a myth that some Marshall JCM 800 4x12s were mislabeled for wattage or not?
Last edited:
NineShallDie
Well-known member
Yep I’ve seen them. And there are no mentioning of Marshall amps which you’d think if they actually did use them.
I have a 1960 cab that is labeled 260W, but have the original G12T-75 speakers, dated 1984. But I haven’t seen them mislabeled the other way around. It’s possible I guess. I think for James’s rhythm they used 75’s and maybe Kirk used a cab with 65’s.
JR-OZ
Active member
Take a mark 3 c+ish green stripe that Bendenali did his thing to. Change the filter caps to higher spec and get a mercury magnetics larger transformer and your mark 3 will be one of the best in your stable. It makes the amp clearer on the top and bottom. When standing 5 front of your cab it seems likes three feet higher and lower of clear power hitting you with that mark grind and smoothnesses c+ thing at the same time.
That was recommended to me by someone in the know. When I blew mine up on the road.
Black album had 40 plus amps in the studio you can bet tons of shit was used all over when needed. They took week or two to get the guitar sound before they even started tracking. Lots of room mics too.
They had two over dub rooms and editing suites there. As someone pointed out all kind of marks were used. I think the mark 3 was used at times (not all the time) to bring out point and touch of clarity into the sound.
I think the assistant engineer or runner told that to a bunch of junkies at aes few years back. I forgot his name.
Flame on
Ohh and Bobs Marshalls were in there for mid range also.
That was recommended to me by someone in the know. When I blew mine up on the road.
Black album had 40 plus amps in the studio you can bet tons of shit was used all over when needed. They took week or two to get the guitar sound before they even started tracking. Lots of room mics too.
They had two over dub rooms and editing suites there. As someone pointed out all kind of marks were used. I think the mark 3 was used at times (not all the time) to bring out point and touch of clarity into the sound.
I think the assistant engineer or runner told that to a bunch of junkies at aes few years back. I forgot his name.
Flame on
Ohh and Bobs Marshalls were in there for mid range also.
rottingcorpse
Well-known member
That's what I'm talking about!!
anomaly
Well-known member
The transformers are just as big in the Mark IVb as they are in the Mark III red stripe I used to own and the early mark IVa's had the same PT as the III's. The Mark IIC+ on the other hand has much bigger transformers.
Also, the very early Dual rec's have Mark III transformers and then they started using the Mark IV transformers, and the Dual rectifier is one of the most open, big sounding amplifiers around. I think the openness of the IIC+ has more to do with the circuit design more than the transformers used to be honest, although it's all part of the equation.
Another thing I must note is the Mark III red stripe I had was not a dynamic amp at all, it was very flat sounding, even when compared to the Mark IVb I have now, which is pretty compressed. But those palm mutes punch out on the IVb, which they don't really punch at all on a Mark III. The wav forms when recording a III are very narrow and flat, but on a IVb there's more going on there, especially on palm mutes, or power chords that ring out.
Last edited:
Speeddemon
Well-known member
I would guess that by '85 or '86, the number of JCM800 cabs loaded with T75 were (becoming) more common than the 260W ones with G12-65's.
As someone who owns both speakers from that era, they're closer than you think, soundwise. It's the latter (90's) T75, that gave them such a bad rap.
cardinal
Well-known member
I assume some Metallica fan knows this and now I'm somewhat curious: what transformer is in Hetfield's C++? The 100PT, 105PT, or the X101 (or whatever that export transformer is called). Each has a different plate voltage to the extent anyone thinks they could hear such a thing in these recordings.
LP Freak
Well-known member
I’ve got one right in front of me. I’ll part with it to the first offer over $1K
Racerxrated
Well-known member
After my first cab with 65s I started buying up 260w cabs at GC.com when I found them…problem is, most ended up having the dreaded M70s. I will say though, one of those cabs sounded like metal…very scooped and perfect for that type of tone. The rest sounded like ass.
Markedman
Well-known member
Not a myth, neither is that the GT70's sound like shit. Truth
midnightlaundry
Well-known member
This shit is getting into the EVH Marshall territory..
Speeddemon
Well-known member
You mean the GM70, or the GT75?
Early version G(12)T75 (either vented or non-vented, but with the old label that has the serifed font) sound awesome.
Good versions (vented on the left: )
Bad version:
Never played this one knowingly (although I played many festivals with bog standard 1960A cabs, so who knows... I didn't like those cabs 9 out of 10 times), but I assume it's more in the vein of the latter, crappy ones:
NineShallDie
Well-known member
I haven’t found any pictures of the back of their amps. So this is only assumptions.
Most likely they are factory +’s and not C upgraded to C+(+). They do have the IIC gain boost faceplates. But I haven’t seen any pull deep faceplates with presence up front. I guess Mesa didn’t bother to make any since they were so few anyway. Presence up front would indicate non reverb versions.
This would eliminate the 100PT since they were the IIC transformer.
Mike B told me their amps are DG and DRG. If they would have the X101 transformer, they would be DGX and DRGX. He could have just left that out though.
But based on that I believe they are the 105PT.
anomaly
Well-known member
I think those 300 watt Marshall cabs were actually loaded with the early incarnation of the V30, marshall's version. They were rated higher back in the day. Could be wrong though. It sure sounds like v30's to me. I do know for sure that they used v30 loaded marshall cab's for the black album... or Celestion Vintage speakers as they are now called.