or is it just the age that makes the older ones cost more? my pal has a 1960a with the older ones, i have a 1960a with the newer ones, and i really don't notice a difference, at least with my amp. also... why are the newer labeled ones like the cheapest of all the higher end celestion speakers? just because they came stock in 1960 cabs? do a lot of people not like them? they're in my top 5, but i haven't played everything.
why are the celestion 75's with the old label like twice as expensive used as the 90's era ones? are they actually different?
- Thread starter JimAnsell
- Start date
cardinal
Well-known member
The earliest ones have a vented magnet like the 65s and people say they sound different.
After that, I'm not sure if the design varied over the years. Presumably so (seems like all Celestions have)? Not sure anyone's really done a deep dive on the T75 versions though.
I have a quad from '97 that sound great IMHO. Not my favorite speaker but they certainly don't sound bad.
After that, I'm not sure if the design varied over the years. Presumably so (seems like all Celestions have)? Not sure anyone's really done a deep dive on the T75 versions though.
I have a quad from '97 that sound great IMHO. Not my favorite speaker but they certainly don't sound bad.
SpiderWars
Well-known member
I have read the same. I have an original 1960a from '84 and it sounds great. I like greenbacks and V30s too but just for different sounds. T75s have their place and I find the old vented ones to sound a little sweeter than the newer ones. But maybe its just because they are old.
I wonder if the old sandpaper-the-cone trick would make new ones sound like old ones. Johan has a couple videos testing that with new GBs.
kmanick
Well-known member
I've had several quads of the early V1 versions with the vents. They definitely sound different than the current version (much better to my ears)
they are much closer in sound to the old G12-65s but with bigger magnets. they sound tremendous with JCM800 style heads, definitely more mid punch and less fizz than the recent 75's. If I wasn't such a Scumback fanboy I'd still have them in my Marshall jcm800 4X12, they sounded great with my Splawn.
they are much closer in sound to the old G12-65s but with bigger magnets. they sound tremendous with JCM800 style heads, definitely more mid punch and less fizz than the recent 75's. If I wasn't such a Scumback fanboy I'd still have them in my Marshall jcm800 4X12, they sounded great with my Splawn.
Last edited:
Racerxrated
Well-known member
This, as a few others have suggested. Seems to me the 75 started off sounding more like a high wattage greenback which was how they were advertised. They progressively lost more and more mids over the years until today’s version that to me sounds like ass even with a good stock Marshall. I did own an early 90s beat to shit B cab that sounded pretty good though. But for me the vented versions are a very good sounding speaker and like night/day different from the mid scooped versions of today.
I have an 83 B cab with the first version and it sounds killer, very close to my 79 cab with 65s but with more high end, deeper lows
turboblues
Active member
I still have 3 old Marshall 1960 cabs with G12T-75's (one from 1984 and two from 1986).I always preferred these over my old blackback cab.
jdel77
Well-known member
The vintage 80’s UK G12T-75’s are exactly the same as 65’s except the 75’s have a Kapton (plastic) former, whereas the 65’s have fibreglass. The 75’s are rated at an extra 10w handling as a result.
Vintage UK 75’s are awesome speakers. The Chinese reissues are completely different, very midscooped. There’s rumours that Celestion contracted a Malaysian supplier and all sorts of other info on the net, but there’s a thread on the Marshall forum where an 80’s UK G12T-75 was frequency mapped against a new UK reissue G12-65 and the graphs weren’t close, they were identical.
Vintage UK 75’s are awesome speakers. The Chinese reissues are completely different, very midscooped. There’s rumours that Celestion contracted a Malaysian supplier and all sorts of other info on the net, but there’s a thread on the Marshall forum where an 80’s UK G12T-75 was frequency mapped against a new UK reissue G12-65 and the graphs weren’t close, they were identical.
Racerxrated
Well-known member
Nope. I have no clue where you get your info; but if you’re suggesting the 90s UK version is the same as the early vented versions then clearly you’ve never heard them. This is Captain Obvious to anyone who’s played these versions.
Even the 2nd version white labels in 87 sound very different to me than any 90s version I’ve played.
Deleted member 26052
Active member
What Scumback do you prefer for an 800 style amp?
I have a pair of the original vented 75s and just paid for a pair of M75 but was also looking at BM75 as well as the LD versions of each.
Mark Skid
Well-known member
Wrong. I played through both UK versions (vented and non-vented) using four different cabinets. They sound identical. Try turning down the preamp distortion... It's liberating, I promise. To be fair, I've never played through 90's era UK 75's. I'll assume they are fitted with the MIC style cones. I'm referring to vented vs non-vented early UK made 75's.
Racerxrated
Well-known member
First version vs 2nd version, I would imagine they are more similar than different yes. I haven’t had the 2 at the same time; while I did have a vented version cab with an early 90s cab that sounded good, but very different than the vented.
Mark Skid
Well-known member
Someone on TGP did a detailed sound/build comparison of the early UK vs later UK 75 drivers. When I say later, I'm referring to the UK made version with the China made cone. If I recall correctly, it was his contention, that Celestion began sourcing China made cones before moving production of non-vintage spec speakers to China. This would certainly account for the confusion. It's been a while since I've played through one, but if memory serves, the two cones can be identified by the size of the dust cap. The 2nd version (I believe) has a smaller center vs the original UK 75 with the larger (65) dust cap. It's a mess!
Last edited:
Racerxrated
Well-known member
All I know is, the first time I played through a first year T75 cab from 1983 i was shocked as to how close they sounded to my 1979 G1265 cab. No other T75 cab I owned ever sounded like that, be it from 87, 88, 92 or newer.
kmanick
Well-known member
I have M75's in my Splawn 2X12 and a mix of M75's/J75's in my Jcm800 4X12. I love em both, but the 4X12 is amazing.
I've not felt the need to try any others as these cabs give me the sound that I was looking for with my Splawn.
Mark Skid
Well-known member
My '87 Silver Jubilee sounded identical to early 80's T75 loaded JCM cabinet. I compared the '87 SJ cabinet against my Marshall Randy Rhoads cabinet w/T75's... No contest! The RR cabinet was downright awful sounding compared to the '87 SJ cabinet. I then reloaded the RR cabinet with G12-65's, and it rocked! Nearly identical to the SJ. Had the 65's not been new, I doubt that anyone could tell the difference.
What it comes down to is this... The vented G12T drivers are guaranteed to have the original cone; as long as they have not been re-coned. Some non-vented G12T drivers have the original UK cones, others do not. That's all there is to it. Anyone who tells you that the '87 Silver Jubilee T75's are the same as the China made G12T 75's is either full of shit... or, the original G12-T75 drives have been replaced with China made T75 drivers. In short... The original UK made T75 cones are not exclusive to the vented style drivers.
Racerxrated
Well-known member
If you’ve ever played a Jube 2551 A or BV cab, those early 8 ohm Marshall Vintages are also very unique and different than the early 90s 16 ohm Vintages. Very warm and fat sounding; I drove down to Chicago to buy an AV cab years back for 300 bucks. Should’ve kept it…