Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs' started by griffstrat, Dec 3, 2005.
Or is it the 4500? Is the SLX worth checking out?
ive used a SLX before,its an exellent amplifier ,realy is ,it isnt diode clipping,it has 4 preamp tubes.i had mine through a 4x12 w/ greenbacks and it sounded awsome.
trick is to get the input gain adjusted just right so you dont get mush front end gain.
Even I love the SLX!! As long as it is the EL34 model. FAT tones!
All of the 900 series amps use diode clipping. As to whether that's good or bad, is an entirely different discussion.
If it sounds good, it is good. No matter how you got there....
I thought the 2100 & SL-X were only tube with no diode clipping
It's not well documented in Doyle. He shows the 2100 and 2500 schematics which have diode clipping. He doesn't show the later 2100 SLX nor the 2500 SLX which do have the extra (4th) preamp valve and no diode clipping (just op-amps for post-distortion stuff).
The SLX's do NOT use diode clipping...
I just looked at the schematic on my hardrive and the 2100 slx does NOT have diode clipping.
The SLX EL34 is the best high gain modern Marshall sound I have ever heard. It did not sound diode like to me, but I never knew for sure. WAY fatter and less buzzy than the "normal"900 and newer2000 series amps to me.
Well I guess I was wrong. Either way, every single JCM 900 I've played has been totally unusable. I wanted to like the Dual Reverb but every one I tried (over 20) was no good. The SLX had just a horrible gain sound.
I'll stick with my JCM 800.
i have both the 800 and slx. And no, it doesn't have "just a horrible gain sound"
you played crates. they're spelled a bit different than marshall, but i can see where the confusion could ensue.
there's no way you tried 20 900's and thought they all sucked if you like an 800. no way
Maybe it is the puny JCM900 output transformer that accounts for Hamilton's distaste of the series? They all seem small sounding to me and I've attributed it to the the OT (Marshall really cheaped out).... And I've also played at least 20 of them.
Does the SLX have that small transformer? If so, I would not think thats the problem. The SLX sounds monsterous, and IMO, blows the buzzy 800 series out of the water.
Excuse me??? Your attitude is not needed. This isn't HC.
Don't tell me what I have played or not played.
Don't tell me what I liked or didn't like.
I tried AT LEAST 20 JCM 900 heads. I truely wanted to like them. Every single one was horrible. None came anywhere close to my stock JCM 800 head.
Interesting. I have not heard others use "buzzy" to describe the JCM 800 2204.
To each his own.
Is the 2204 the pre channel switcher? The 800 series before they used the diode clipping, were not buzzy. Problem is, they have very little gain. You needed a box to get your gain, which then introduced the buzziness anyway. Then the 800 series came out with the diode clipping, (which gave you more gain) but it became buzzy, and you STILL needed a box to get a singing lead. The 900 series came out with finally enogh gain, but were buzzy as all get out. IMO, the SLX addressed this problem, and gave you the fatnesss of the early (pre diode) 800 series, with even MORE gain than the 900 or 2000 series amps, but without the buzziness. Thats why I always dug them. Also, the SLX with the 5881 tubes $ucked IMO. Buzzy and thin sounding. Those do not count.
wow. Now we've had people say BOTH the Slx AND the 800's suck...
Not saying either is my cup of tea, but i own both and there's no WAY to discount either amp at being good at what it does...
This may as well turn into a "Mesa is better than Marshall thread" bc that's where it's headed....
Yes, I'm talking about the single channel models. I agree that you need a box to push them over the top. They do respond very well to pedals though.
The SLX amps that I tried were the worst Marshall amps I've ever heard. Not sure what tubes were in them. Could have been 5881. I don't know.