Marshall/Rivera comparison

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs' started by bek, Aug 3, 2008.

  1. bek

    bek Member

    Messages:
    1,350
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Location:
    California
    Can anyone say anything about a comparison between the Marshall 4210 (JCM 800 50-Watt Lead 1x12 combo channel-switcher) and the Rivera Clubster? I expect the Clubster has what limitations a 10-inch speaker would have, but it seems that it is built to allow reasonable facsimiles of a Fender Deluxe and a Marshall of some sort, both in the same amp. True? I'm thinking that my old Marshall is just too much amp, whereas the Rivera would be smaller & lighter (hooray!), more versatile, and get its best tones at volumes considerably less than the Marshall. True?
     
  2. Flameout12

    Flameout12 Member

    Messages:
    1,153
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Location:
    Columbia, SC
    Awkward comparison IMO.
    The 4210 is probably 20+ years old and I'm not sure how that model compares to something more modern.
    Regardless, they are both MV amps which should help them sound respectable at lower volumes & there is a 12" Clubster as well as an EL34 45 watter.
     
  3. bek

    bek Member

    Messages:
    1,350
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Location:
    California
    It's true the Marshall is around 23-25 years old, I haven't checked. It sounds incredible when it's turned up, but it's tough to let it breathe at all in a home setting. Maybe I'm expecting too much.
     
  4. gixxerrock

    gixxerrock Member

    Messages:
    3,723
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Location:
    Parksville, B.C.
    I have an old 76 JMP 50 and a Rivera Quianna. I rarely play the Marshall as I prefer the Rivera cleans and overdrive. I find the Rivera overdrive a much richer more saturated grind. Some people don't like the mid voicing of the channel. It works great in the bedroom and at gig level.

    With Marshall cranked around 3/4 pre/master, it has a tight rhythm sound that nothing can touch (IMO). Marshall also seems to take pedals better and sound great. If you have found the perfect sweet spot of your Marshall at gig levels, don't expect a Rivera to necessarily replicate it.
     
  5. JohnnyL

    JohnnyL Member

    Messages:
    422
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2002
    I own a JCM 800 4210 and a Rivera Knucklehead. The 4210 does classic Marshall sound very well IMO. The Rivera does many things very well...I have never played a Clubster so no comparison there. The cleans from the Rivera are stellar-you will not get that from a Marshall...Rivera clean channels take pedals very well. There are times when I just take the Marshall for an all out jam session!

    Have you had a chance to try the Clubster and some pedals?

    Good luck. Let us know how it works out.

    Johnny
     
  6. pgissi

    pgissi Member

    Messages:
    2,487
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Location:
    Outta Here
    Here are some thoughts on my Marshall SLX and Rivera R30 which is the predecessor to the Chub.

    Of course in this comparison 1 is a 100watt head and the other 30 watts so I will focus on utility.

    The Marshall is of course only 1 channel so in that its not as versatile but it is special for those times when you need what it has, big, fat and loud and all marshall. From my experience with my 50watt jmp, I imagine your 4210 combo is as loud and powerful, especially into a cab and is really the choice when you want to dominate if you know what I mean but your left short without the versatility of better cleans.

    Riveras philosphy was 2 take 2 of the several archetype design philosphys (marshall and fender) and put them in 1 box and its something I used to accomplish by dragging my slx and my twin to a gig and is just not practical in smaller venues. Outdoors or large stages, its the shiznit and is for me just short of utopia, the only thing I would add is a vox from there and you have the top 3 tonal center of rock and roll founding roots. But where talking 3 amps here, not very practical.

    The Rivera being a 2 channel amp 1 marshall flavored the other fender provides a solution for this problem and is very versatile in covering classic or more modern marshall tones depending on your settings and gain boost used and in addition fender tweed or blackface (mid pull) from channel 2. Think about all the music made on those 3 tonal centers past and present.

    I dig both these amps but tend to use the rivera for the versatility with my cover band covering 5 decades of music and tones but do use the slx for larger venues when I can run it loud but my clean tones are a compromise. I beef up the rivera by using a closed back 2x12 which gives it a fatter tone with better bottom, smoother top end since I am not a fan of a 1x12 combo, this benefits the marshall channel the most but it even takes the fender blackface tones to a different place more along the lines of the bandmaster into a closed cab etc. for hard blackface but yet cleans up with the guitar pot nice or kicked hard with an OD pedal.

    I use pedals extensively into either channel on the rivera (or the slx) and with the rivera I can either OD a dirty chan setting harder or a cleaner setting for more OD flavors or use the channels on their own of course, I can do this with either channel but its with the fender chan that I tend to set cleaner and then hit it with a pedal to OD it, chan 2 is naturally cleaner overall with less gain even with the built in boost which on this amp is called ninja.

    I also use the rivera fx loop with 2 delays in parallel using a looper/mixer (boss LS-2) that can pass both loops (rv-3 and older boss dsd-2)at once or just one at a time and with this arrangement I can have rev/dry or rev/delay or delay/delay rev/rev for even whacked out ambient tones and swells etc., repeats, psuedo harmonies. Its poor mans rack processing.


    Yes this is genarally true, the nature of the jcm800 4210 50 watt tends to be that it needs to be louder to be more full bodied in its voicing and if your primary goal is something smaller and lighter with less volume for same amount of OD your generally correct, the Chub has more gain in the pre-amp. The R30 is a similar design and its something Rivera designed in for hot rodded marshall tones so that was one of my goals too but like I said, for me a 2x12 is prefered to get that tight marshall tone and the closed back is more focused and has less dispersion meaning its even more restricted volume friendly with even more OD'ven tones either with the amps boost or pedals.

    But even with just using it as a combo, its just overall more versatile having 2 channels modelled after rock and rolls lineage, you cant go wrong.

    As an additional note, I can even get some psuedo vox tones using the Riveras Fender channel with the Mid Pull engaged and using a compressor and weird boss enhancer on my pedalboard and it pulls it off nicely. The compressor is set for some medium squash to keep the tone clean but fattern it and the enhancer is set to emphasize the highs and bring in some chime.

    With this my les paul with a pearly sounds like a Rick, its very cool.

    I am always impressed by the Riveras versatlity and the eq on the amp makes this possible, very effective.
     
  7. nofootprints

    nofootprints Member

    Messages:
    10
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Just a quick observation...a friend of mine was seriously interested in the cheaper Rivera's (Pubster and Clubster, I believe). We drove 3 hours to a place we could take a test drive and in the end were NOT impressed. However, they had a Chubster there, and that was a whole different story!

    Our conclusion was the cheaper Rivera's are a great concept, but they really don't deliver. If you really want to take advantage of the Rivera concept of putting a Fender and Marshall channel in the same amp, you gotta go with the more expensive models.

    I almost did, but then tried a Marshall JVM and ended up getting one of them instead.
     
  8. rongtr

    rongtr Member

    Messages:
    1,581
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    I agree, especially if you can use the Chubster with an extension cabinet. I have a Avatar Contemporary 112 cab with my Chubster 55, and it does give it a little more "thump".
     
  9. Whoopysnorp

    Whoopysnorp Member

    Messages:
    179
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    I have owned a Rivera M100 for about three years now. Its gain voicing is vaguely Marshall-esque, but it really has its own thing going on. I think it's a very good sound though. The 'American' channel, however, is extremely Fender-like. How that happens with EL34s I have no idea, but it is.
     
  10. stratzrus

    stratzrus Philadelphia Jazz, Funk, and R&B Supporting Member

    Messages:
    19,297
    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Many prefer the Chubster to the Clubster...you are not alone.
     
  11. pgissi

    pgissi Member

    Messages:
    2,487
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Location:
    Outta Here
    Combos dont impress me in general, they are a tonal compromise generally-

    -small cab that houses speaker (chosen for versatility, that coudl be good or bad) and the chassis

    The last thing I would expect to be impressed by is a 1x10 combo.

    Its like comparing a transistor radio to a good quality hifi, no comparison.

    The secret is that these little amps can roar into bigger cabs and are there great 1x10 or 1x12 combos, sure.

    Lastly, comparing the pubster/clubster to the JVM, using the stock 1x10 or 1x12 is reall y not a fair comparison but could have been had they been mated to a 2x12, the Riveras need to be opened up and run hard.
     

Share This Page