Roland JC 40. Anyone?

slybird

Member
Messages
6,468
Quilter stuff blows it away, IMO. Played through a JC-40 for several years but his amps are much better. Way more dynamic, way better with pedals.. better EQ stack all around. The JC is a good solid state but the Quilter stuff is way more refined and much newer.
I currently own a JC40 and Quilter 202. I disagree about Quilter sounding more refined. Quilter sound is less refined, has a much rawer old school sound compared to the Roland. Comparing the Quilter 202 when clean to the Roland, the Roland is also more dynamic.

As far as the EQ stack, I guess it would depend on the model. I used to own the 101 Mini. I really didn't like the EQ on it, never could get it bright enough with a couple of my guitars. The 101 Mini was also overly bass heavy with no way to dial it down enough for my taste. Roland EQ is much better than than the 101 Mini.
 

Jabby92

Member
Messages
3,738
I own a Quilter. It doesn't sound very good IMO.
Care to explain why?

I currently own a JC40 and Quilter 202. I disagree about Quilter sounding more refined. Quilter sound is less refined, has a much rawer old school sound compared to the Roland. Comparing the Quilter 202 when clean to the Roland, the Roland is also more dynamic.

As far as the EQ stack, I guess it would depend on the model. I used to own the 101 Mini. I really didn't like the EQ on it, never could get it bright enough with a couple of my guitars. The 101 Mini was also overly bass heavy with no way to dial it down enough for my taste. Roland EQ is much better than than the 101 Mini.
In what environment or setting are you playing in? I've used both amps at gig level and bedroom level and like I said the Roland is good but I find it way too clean and with no way to dial out the harsh high end frequencies or control the compression (most Quilters have a high cut + limiter which is extremely useful). It also does not overdrive like a tube amp will, which is where the Quilter shines and being able to control it with the limiter is very good.

I also find the EQ is way more responsive in Quilter amps so personally I was able to refine it way more. So to says it not as refined to me is false, it comes down to how you as a player refine your own sound, gear and EQ.

Anyway I'm judging this off the Mach 2 which is the highest end Quilter available but I had a similar experience using the 101R which I found to be a very good mini Blackface style amp.
 

83stratman

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,988
Admittedly I only have about an hour total experience with the JC-40. I was trying a Fender 68 Custom Princeton Reverb and for grins I decided to AB the Princeton with the JC-40 that was sitting right next to the Princeton in the shop. I was blown away. Surprisingly (for me) I LOVED the JC-40. My thoughts of getting a Princeton are gone and I won't consider one again because of the JC-40. I ended up not getting either though, mostly because I have too many amps as it is.

Original Tone Block 200 (I have played a few of the combos and the smaller mini head as well, and they all have the same irritating characteristic IMO). Both gigs and at home. Various cabs from a 1x12 closed back Greenback, to a semi open back 2x12 Eminence GB128, or Greenbacks (depending), to a Marshall 4x12 with 75s, to a full stack (8x12) provided back line (Soldano cabs IIRC).

Distortion just plain sucks on these amps. No other way to describe it. For gigs I use a single channel Carl Martin Plexi Tone pedal (the gold one). At home I use what ever my mood is, which for distortion could be anything from a big box three button Carl Martin Plexi Tone, to an EVH 5150, to a Freidman BE-OD, to a Tube Screamer. Also at home any goofy effects I feel like zoning out on, such as reverb, delay, flange, phase, chorus, etc.

There is a strange mid range quality that can't be dialed out, and I can't describe it or put my finger on it. The amp can be too bassy and that can't be dialed out either. Something like a Boss eq pedal could maybe fix it, but I don't bother.

It is still my main giging amp. I do get tone compliments at gigs with it, but I just don't like its sound. I dislike how it sounds so much that I won't even use it at home anymore. At home my old Fender SS Harvard Reverb II and SS Marshall Lead 20 will eat its lunch tone wise. For reference, my main at home amp is a 69 Bassman head through a closed back 1x12 Greenback with pedals.

Take my opinion with a grain of salt as I am an oddball as I prefer a JC-40 over a Princeton Reverb 68 custom, I think my DRRI sucks, and I am considering trading my DRRI for a new Tone Master Twin Reverb!

Care to explain why?
 

jeff25

Member
Messages
211
One of the most surprising tones I've ever come up with was HB's into one of those cheap Dano black distortions into a JC55 with a touch of chorus. Stupid fun! Those amps have a fair amount of EQ available to play with, and pedals that mimic a certain amp (as opposed to pushing the preamp) seem to play well with them.
 
Messages
2,900
I currently own a JC40 and Quilter 202. I disagree about Quilter sounding more refined. Quilter sound is less refined, has a much rawer old school sound compared to the Roland. Comparing the Quilter 202 when clean to the Roland, the Roland is also more dynamic.

As far as the EQ stack, I guess it would depend on the model. I used to own the 101 Mini. I really didn't like the EQ on it, never could get it bright enough with a couple of my guitars. The 101 Mini was also overly bass heavy with no way to dial it down enough for my taste. Roland EQ is much better than than the 101 Mini.
Agreed .. In regards to the Roland JC being more refined than Quilter ... Quilter, by his own admission, is striving to really capture the "tube warmth" by way of a solid state platform .. He has come incredibly close .. Thete is still progress to be made .. He may never get there .. However, he will never stop trying .. Even falling short of his objective, he is building some great sounding EXTREMELY PORTABLE products

When measuring his success on test equipment in videos, Mike Quilter achieves some impressive figures and can take a bow and have no fear of hubris. That being said, commendable achievement aside, when plugged into various cabs, Quilter's products seem to lose some of the magic. Those wonderful achievements Mike Quilter achieved on his workbench are real but they just dont translate well into a live, real world environment. Clearly, that is nothing more than one man's opinion; others will just love the Quilter products. Mike Quilter's indefatigable pursuit of a true warm, raw tube sound via a solid state platform will give birth to some really great products in the process of striving for that goal

The JC-40 is the epitome of refinement, and that can be a turn-off to certain players. Older players will understand the following analogy: Roland is to guitar amplification and sound what Bose was to stereo systems and their sound in the 80s. It's clean, powerful, dynamic, but has a filtered quality to it. They really are great to have in a studio setting ... Total workhorses.
 
Messages
2,900
Don't know anything about the JC 40 - but the JC-120 is the favorite of many guitarist wanting that clean beautiful chorus sound. I've used one and can sit in front playing for hours grooving on the sound.
I bought my first JC .. a JC-120 after learning that some of my more favorite bands were using them in the studio. Jazz musicians .. Top 40s studio musicians .. Classic Rock musicians .. And Metal guitarists .. after seeing the Roland JC mentioned on some of my favorite albums liner notes/credits, I took note of how versatile the amp really is. Then I learned that Iron Maiden was using them - i sorta dug their sound - and i said "hasta la vista, senhor Peavey. .. Hola, senhor Roland" .. I love its clean tone .. The distortion at the time was crap .. Though the addition of a tube screamer put the sound more in my wheelhouse than without it .. I use the amp's Distortion in conjunction with the ibanez tube screamer .. and it wasn't too shabby .. For metal .. I used an American Metal ..
I can understand and appreciate how people are so loyal to their tube amps... I am not one of them .. I am only loyal to my own sound .. if it works for me then it's in my arsenal .. I have two tube amps and I wouldn't be without them .. but I am not a tube amp fan to the exclusion using NO solid state amps and I don't feel threatened enough by solid state amps to berate and dismiss them .. I always recommend that my students play anything and everything .. don't dismiss anything until you've tried it .. and I tell them that there were times that I tried something and dismissed it and years later I Revisited it and I liked it... Play EVERY piece of gear that you can .. Nothing ventured .. Nothing gained
 
Last edited:

esowden

Member
Messages
203
I was looking for something more portable than my Archon head and 2x12 cabinet so I bought a JC-40 to use with my Valvulator. Played that for a while but never could get the tone I was looking for. Removed the Valvulator and was pleasantly surprised with what I heard. The amp had a sweet grind - a bit too much emphasis on the highs but still sounded great. To me - better than the Peavey Bandit sitting in the corner. Switched the speakers out with a pair of Eminence Lil' Buddys and found an even better sound. No, it doesn't have the feel of my Archon or Statesman but the tone when the JC-40 is cranked is glorious. The Lil' Buddys help control the ice-pick highs and add a fullness that wasn't there before. The distortion sounds good when kept on the minimal side but I can get all the dirt I need with my FX8. The cleans are to die for. The JC-40 is definitely a keeper. Because of it's portability, the tube amps have taken a back seat.
 

LobsangNY

Member
Messages
1
I've always loved the JC120, but I think they improved many things with the JC40. It is now my favorite new guitar amp. I bought one for my recording studio collection. I bet it will get used a lot by visiting guitarist. And BTW, I really like the distortion. It is a bit tamer than some distortion effects but it sounds warm to me. IMHO the JC40 will become a classic!8
 

topoftherock

Member
Messages
2
I know, I know........solid state.

But I like clean, using pedals for dirt.
So, anyone here played one or gig with one?
I've had my JC40 for 2 years now. It's a great sounding amp, though not quite as good for guitar as the bigger, more expensive Fender valve amps.....or so I thought until I recently tried a 7 band EQ pedal on my board.
The EQ pedal seems to work a totally different way to the Bass, Mid & Treble knobs on the JC40, and corrects and improves an already very good sound. I can even make the two 10's sound like two 12's. My EQ pedal is just a simple Danelectro 'Fish & Chips'.
 

teemuk

Member
Messages
3,178
Its an ancient circuit. Better options available these days.
Well... actually looks can deceive: The modern JC-40 has an entirely DSP -based preamp; chorus, distortion, tone controls, everything, is digital and modelled. There's nothing common with the old analog Jazz Chorus amps except the cosmetic packaging and the overall concept.
 




Trending Topics

Top