opinions needed marshall tsl100 for a boogie dr 3ch?

[twothemax]

i have a deal pending. my 3 ch dr for a tsl100 marshall. what do you guys think. should i go for it??
i play everything from clean to classic and heavy rock. just need some opinions.
thanks

 

[94Tremoverb]

No, absolutely not - TSLs are cheaper amps, less well built and have reliability issues... as well as less versatile soundwise. If you really prefer the sound of the Marshall you should either get a significant cash adjustment in your favor, or buy it and keep the DR as a backup for when it goes down.

 

[twothemax]

No, absolutely not - TSLs are cheaper amps, less well built and have reliability issues... as well as less versatile soundwise. If you really prefer the sound of the Marshall you should either get a significant cash adjustment in your favor, or buy it and keep the DR as a backup for when it goes down.

thanks buddy. i kind of thought that i would be going down hill. i absolutely love my dr, but you know a guy always is looking for different things.
thanks again for your comment

 

[Turumbar82]

Definitely keep your Recto. It's a better amp in every way. Marshall TSL's don't sound so great and are not known for being reliable. My buddy had one and it died on him.

If you want a Marshall sound maybe look into distortion boxes to use with your clean channel. It's a cheap way of approximating sounds.

 

[twothemax]

thanks guys. just started up the dr and took her for a drive ,and man i must be crazy. she sounds like a dream.

 

[94Tremoverb]

You should also find that if you dial it carefully, you can get quite close to the sound of the TSL with the DR - much closer than the other way round. Not absolutely exact, but close enough that you probably don't need to change amps. (Getting the DR to nail a real vintage Marshall tone is a little harder, but even that can be done closer than you might think.)

Set the DR for Bold/Diode, run EL34s if you haven't tried it already, and the rest is just down to listening carefully and adjusting. There's really nothing the TSL will do that the DR won't, except blow a transformer for no very good reason or incinerate its main circuit board .

 

[YellowJacket]

I'm actually very surprised how similar the two amps sound when you try them back to back. The Marshall is much more shrill and bright but you can easily dial it down into the same territory as the Dual. Something has me curious though, I wonder if a marshall replacement tranny from Mercury Magnetics would give a dual a more 'marshall' tone? Just a thought.

 

[94Tremoverb]

Probably not. While there is a lot of talk about how much the transformers affect tone, and how upgrading to something like a Mercury Magnetics makes a night and day difference, etc etc, it's really not entirely true. Transformers do affect tone, but only in a minor way - assuming you're comparing ones of a similar spec, which a 100W Marshall and 100W Mesa will be, roughly. They're probably the most important of the components in the amp, but still come a long way behind speakers, tubes and the overall circuit design in terms of what gives an amp its distinctive sound. The minor change you get may be important if you're chasing a particular quality in the tone, but it isn't going to make one amp sound like another - putting EL34s in a DR doesn't make it sound exactly like a Marshall either, and the tubes make more difference than the transformers.

 

[YellowJacket]

But once you change the tubes and output transformer, what really is left to change on a tube amp? I would thing changing both of these would have a fairly pronounced effect on the tone, even if the amp still sounds like a Dual Rectifier. I know there is more to a tube amp aside from these two components but come on, the Dual Rectifier is basically a copy of a modded JCM800.

I agree though, speakers / speaker enclosure has a HUGE impact on tone.

 

[94Tremoverb]

Saying the DR is basically a copy of a modded JCM800 is like saying a Porsche 911 is just a copy of a modded VW Beetle .

It's the amp circuit design that makes by far the biggest difference in sound, more than all the parts put together. Transformers, tubes, cap types, resistor types etc (in about that order) just tweak the fine nuances or 'texture' of the sound. Layout can make a big difference too, especially in higher gain PCB amps.

Actually, the DR is based on (not a copy of - there's a lot that's very different) the Soldano SLO, which is in turn based on a modded JCM800 (or more likely JMP, going by when Mike Soldano was first doing them) 2203, which is a modded JMP Super lead, which is an evolved JTM45, which is a copy of a Fender '59 Bassman 5F6-A! But that doesn't mean the DR is just a Bassman copy... (which I think is itself based on common 50s circuitry familiar to Leo Fender, but I don't know exactly what).

There is a distinct family lineage through all of these amps though, mostly centered around the cathode-follower tone stack stage, which gives them that rich 'Marshally' crunch tone that's almost impossible to really nail without it. But it's the rest of the circuit that separates them in gain and tone.

For example, the main reason the JTM45 - even through the same speakers - doesn't sound the same as the Bassman is not the tubes (which were the same, originally) or even the output transformer, but the fact that the Marshall has about three times as much negative feedback in the power stage, probably by mistake. (They copied the circuit exactly, but forgot to compensate for the different output impedance.) This makes it much tighter and more 'British'-sounding. Changing even just a couple of resistor and cap values can also have a big effect on the frequency response, which in turn will affect the way the amp distorts as well as the EQ itself. There are far larger changes between almost of the amps in the family tree than just that, too... although where there *aren't* it can be just as revealing - for example, some very unusual preamp resistor values which prove that the DR is at least partly based on the SLO, not a separate evolution from the Marshall.

Changing the OT for one of the same basic spec (turns ratio, core mass) will not change any of that at all, hence it can't do more than subtly change the texture of the tone. Different construction (wire type, winding pattern etc) does make a small difference, yes. But not even as much as using a different power tube type, eg 6L6 (beam tetrode) vs. EL34 (pentode), which have different performance characteristics. It's probably in the same scale as changing the brand of tubes (assuming they're *correctly* to the tube spec, which not all modern ones are) - as you know, you can't make a Mesa sound like a Marshall by putting in different 6L6s (or even KT66s), even though the difference in tone can be quite obvious.

... at least to obsessive listeners like us

 

[twothemax]

thanks guys. that is some goooood reading.

 

[YellowJacket]

Very interesting. See, I read up and Mercury Magnetics people swear that the output tranny is very much the heart and soul of an amplifier's tone. I listened to that one guys clips of a Rev F Dual, a Rev G Dual, and another Rev G with a Mercury Magnetics transformer; and honestly, I really couldn't hear much of a difference between them at all. When I put EL-34s into my Dual Recto, it just gives it that extra crunch that was missing before.
Just curious though, I find the JCM2000 series marshall heads can be made to sound very similar to a Dual. What I mean is that with the knobs all at 12:00 the tone on a Marshall is much, MUCH brighter but when you turn down the treble and presence, it gets in a very similar territory. Of course, they can also do this ugly scooped tone that the Dual will not do, even if you zero the mids. When I dial in a JCM2000 series amp, I get the impression that the controls are much more sensitive, especially when pressing the DEEP switch, the contour, switch, etc., all things that shouldn't even have been put on the thing in the first place. (In my opinion) They simply don't make for usable tones in a band situation, unless you don't want people to hear you guitar!
So basically, when you're getting an amp modded, the circuit is being rebuilt. I mean I knew this but when reading certain websites, they make it sound like a make or break situation if you don't swap certain component when the originals are perfectly fine. (Mesa OTs for instance) It is good to have people here who have knowledge in this area AND are not pushing a particular agenda i.e. they have a vested interest in people building their products so they unnecessarily hype it to the high heavens.

 

[94Tremoverb]

You can actually make more difference to the gain and tone of an amp by changing *one* 10-cent resistor or cap, if you know exactly where to do it - not even the quality, just the value - than by changing the OT. A lot of 'mojo' mods aren't really a lot more sophisticated than this (something which is usually carefully hidden by the modders) - the trick and what you're really paying for is to know what to change and how much without causing undesirable side effects as well, which is not as easy as it sounds. There are other mods that are a whole lot more involved, too - usually involving more subtle changes to multiple values, or improving component quality.

I do sort of agree that the TSL can be made to sound a bit like the DR - but I've always thought it was thinner-sounding, even if you avoid that horrible hollow artificially scooped sound - it doesn't have that dark rich grainy character that the DR does, even if you dial them in similar EQ-wise. I actually think the DSL sounds closer - which is maybe odd, because it shares a lot of common parts and circuitry with the TSL. But the DR still just sounds fuller and better, to me.

 

[fishyfishfish]

Keep the DR. Check out a Goodsell Black Dog 50. Or Mojave Scorpion.

 

[YellowJacket]

You can actually make more difference to the gain and tone of an amp by changing *one* 10-cent resistor or cap, if you know exactly where to do it - not even the quality, just the value - than by changing the OT. A lot of 'mojo' mods aren't really a lot more sophisticated than this (something which is usually carefully hidden by the modders) - the trick and what you're really paying for is to know what to change and how much without causing undesirable side effects as well, which is not as easy as it sounds. There are other mods that are a whole lot more involved, too - usually involving more subtle changes to multiple values, or improving component quality.

Well, you pay a modder for the knowledge and skill they have as much as for the amount of work they do. So really, upgrading components on an amp is beneficial more for when there are components on an amp that are inferior to the rest of the amp build. When I listened through MetalAxe's guess the recto thread, the difference between the schumacher and the MM OTs really was slight at best.
So you think there is a bit of bait and switch going on with the amp mods? i.e. people are attributing change to an OT when it is really the components on the circuit board that were changed at the same time that made all the difference?

I do sort of agree that the TSL can be made to sound a bit like the DR - but I've always thought it was thinner-sounding, even if you avoid that horrible hollow artificially scooped sound - it doesn't have that dark rich grainy character that the DR does, even if you dial them in similar EQ-wise. I actually think the DSL sounds closer - which is maybe odd, because it shares a lot of common parts and circuitry with the TSL. But the DR still just sounds fuller and better, to me.

LOLing at 'horrible hollow artificially scooped sound'. I agree that the DR definitely has an edge on the JCM2000 series amps, ESPECIALLY when you get well into Dual Rectifier high gain territory i.e. much heavier than the sort of tones I demand from my amps. The clean is also FAR better on a DR, EVEN with EL-34s. That being said, I don't find Marshall crunch to be distasteful. Maybe 'thin' is a bad word for it. It is definitely less muddy and clearer sounding, something that works EXCEPTIONALLY well when paired up with a Mesa Standard Rectocab. I personally believe that a Dual Rectifier is much better served by a cab with far more clarity and even response. In the case of my thiele 2 x 12, I can run far more gain and retain clarity without mud, and I imagine a Mills cab would be similar to this.

Of course, we have already established that the issue with Marshall amps is the build quality, not the tone.

 

[94Tremoverb]

Given that those three amps are two different revisions (F/G), two different layouts (head/rack), have different tubes in them, probably aren't set *exactly* the same (even if the knobs look like they are), and certainly also contain components with tolerance variations, I don't think you can tell *anything* about the transformers from those clips, other than that the difference can be no more than marginal at best - since they sound so very similar, and all the other stuff could account for the small differences you do hear.

So yes, I would think that when you have an amp modded and new transformers fitted, it's the component changes that are the real magic, and the transformers are just the icing on the cake. It's not that they make *no* difference, just that it must be very subtle, unless the originals are total junk.

I've actually never heard a Marshall through a Mesa cab - over here, Mesa cabs are rare (because they're insanely overpriced) and a lot of guys play their Rectos through Marshall cabs, which actually works pretty well - the V30 loaded 'V' series cabs especially. And still, sound better than a modern Marshall through the Marshall cab! I agree that the main problem with the JCM2000s is the build quality, but I do also think you can hear it in the tone too... just not quite as solid and powerful. *Old* Marshalls are a different thing entirely though!

 

[YellowJacket]

Given that those three amps are two different revisions (F/G), two different layouts (head/rack), have different tubes in them, probably aren't set *exactly* the same (even if the knobs look like they are), and certainly also contain components with tolerance variations, I don't think you can tell *anything* about the transformers from those clips, other than that the difference can be no more than marginal at best - since they sound so very similar, and all the other stuff could account for the small differences you do hear.

So yes, I would think that when you have an amp modded and new transformers fitted, it's the component changes that are the real magic, and the transformers are just the icing on the cake. It's not that they make *no* difference, just that it must be very subtle, unless the originals are total junk.

Hype and reality are definitely two different animals!

I've actually never heard a Marshall through a Mesa cab - over here, Mesa cabs are rare (because they're insanely overpriced) and a lot of guys play their Rectos through Marshall cabs, which actually works pretty well - the V30 loaded 'V' series cabs especially. And still, sound better than a modern Marshall through the Marshall cab! I agree that the main problem with the JCM2000s is the build quality, but I do also think you can hear it in the tone too... just not quite as solid and powerful. *Old* Marshalls are a different thing entirely though!

Yes, it is strange how a Mesa will sound better through a Marshall cab (depending what you want) while the Marshall sounds better though the Mesa cab. I like a warmer tone and I find Mesa's cabs to be very dark or 'cold', just like how their amps sound stock. I much prefer warmer cabs.

When we were at warped tour way back in the day, there was still a currency gorge between Canada and the US. For whatever reason, Marshall had decided to import their gear for the same price in Canada and US which meant that Mesa gear -which was marked up in Canada to adjust for the currency conversion- was actually more affordable than Marshall in the states. So we saw many bands running boogie cabs with marshall heads and MAN did it sound great.

 

[KH Guitar Freak]

I guess this is where I disagree, unless you are talking about Marshall handwired cabs. Most Marshalls and Mesas I've tried sounded better through a Mesa cab than a standard production Marshall cab...

 

[94Tremoverb]

If you mean a standard modern 1960 cab with G12T-75s, I agree.

It really puzzles me why Marshall strangle their amps by using such a poor speaker as standard (and that's not even mentioning all those horrible 'special design' types they put in the combos), when the cost difference to a company the size of that just to order better drivers would be negligible. The V series (V30) and C series (G12M-25) cabs are so much better, even with exactly the same cabinet construction.

But older Marshall cabs are a completely different ballgame - there is a good reason why they've increased in value so much in recent years. Even the later 70s and 80s cabs sound better compared to the new ones - even the ones with the original version of the G12T-75, which sounds quite a bit different to the current one.

 

[YellowJacket]

I guess this is where I disagree, unless you are talking about Marshall handwired cabs. Most Marshalls and Mesas I've tried sounded better through a Mesa cab than a standard production Marshall cab...

You mean the JCM800 1960a lead cabs? UGG, those things don't deserve to be called a marshall. Like 94Tremoverb said, I was speaking of the 1960v or c cabs with the v30s or Greenbacks. I think I like warmer sounding cabs with Mesas because Mesa amps tend to be biased on the cold side to begin with. That being said, the currently quality issues with Marshall are disheartening at best. It perplexes me how many formerly reputable companies are outsourcing production to China instead of building things themselves. The fact that people pay $150 for a Celestion still and it simply isn't the same speaker anymore is strange. I am seriously investigating WGS speakers at the moment since they aren't (to my knowledge) built overseas and they cost less.