Jim Marshall

  • Thread starter Thread starter kidkage
  • Start date Start date
He was mainly a drummer. That's why his amps are so loud. :D

He had a really interesting life. I was just reading about him online.

It was funny to read him talk about all of the dummy cabs he built for KISS and Bon Jovi so they could have tens of stacks up on stage all at once :).
 
The dummy cab for live appearances is a common thing. I bet there's more Marshall cabs out there with no speakers in them than there are loaded. :laughings:
 
With my new LP.

20120421_165536.jpg

dood no way - awesome. it is up to you to not RIP in his honor.
 
Greg, no offense to your love of the SG body style, but I think the LP is more you from pics I've seen. SGs and LPs are pretty close sonically if comparing models running the same pickups, but the bigger look of the LP is probably a better fit for you. Congrats on your new toys. You picked some good ones.
 
Greg, no offense to your love of the SG body style, but I think the LP is more you from pics I've seen. SGs and LPs are pretty close sonically if comparing models running the same pickups, but the bigger look of the LP is probably a better fit for you. Congrats on your new toys. You picked some good ones.

I had always wondered about the difference between the SG and the Les Paul. I have an SG 61 RI and a Les Paul Standard both with the same pickups in them, Gibson 500T's. They are quite different. The Les Paul being much brighter and the SG more mellow. Also I noticed the SG has more volume induced feedback than the Les Paul. The Les Paul has more consistent feedback but the SG will sing more at high volume. I attribute this to the SG being a louder guitar acoustically. The louder a guitar is acoustically the less sustain it has unplugged but with high volumes the fact that the body is a good transmitter of sound means it will also feedback easily. I like both of them equally well.

VP
 
Greg, no offense to your love of the SG body style, but I think the LP is more you from pics I've seen. SGs and LPs are pretty close sonically if comparing models running the same pickups, but the bigger look of the LP is probably a better fit for you. Congrats on your new toys. You picked some good ones.

Lol. Thanks dude. You saying I'm fat? :laughings:

You know a LP isn't really any bigger than an SG. It's thicker and heavier, but not really bigger when looking straight at it. I do love SG's, always have, but I've had them already. I've never had a good and proper Les Paul, so I got one. I gotta get used to it. I don't do blazing leads but the fret access on my SG is unmatchable. The LP has that giant chunky heel back there, but the overall sound is better to me. The LP is where my tastes have been lying lately. It's a classic. I'm thrilled to have it.

Besides, I've leaned way down. I'm sexy. :D
 
Lol. Thanks dude. You saying I'm fat?

Naw, I'm saying you're 6'+ and muscular and a LP will fit you better. I'm pro LP, thought SG is a great model. LPs imo are not meant for shredding, and this coming from a guy who can do a little of that. LP is meant, imo, for the way I like to play...straight up rock and roll, solo or rhythm, solid and good.
 
I had always wondered about the difference between the SG and the Les Paul. I have an SG 61 RI and a Les Paul Standard both with the same pickups in them, Gibson 500T's. They are quite different. The Les Paul being much brighter and the SG more mellow. Also I noticed the SG has more volume induced feedback than the Les Paul. The Les Paul has more consistent feedback but the SG will sing more at high volume. I attribute this to the SG being a louder guitar acoustically. The louder a guitar is acoustically the less sustain it has unplugged but with high volumes the fact that the body is a good transmitter of sound means it will also feedback easily. I like both of them equally well.

VP

I'm not doubting you, man, but put an SG and LP with 490 and 498 pup combo together, and they are going to sound like they are in the same league...not the same guitar, not the same model, but not a 335 and not a Strat. SG was the LP of the '60s when they discontinued LP and made SG the new LP circa what, '60, '61?.
 
I'm not doubting you, man, but put an SG and LP with 490 and 498 pup combo together, and they are going to sound like they are in the same league...not the same guitar, not the same model, but not a 335 and not a Strat. SG was the LP of the '60s when they discontinued LP and made SG the new LP circa what, '60, '61?.

Well they certainly are more similiar to each other than my ES-335, that is quite unique. I am going to put the 498 and 490 combo in one of my Les Pauls, I never had that combo in a guitar before except for my new SG 12 string. I dont know why they put those in it, I would have thought 57 classics would have made more sense.

VP

PS: 1960 was the last year of Les Pauls non SG style. They made the SG style Les Pauls until 1963 or so.
 
Last edited:
Naw, I'm saying you're 6'+ and muscular and a LP will fit you better. I'm pro LP, thought SG is a great model. LPs imo are not meant for shredding, and this coming from a guy who can do a little of that. LP is meant, imo, for the way I like to play...straight up rock and roll, solo or rhythm, solid and good.

I know what you meant. I like SG's and LP's. Hell I like just about all Gibsons......into Marshalls!
 
I know what you meant. I like SG's and LP's. Hell I like just about all Gibsons......into Marshalls!

Marshall is the epitome of rock amps. There are other fantastic amps (models of manufacturers) out there, but a classic Marshall is impossible to beat for rock guitar. There is a reason behind the hype in Marshall's case. Welcome to the club.
 
Marshall is the epitome of rock amps. There are other fantastic amps (models of manufacturers) out there, but a classic Marshall is impossible to beat for rock guitar. There is a reason behind the hype in Marshall's case. Welcome to the club.

Right on. I've always been a Marshall guy. I've just never owned a good one. I've been well aware for a long time that pretty much everything I like to listen to comes straight from a roaring Marshall, and that's the sound I want from my own equipment. My drum gear is well set. Great kit, great hardware, great cymbals. I don't even think about upgrading my drums now. I recently turned my attention to my guitar setup and here I am. About the only amp I'd consider now is something like a Fender Twin or Vox AC30 - just for the clean surfy stuff I like to play. Something with natural spring reverb and tremolo. The Marshall will always be my main beast though. To me, that is the sound of rock and roll.
 
I know you've been a Marshall fan for awhile. Now you're an owner.
 
With my new LP.

20120421_165536.jpg

That is a beautiful, classic rig Greg. Congratulations.

For a drummer, you have a nicer setup than most "guitarists"!

While not always a fan of the LP shape, I really like the gold top on that one. Did you get rid of your SG?
 
That is a beautiful, classic rig Greg. Congratulations.

For a drummer, you have a nicer setup than most "guitarists"!

While not always a fan of the LP shape, I really like the gold top on that one. Did you get rid of your SG?

Thanks bud. No, still got the Epi SG and a MIM Strat. The SG is an Epi that's been upgraded with Gibson components, so it's okay. I had a ES-335 on loan with intent to buy for a little while but decided not to.
 
There's 'classic' setups, and I thought about how and why. If you read about the development of the EL34, it's an interesting story, in a nerdy way. But the bottom line was they put the Control Grid closer to the Cathode, so it took less of a preamp signal to get full output wattage. With the Fender Bassman preamp Jim 'borrowed', you can drive the EL34's very easy. Now add a higher output pickup like the humbucker, blend in low wattage Celestion speakers that break up so nice, and that sound is forever 'classic'. Like a Tele into a Deluxe or a Strat into a Twin. AC30's drive so easy with no negative feedback loop, and they have a sound you can't go wrong with, either. I just played a Les Paul with '57 Classic Alnico II's (not high output humbuckers) into a dimed Top Boost..... :D
If anyone has a Blonde Bassman; for some reason, that unmodified head with that same Les Paul sound like a cranked Marshall. I've yet to figure that one out.
 
I'd actually never heard of Jim Marshall before this thread...

Maybe he should've had a better pr rep/agent 'cause his shit is everywhere, but I had no idea there was actually some dude named marshall behind it.

I'm not trying to slight the guy or anything.

Just making the observation that I find it odd that the man himself wasn't more famous given how ubiquitous his products are.
Actually, Heat, it's not at all unusual that you {and many others, I'm sure} would not have heard of Jim Marshall. In a way, that's kind of one of the subtexts of this thread that some of us were skimming over earlier - popular music since the dawn of the 20th century has had thousands of contributors and the overwhelming majority of well known ones are those that have actually made the music or whose faces are representative of the songs we know and love or hate {few people could name you the session musicians on countless singles and albums or members of housebands like those of, say, Motown or Stax}. But there's been many behind the scenes that, for whatever varying reasons, aren't particularly known except to those that have a particular interest in that vein. My kids are 10 and 7 and even they know Whitney Houston died. I bet only a minute fraction are aware of Jim Marshall and not many with no interest in guitars, amps, Hendrix, the Who, etc. I don't think he courted fame and publicity.
Actually, alot of old timers whose inventions, developments, productions or innovations that we are aware of now seem pleasantly surprized when people in the modern day want to interview them about stuff they did 50 years ago. Often, they have no real way of knowing the impact they've had. Can you imagine if the Wright brothers or Oppenheimer were around today to talk about planes and nuclear weapons ! ?
When I was a kid, one of the features of our household from the mid 60s right through to when I left home in '81 was a Kenwood chef, a kind of blender. We just always knew it as 'the Kenwood'. A few years ago, I happened to come across an article in which the death was reported of a guy called Ken Wood who was the company head and developer of a number of Kenwood products. It never even occurred to me that there was a person called Ken Wood ! 'Kenny Wood' was the name of a footballer that I made up in my younger days for a game my cousin and I invented.
The only reason I'd heard of Steve Jobs when he died is that a few weeks before, there was a thread in the Cave about him. I didn't even read it, the name just remained with me {I initially thought it was a thread about jobs and unemployment}.
 
Back
Top