The New Tone Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Telegram Sam
  • Start date Start date
Cool Greg, I'm curious to hear how that thing compares to your other amps myself....The guys in the Marshall forum would be jacking-off to that pic...

In other Marshall news, here's a pic of one of their new amps, dunno anything else about it, but just from the looks, it's a fail, & exactly what I expected from them...Probably cost about $2,000....I think these amps looks like pure shit myself:

The Marshall Roadhouse
 
Hmm, interesting. I like the minimal row of knobs and no channel/mode buttons. Maybe it's a good, simple amp. Kind of looks like a 2203/2204 with the two vertical inputs. I don't like the head box. The Marshall look is iconic. They're getting a little too cute.

I've never gotten more than a passable sound from this Jubilee. It's never excited me. I know Marshall people love these amps, but I don't know why. I'm gonna try to find out.

---------- Update ----------

jonny deep said:
Is that the recent reissue?
Click to expand...

No that's a real-deal original Silver Jubilee.
 
It won't play get 404

Here's my first contribution.

This is not intended as a great guitar tone (it's not);
I'm just pointing out an amp / technique characteristic that I was attending to today in the interest
of perhaps discussing some of the elements of what makes up (or perhaps ruins) a good tone.

I used the same tone settings throughout the sample, however I struck the strings harder as the track evolved.
The notes at the beginning end up being pretty clean, where there is considerable breakup in the chords at the end.

A lot of amp sims demonstrate that playing the guitar with the guitar's volume turned down halfway results in clean notes,
and pleasing distortion is introduced when the guitar is turned up full.

This tone example demonstrates that a sensitive amp will also respond favorably based just on picking intensity.

I had the guitar volume turned up full for the duration of the recording.

Pardon my poor playing, this is just to illustrate the effect:

Dropbox - 404

Please post some of yout tone samples and discuss, if you like.[/QUOTE]
 
Greg_L said:
Hmm, interesting. I like the minimal row of knobs and no channel/mode buttons. Maybe it's a good, simple amp. Kind of looks like a 2203/2204 with the two vertical inputs. I don't like the head box. The Marshall look is iconic. They're getting a little too cute.
Click to expand...
Yeah, looks to be an old style amp (going by the knobs anyway), but the look is terrible IMO...They need to keep the black/gold with the iconic logo IMO, but what the fuck do I know...lol...I bet the price on these things are outrageous....We'll find out tomorrow I suppose, not that I'd be able to buy one right now anyway, but I am interested to see what the prices & features are...

Greg_L said:
I've never gotten more than a passable sound from this Jubilee. It's never excited me. I know Marshall people love these amps, but I don't know why. I'm gonna try to find out.
Click to expand...
I've read in the Marshall forum that some guys cream their pants over these amps, & others think it's just hype...I'm pretty curious to see/hear what Greg thinks about this amp since he's got it at his place, & can actually put it through the paces to see what it's really got...

KT66 tubes, & hand-wired....probably cost as much as my whole rig put together...
 
Last edited:
Looks like I'll be seeing Motorhead this summer at Glastonbury!
 
Rusty Nuts said:
It won't play get 404

Here's my first contribution.

This is not intended as a great guitar tone (it's not);
I'm just pointing out an amp / technique characteristic that I was attending to today in the interest
of perhaps discussing some of the elements of what makes up (or perhaps ruins) a good tone.

I used the same tone settings throughout the sample, however I struck the strings harder as the track evolved.
The notes at the beginning end up being pretty clean, where there is considerable breakup in the chords at the end.

A lot of amp sims demonstrate that playing the guitar with the guitar's volume turned down halfway results in clean notes,
and pleasing distortion is introduced when the guitar is turned up full.

This tone example demonstrates that a sensitive amp will also respond favorably based just on picking intensity.

I had the guitar volume turned up full for the duration of the recording.

Pardon my poor playing, this is just to illustrate the effect:

Dropbox - 404

Please post some of yout tone samples and discuss, if you like.
Click to expand...

That's a 3 year old post you're trying to link from.
 
minerman said:
Yeah, handwired means lots of $$$, so for me it's "meh".........:laughings:
Click to expand...

I'm about to fire up this Jubilee and I'm wondering which speaker to mic. G12T-75s reigned as king when this amp was made, so maybe I should go with those.
 
I know it's a lot to ask, but I'd like to hear it ran through each of your speakers Greg, with a couple different mic choices....:D.

Dunno dude, I know the T-75's were the "stock" speaker back then, what about the greenback??
 
minerman said:
I know it's a lot to ask, but I'd like to hear it ran through each of your speakers Greg, with a couple different mic choices....:D.

Dunno dude, I know the T-75's were the "stock" speaker back then, what about the greenback??
Click to expand...

Lol. I'll give em all a try. I don't know about different mics though. That's too much too much.

Just running it in my head, I don't think Greenbacks would be a good pairing for this amp. I'll try it and see, maybe it's awesome. This amp is very compressed and thick in the low mids.
 
Lol...use whatever you wanna dude, I just wanna hear how it compares to your other amps to be honest....A '57 on a T-75 would be a good baseline thing dude....That mic/speaker is about the most popular combination I'd say....
 
Okay, well right off the bat, this Jubilee sounds significantly better through my own personal 4x12s than it does through my band's 8x10s. So that's that.

Secondly, the controls on this thing are super weird. Seven knobs. From left to right it's got the standard Presence, Bass, Mid, and Treble. No problem there. Then there's the "Output Master" which is also a push/pull clean/lead channel switch. Then the "Lead Master" which only controls Lead channel volume. I don't have the footswitch, but I assume it would control the clean/lead switching. And then there's the "Input Gain" which is also a push/pull "rhythm clip" - whatever the fuck that does. Basically, it's a two channel amp that can act like four and none of them work well together. Lol. Shared EQ. The "rhythm clip" can be activated on either channel. I'm not sure if it's switchable via footswitch. It adds a little grit to the clean, and just totally fucks up the lead channel. It also has a half-power triode switch on the front panel. This might be the only Marshall with three rocker switches on the front. I'm still pretty perplexed with juggling the lead and output volumes. Engaging the rhythm clip throws everything out of whack, and the volume difference between the clean and lead channels is pretty ridiculous so far. I think the lead channel sounds good with the output master literally cranked, and using the lead channel volume for that channels volume. This makes the clean channel blow-your-face off loud though.

My third quick revelation...this thing has to be very loud to sound clear and open to me. At low volumes it's kind of murky. Switching to half power just murks it up more. But I still got a lot of learning to do.

Here's a couple quick clips.
Les Paul Traditional - Burstbucker 3 bridge pickup
Marshall Jubilee 2555
All controls on 5 for the first clip
All controls on 5, gain on 2 for second clip.
Marshall 1960B 4x12 - G12T-75 - SM57 on axis, on grill, just outside dustcap.
No EQ or anything in DAW.

Jubilee test 1 - gain 5
Jubilee test 2 - gain 2
 
Both of those clips sound good Greg, I actually like the lower-gained clip myself, go figure...lol...

Talking about the 10" speakers, I've often wondered how those would sound in a recording, I had a little micro-stack back in the 80's, & I gigged with the cabs for a long time...

Back to the jubilee, it sounds good man, but I honestly don't hear anything that makes me like it better (or worse) than any of your other amps either...But, listening to a recording is one thing, being in the room with it is another thing altogether....

Again, it sounds good dude, but I honestly don't hear anything that sounds any better than any of the other amps you already have...
 
Right I agree. The lower gain is better to me too. But that is just a basic baseline. I've stumbled on a EQ setting that's sounding pretty good, but I can't get loud right now. I don't like that I can't just plug in and get a fun sound out of it. An amp shouldn't take this much work. Lol. My JCM 800 or Plexi sound awesome to me no matter how they're set. :D

I have those 8x10 cabs in my garage. I'll wheel em out to record them tomorrow. I've been meaning to see what the fuck speakers are in those things anyway.
 
I preferred the lower gain as well.
Can't hear much mid or bottom in either though.
It's an ugly looking thing with an equally ugly logic to the panel.
I'll take it if it's being given away though.
 
I'm pretty curious to see what's in those cabs too...Like I said, the little micro-stack cabs I had years ago kicked ass for what they were, but I fried 'em at an outdoor gig in the summer of '88 (I think it was '88 anyway) with a Randall RG80...All I remember about 'em was they had a white label & were 10" Celestions...I had one of the original micro-stacks back in the day dude...Wish I'd kept it, but, it's long gone...

To be honest, my bastard cab is great for different tones, but I miss my T-75's in a way, my cab had way more bottom end to it with 'em (obviously), so I no longer have the "chunk" I once had with my amps...It's still there, just not like it once was...but, it's a pretty good trade-off for the speakers I have now, IMO, they all sound pretty good with a mic on 'em...Lots of mids though dude, you wouldn't belive how "middy" sounding this cab is right now (in the room anyway)...Eventually, I'll get another cab/more speakers though...eventually...
 
rayc said:
I preferred the lower gain as well.
Can't hear much mid or bottom in either though.
It's an ugly looking thing with an equally ugly logic to the panel.
I'll take it if it's being given away though.
Click to expand...
Really? Wow, they sound thick as hell to me. But let's see how it is when I dial it in a little better.

minerman said:
I'm pretty curious to see what's in those cabs too...Like I said, the little micro-stack cabs I had years ago kicked ass for what they were, but I fried 'em at an outdoor gig in the summer of '88 (I think it was '88 anyway) with a Randall RG80...All I remember about 'em was they had a white label & were 10" Celestions...I had one of the original micro-stacks back in the day dude...Wish I'd kept it, but, it's long gone...

To be honest, my bastard cab is great for different tones, but I miss my T-75's in a way, my cab had way more bottom end to it with 'em (obviously), so I no longer have the "chunk" I once had with my amps...It's still there, just not like it once was...but, it's a pretty good trade-off for the speakers I have now, IMO, they all sound pretty good with a mic on 'em...Lots of mids though dude, you wouldn't belive how "middy" sounding this cab is right now (in the room anyway)...Eventually, I'll get another cab/more speakers though...eventually...
Click to expand...

You might have speakers fighting each other. I think that if you had all of one kind, or two-and-two, you'd have better balance from your cab. The G12-65 isn't that much different from the G12T-75 as far as bottom end goes. The 65 is just smoother overall. And your V30 and G12H30 are almost certainly raping the other two speakers for loudness. :D

I'm gonna crack open those 8x10s tomorrow. I have two of them here. I use one of them all the time, the other just sits there to look cool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top