Marshall SLP Reissues

[OdgeUK]

My first introduction to all things Marshall JMP was this forum and the Plexi Palace, many years ago. Quite quickly, from spending time here and there, I formed an opinion / perception that the Marshall Reissues of the 100w Superlead was basically rubbish, and wasn't representative of the Marshall 1959's of old. So I was quite surprised to really enjoy the sound of the 2000 Marshall SLP in this vid (it's the first part of the video, afterwards it's a pedal comparison). I also really like the sounds that The Darkness are getting, which seems to be modern day production 1959s.

What's know about these reissues? Have Marshall changed them over the years since the first ones in the 90s?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?t=29&v=1D5alOCO1qk[/youtube]

[youtube]www.youtube.com/watch?t=29&v=1D5alOCO1qk[/youtube]

[JiMB]

Hi,
That first vid is me. I don't think they're rubbish, good tones can be had with them.
They're perceived as inferior because they're mass produced and not made with the same components as they were back in the day.
I still have the amp, it's my main gigging amp and it now has a ppimv and fx loop installed on the rear of the amp.
I dig it!

[OdgeUK]

To my ears, it's "the sound". I'd gig with that all day long! Nice vid dude.

[JiMB]

Thanks!

[VelvetGeorge]

I know the guy who supplied several plexis to Marshall to consider replicating for the 1959 reissue. He said they chose the loudest, brightest of all the amps. His 1969 Superlead.

The reissue is loud and bright, no question. Fortunately, it can easily be modded and tamed a bit to give some of the more balanced plexi tones. Upgrades in the signal path help a lot too.

The Handwired 1959 should have been a better replication of the earlier Superleads, but there is a flaw/mistake in the output transformer. All that marketing hype about Dagnall going back to their original design notes and then they get it wrong.


george

[Tazin]

The Handwired 1959 should have been a better replication of the earlier Superleads, but there is a flaw/mistake in the output transformer. All that marketing hype about Dagnall going back to their original design notes and then they get it wrong.


george

George, could you elaborate on this OT flaw/mistake?

[neikeel]

The Handwired 1959 should have been a better replication of the earlier Superleads, but there is a flaw/mistake in the output transformer. All that marketing hype about Dagnall going back to their original design notes and then they get it wrong.


george

George, could you elaborate on this OT flaw/mistake?

+1

[VelvetGeorge]

I probably replaced 10 OT's in handwired amps. Artists would send them to me after they went through 2 or 3 of the stock OT and I'd put my Dagnall in.
Eventually, a friend at Marshall confided in me that Dagnall made a mistake in the design that made them prone to fail. He never said exactly what the flaw was though. We should measure the turns ratio and primary impedance of one.

I always thought the OT in the standard reissue sounded better than the handwired OT. But, still lots of room for improvement.

george

[yngwie308]

True what George relates, the stock 1959HW OT, mine was an early 2005 are the biggest weak line in these otherwise fine sounding replicas. Having discovered Metro after putting a years wages it seemed like on a HW stack.
George's skillful componet upgrading made all the world of difference. I wouldn't sell my Metropolous 1959HW for anything.
So happy with it I have been. The Dagnall clone is the major change and what a fine transformer it is.

Here are some pictures of George's fine work:
http://s57.photobucket.com/user/davida5 ... t=3&page=1
Thanks!
yngwie308

[JiMB]

Here's another vid of mine. It's not the HW reissue, it's the PCB one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm7paxbExc4

Jimmy Wigle added an fx loop and wired the ppimv for me.

[yngwie308]

I'd be willing to donate my original HW OT for the purposes of science as it resides as a bookend/paperweight currently if you would like George. Mine is from the early run!
Would be interesting to see.
yngwie308

[Mats A]

Sometimes i get tired of this talk that all was much better before. In those (glory days) they often took what they had so if they missed some component they could take something else that worked. See the log pot in the 1959 HW that´s there because the one they thought sounded the best had that. In those days a Marshall amp could be hit or miss. Some sounded good and others not so good. I´ve heard old Marshalls sounding terrible and new reissues sounding great. It´s much in the one playing the amp. There´s so much crap about old is always better guitars, amps and speakers. I don´t agree.