50 Watt Heads And Rock And Roll

raul · Post by **raul** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:24 pm

hello all. this is my first ever post here at Metroamp. i have been stalking this place for a few years now but this is my first ever entry.

so, i love the sound of big rock and roll tones and i've noticed that yes, i loooove the tones of many bands who use or used 50 watt Marshalls. what a list, and they all sound so different...Def Leppard, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Schenker, Yngwie...to name a few.

and now we have so many people who are making modern music with 50 watt Marshalls or clones of them. Danko Jones and Ron from the Supersuckers love 50 watt heads and have great overdriven tones...

my question is...why? well, it sounds great but, what's the lure of the 50 watt head? quicker breakup? complex harmonics? these are qualities i love and i am thinking about a 50 watt head with a PPIMV. that would rip!! and hit it with a MXR EQ and or a Boss SD 1...with a 4 12 Avatar cab with 2 Vintage 30's and 2 G 12 30's.

which is better for big rock and roll tones...a 68 head or the 72 Metal Panel? i know the 72's have more gain...do they clean up well? i'm not sure which flavor would be best for me...i want big rock tones, harmonics and the ability to clean up a tad with the roll of the vol knob. i don't need crystal clear cleans... i like Marshall style cleans much more than Fender cleans...

what do you think?

Billy Batz · Post by **Billy Batz** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:45 pm

I started with 50 and went to 100s. I think the lore has to do with the amount and way they distort. I think most people think the 100s are the most overdriven you get but thats just false. The extra tubes in that amp equates to extra power equates to more headroom. In 45s and 50s you have a lot of low end energy which the amp doesnt have the juice to amplify cleanly. So it ends up sounding like, what 100W lovers might call mushy, but what 50W lovers may call liquidy or more saturated in a way. I dont think they have the same definition and dynamics as 100Wers. In a 'ringing chord' sense as in you can hear all the individual notes cleanly. Obvioulsy they dont have the punch either. But I think if your planning on using boosts and pedals its a good match. Personally if I was going for the tones you mentioned Id probably be more inclined to use a 50Wer. I like crunch and grind more then distortion. So you can see where th eline is.

raul · Post by **raul** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:58 pm

cool. so you think these players just wanted more overdrive, and quicker, not much need for headroom? but do they clean up or is pretty much gain from the get go?
i used to have a 100 watt Plexi years ago. it did have a lot of headroom. i've never played a 50 watt head but may go for one because i love the tones that many of my faves got with one...
i guess the 100 watt heads have more power and umph? more clarity?
the 50 watt seems awesome for pure rock tones...and may be pretty complex with harmonics...

JD · Post by JD » Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:57 pm

Exactly, I find the same amp design, 50W vs. 100W, the 100W has the power to give a stronger and tighter bottom end vs. the 50W, which is why I believe the 50W has more of a raw/crunchy midrangey sound vs. the "fuller" sound of the 100W. Just my opinion.

Billy Batz · Post by **Billy Batz** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:30 am

No, they do clean up raul. Its just subtle things Im talking about here. Things a classical pianist would look at and say 'whats the difference' but to marshall people it makes all the difference in the world. But yeah I think you have the basic idea. I wouldnt say that 50W are more rock. I mean 100Wers really defined rock, but 50Wers might be better for heavier rock in a lot of ways. All good marshalls have complex harmonic character. Honestly I think the OT has a lot to do with that. And the tubes.

clarkydaz · Post by **clarkydaz** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:35 am

i have a 50 watt and 2 100s, and my bread and butter amp is the 50. for me when plugging straight in its all there, as i use a strat with low output pickups, and hate od pedals.

i need it thickened up though, with shared cathode and higher presence caps, otherwise its too thin. no mixer bypass cap.

i wish i could make a 100 watt behave like my 50 watt

908ssp · Post by **908ssp** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:05 am

50s are loud too loud for me to play without an attenuator. So absolute volume between a 50 and 100 is a none issue. So it is about the quality of the sound and there is a difference but volume isn't part of that. I use 4 x12 cabs so the difference in bass is very small 100s are tighter but we're talking a minuet amount. Clean, plenty of clean and a very nice clean in my book on both 50s and 100s really I can't hear any difference here. I think 50s generally sound a bit more distorted stock but so few 100s are stock any more and if your tweaking a 100 for EVH tones well all bets are off. My 68 is a 1986 circuit and it sounds great. The thing loves fuzz and treble boosters and recaptures for me all the early to late 60s and early 70s tones I love so much. My 72 has more gain by itself and is brighter even when run at 10 then the 68. It actually sounds more like the late 100 watt amps crunchier punchier and more articulate. I am really lucky to have both.

johniss0001 · Post by **johniss0001** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:27 pm

alex do you have a ptp layout for your amp, i quite fancy making a 1986 i am addicted to the early bass heads. alex if you don't have a layout can you take a highres pic with values and can i see the power supply cap and recitifier arrangement.

thanks mate

908ssp · Post by **908ssp** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:54 pm

No Problem

leleduke · Post by **leleduke** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:46 am

908ssp wrote:No Problem

Thats my old amp I sold on ebay. How do you like it? What value are the filter caps? are the 32pf +32pf?

908ssp · Post by **908ssp** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:40 am

Yea you're the Louisiana Les Paul Guy. You should tell that story. I buy the amp in the middle of Katrina and wait to hear from you whether you and the amp got washed away....

I love the amp. I haven't touched since I got it from you. You had the caps changed I never even bothered to check if you kept the stock values. The thing sounds terrific I was playing it last night I love it. It has this wonderful deep warm tone when played straight in but step on a treble booster or clean boost and the thing just wails. Even before I got it from you I have been looking for an original style cab logo and I can't find one. I missed one when my snip had the wrong sign in code ARG

Anyway good to see you here.

johniss0001 · Post by **johniss0001** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 3:17 pm

alex can you email me those pics please also where is the bloody rectifier on that thing i can't see it anywhere tell me where to look please

saborthw · Post by **saborthw** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:48 pm

The rectifier diodes are on the front taps of the PT

Scott

leleduke · Post by **leleduke** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:10 pm

908ssp wrote:Yea you're the Louisiana Les Paul Guy. You should tell that story. I buy the amp in the middle of Katrina and wait to hear from you whether you and the amp got washed away....

I love the amp. I haven't touched since I got it from you. You had the caps changed I never even bothered to check if you kept the stock values. The thing sounds terrific I was playing it last night I love it. It has this wonderful deep warm tone when played straight in but step on a treble booster or clean boost and the thing just wails. Even before I got it from you I have been looking for an original style cab logo and I can't find one. I missed one when my snip had the wrong sign in code ARG Anyway good to see you here.

I purchased the amp from two tribes in England. Great amp, wish I still had it. I do know now that it's a PA version. Only the PA was lacking the bypass on the mixers. When you get a chance, could you look inside to see what value filters it has. Thanks

Michael Patrick · Post by **Michael Patrick** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:35 pm

I used to have a '72 50-watter. It was a most righteous amp. I used it to record all of the guitar parts on this tune, this tune, and this tune.