[zimbloth]

I really didn't think the DSL100 I briefly had many moons ago sounded bad at all, at least with a tube change thru a Mesa cab. You had to stay away from those scoop/bass boost buttons, really crank it and set it up right.

[Drew]

Originally Posted by zimbloth

I really didn't think the DSL100 I briefly had many moons ago sounded bad at all, at least with a tube change thru a Mesa cab. You had to stay away from those scoop/bass boost buttons, really crank it and set it up right.

I even thought the "lead" channel of the (lower gain) TSL had the capacity for some pretty cool crunch rhythm sounds, after a tube swap. It's just, they're basically one- or two-trick ponies, and it's a different trick than people expect from a Marshall.

[B Lopez]

I was able to play one of these yesterday, I have mixed feelings about it. It rocked all around, but didnt impress me too much. Maybe becasue I was playing a VHT Pittbull right before it Doesnt hold a candle to my old JMP-1 though.

[skattabrain]

isn't the point of this amp that it has that classic marshall sound of the jcm800 and plexi ... plus a more modern hi-gain sound too?

i really need to check out on these out.

not sure if i need retubing ... or i'm out growing it ... but my jsx hasn't been doing it for me the pas couple weeks.

note: i was having massive, unjustified gas for the JVM until reading this thread ... my local Daddy's says they'll have one shortly. i haven't even seen one, yet alone hear one and i was wanting one LOL ... i hate that!

[noodles]

Originally Posted by skattabrain

isn't the point of this amp that it has that classic marshall sound of the jcm800 and plexi ... plus a more modern hi-gain sound too?

That's all well and good, but only if it a) actually nails those classic Marshall sounds and b) the newer high gain sounds are actually usable. I am not a fan of the JCM2000 at all.

So far, I haven't heard anyone say much of anything about the first two channels, and how close they compare to the older Marshalls.

[bossdjay]

The JVM sucks!!! I played it next to the DSL 100 and went with the DSL. The JVM tries too hard to be cool, but the DSL can do everything the JVM does, but better. AND the JVM costs $1800!!!!! No thanks. Even the supposed higher gain channel that is meant to be a selling point for this amp, is unusable (unless yo ulike shitty tone!). If you get a chance, A/B these amps side by side and you'll see what i mean.

BTW first post here. Hi!

[tonyhell]

Originally Posted by noodles

Wow, I got a far different impression of the VM. I thought it was cold, sterile, and almost completely useless. I could not get one usable tone out of it. Mike and I A/B'ed it with the JCM800 reissue sitting right next to it, and it went down hard.

I think the name makes people think they can get modern tones out of it, but no

[Bound]

Originally Posted by noodles

That's all well and good, but only if it a) actually nails those classic Marshall sounds and b) the newer high gain sounds are actually usable. I am not a fan of the JCM2000 at all.

So far, I haven't heard anyone say much of anything about the first two channels, and how close they compare to the older Marshalls.

I've played one at a Daddy's and the high gain sounds like a buzzsaw ( I was playing through and Ibby of some type, I can't remember) I overall wasn't too impressed with it.. It sounded thin and the dynamics reminded me more of a ss amp. All in all I'm sure you could work out some of the amps kinks with a power attenuator, an eq, and maybe a darker sounding cab... but I really wasn't impressed by it's high-gain.... cleans were good, the crunch channel was fairly crunchy but all around felt generic.

Laney's Vh100 has a more modern high gain than this bad-boy and it's really not all that modern, though at least it has some depth of gain structure...
lol... I think my adown has the JVM's high-gain beat.. at least it has some bass response