What do you guitarists think of the Marshall DSL50/100?

[JonWormwood]

I'm thinking OD + actives and maybe an EQ should get me that metal marshall tone right?

I'm really fuckin lovin the new bodom albums gits, I know they were done with JCM800KK's but I don't have that kinda cash. Looks like the DSL's are going for $500-$600 and the 100's for a bit more.

Anyone have any clips?

 

[Notuern]

The latest album seems to have been done with a Krank also.
I havent listned much to it, or Bodom for that matter, but Im guessing that they are still using that Lee Jackson Preamp and maybe running it through the poweramp of the Marshall, and Ive seen videos when they track the lead with the Krank.

 

[JonWormwood]

The latest album seems to have been done with a Krank also.
I havent listned much to it, or Bodom for that matter, but Im guessing that they are still using that Lee Jackson Preamp and maybe running it through the poweramp of the Marshall, and Ive seen videos when they track the lead with the Krank.

Link to these vids? I know he did for some other album.

 

[MetalJonesy]

ive only ever tried the dsl combos and they were god awful, poss caus of the speakers in em, but i really didnt dig the tone they lacked soo much balls. however lots of rock guitarists, and metal, swear by the heads! id love to try a dsl 50 with my current setup though see how it compares

 

[Notuern]

Link to these vids? I know he did for some other album.

[ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=j723qPG-qhA&feature=related[/ame]

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

Not a fan of them.

When I was in my old band we gigged with a 5150 (me) and a blue voodoo (other guitarist) and we opened for a band with 2 guitarists running voodoo modded jcm2000 dsl100 half stacks.

We pwned them. I recorded the show live and I don't know if it was the way they set the amps but they didn't cut and were muddy as fugg.

 

[Amberience]

They're really good for rock and metal where you just need a basic gainy tone. But they're nothing too special.

 

[JonWormwood]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=j723qPG-qhA&feature=related

That was for his guitar hero thing, not the new album.

 

[Savo]

They are great heads for what they do - rock to lighter metal. They excell at Iron Maiden (Dave Murray used one on the latest Maiden) RATM, etc.... Anything up to Metallica. Heres an excellent Metallica cover band using a DSL so you can get an idea of it doing heavier tones. I have seen this band and trust me - they sound EXCELLENT live. The DSL definately can do Metal up to Metallica really well. After that though there is better options.

The is the Live is to Die Video. I love the bit at 3:50 on. You can get a good idea of the clean tones too. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG0N9niuGbk&feature=related[/ame]

And heres my one so i know what im talking about. (BTW i bought mine after hearing "James Hetfield" in this band playing in a Thin Lizzy cover band. It was one of the best live tones i have ever heard to this day so had to buy one after hearing them.

 

[xupypr]

maybe this helps...my old marshall testing
http://enemy.ho.ua/ozzy-epi-dsl.mp3

chain: my old epiphone with EMGs 81,85 -> marshall dsl401 - internal DI output -> computer...
no mics sorry...

 

[xupypr]

with Screamer you`ll get more compressed sound with less bottom

 

[Exocaster]

I recorded the show live and I don't know if it was the way they set the amps but they didn't cut and were muddy as fugg.

It's the way they set them. If any Marshall tube head in good working order is muddy and doesn't cut, it's user error. Someone fucked up hard. They're bright bastards with an upper mid voicing that cuts through well.

If I had to guess, they were probably running on Red/OD2 with the deep and tone shift switches engaged. Deep and tone shit appeal to bad metal players, because deep is a massive, muddy bass boost and tone shit is exactly that. It's a very wide, very significant mid scoop. Either of those is pretty much a recipe for crap on its own, but together they're instant fail tone. Keep that stuff off, turn up and blast. You're good to go.

They have a lot of gain, and aren't so loose or bassy that they scream for a boost. I used to gig with an unboosted TSL without a problem, and got a nice, chunky, percussive tone. They're equally at home through 75s, V30s or Greenbacks. They're not the most exciting amps on the planet tone-wise, and the shared EQ may force you to compromise either your gain or clean tone. But they have totally usable, if rather unremarkable clean (actually quite good for a Marshall), crunch and high gain tones. I've heard from people who've spent a lot of time with the DSL that the green channel in crunch mode with a boost is the best high gain tone in there- more akin to a boosted 800 than the more compressed voicing of the red channel. And like most things that say "Marshall" on them (save the JVM, which apparently has a very good master volume) they really should be turned up. They lose a lot at low volumes.

And they're cheap, too. I've seen ones in good condition go for as low as $600. They're not unreliable (neither is the TSL, really, but the TSL footswitch is absolute garbage, made from the cheapest, softest metal possible with screws that come pre-stripped and switches that come pre-broken. An awful piece of gear I wouldn't pay $10 for, never mind the $120 they want for them) and you can bias the power tubes yourself with a tiny screwdriver and a multimeter via the external bias points. The DSL heads (not the combos) are, according to most, the stars of the JCM 2000 line tone-wise. They're a decent, versatile, inexpensive amp.

 

[Splat88]

I personally think the DSL is a great amp. I owned one a few years ago, but have sold it since (along with all my other amps). I would take it over the Triple Rectifier I had any day of the week.

 

[if6was9]

Thats a metallitia clip- I've seen them 2 or 3 times in Limerick, probably see 'em again this month.
doesn't Flash also play in Tampora(pantera covers), some Ac/dc band as bass and i was told he played in a guns and roses band aswell before by someone/

 

[beyond dead]

great amp... my guitarist uses a jcm 900 50w with a tube screamer and he gets compliments about his tone at every show we play. nothing complicated, he cranks the pretty much every nob on the head except gain and treble, and gets an awesome tone!! standard ts settings with low gain, max output.

 

[JonWormwood]

It's the way they set them. If any Marshall tube head in good working order is muddy and doesn't cut, it's user error. Someone fucked up hard. They're bright bastards with an upper mid voicing that cuts through well.

If I had to guess, they were probably running on Red/OD2 with the deep and tone shift switches engaged. Deep and tone shit appeal to bad metal players, because deep is a massive, muddy bass boost and tone shit is exactly that. It's a very wide, very significant mid scoop. Either of those is pretty much a recipe for crap on its own, but together they're instant fail tone. Keep that stuff off, turn up and blast. You're good to go.

They have a lot of gain, and aren't so loose or bassy that they scream for a boost. I used to gig with an unboosted TSL without a problem, and got a nice, chunky, percussive tone. They're equally at home through 75s, V30s or Greenbacks. They're not the most exciting amps on the planet tone-wise, and the shared EQ may force you to compromise either your gain or clean tone. But they have totally usable, if rather unremarkable clean (actually quite good for a Marshall), crunch and high gain tones. I've heard from people who've spent a lot of time with the DSL that the green channel in crunch mode with a boost is the best high gain tone in there- more akin to a boosted 800 than the more compressed voicing of the red channel. And like most things that say "Marshall" on them (save the JVM, which apparently has a very good master volume) they really should be turned up. They lose a lot at low volumes.

And they're cheap, too. I've seen ones in good condition go for as low as $600. They're not unreliable (neither is the TSL, really, but the TSL footswitch is absolute garbage, made from the cheapest, softest metal possible with screws that come pre-stripped and switches that come pre-broken. An awful piece of gear I wouldn't pay $10 for, never mind the $120 they want for them) and you can bias the power tubes yourself with a tiny screwdriver and a multimeter via the external bias points. The DSL heads (not the combos) are, according to most, the stars of the JCM 2000 line tone-wise. They're a decent, versatile, inexpensive amp.

Right on man, thanks for the review. I really want a JCM800 2203/4 but my pockets aren't deep enough so I've been looking at alternatives, thus the DSL series. I think I must just pull the trigger on one sometime soon.

Is it possibly to throw some kt88's or 6550's in there? That'd truly be wicked.

 

[Exocaster]

Right on man, thanks for the review. I really want a JCM800 2203/4 but my pockets aren't deep enough so I've been looking at alternatives, thus the DSL series. I think I must just pull the trigger on one sometime soon.

Is it possibly to throw some kt88's or 6550's in there? That'd truly be wicked.

You're welcome! I think Marshalls are sorta underrated around here.

For what it's worth: I A/Bed a '76 JMP 2204 (essentially the same as a JCM 800, just in a sexier headshell) against my TSL when I owned both. The voicing is broadly similar- both are instantly recognizable as "Marshall" but there's a few differences between the 2000 series and the 2203/2204s. The older Marshalls are significantly brighter- or at least mine was. (Admittedly, it was a pristine stock 2204 that was pushing 30 years old when I got it. Probably needed new caps.) However, they are also tighter and clearer; there's a noticeable difference in the low mids. They're more "open" sounding as well; I feel they sound "bigger" than the 2000s, which I attribute to their less compressed feel, even when boosted into high gain. The older Marshalls have less bass on tap, but it seems to me the bass control affects a different, deeper frequency. So there's a bigger bottom end, but less of it, if that makes any sense. I tended to run the bass very high on both those amps- and I'm not big on having huge low end in my guitar tone. (I hate modern mode on Rectos; I can't dial out enough boom!) It's perfectly adequate with a band or in a mix. I think that's where these sort of amps show their true worth.

One thing about the 2204: it was the loudest thing I've ever owned, by far. Giggable volume with the master on 2. Not 2 o'clock, 2, as in 2 of 10. I usually ran my TSL on 6. Green/crunch should get you closest to an 800 tone on a DSL.

As far as the 6550s or KT88s, I'm not sure. You'd probably be able to get within the right ma range for the bias, but I don't know about the plate voltage and such. You could do it, but I don't know if you'd have to mod it to get them to run acceptably. KT77s are a direct EL34 replacement, and those might get you where you want to be. They're cleaner than EL34s, with a bigger bottom; I've heard them compared to an EL34/6L6 hybrid tonally. I haven't switched 34s out for something else, as I'm rather fond of how they sound run right on the edge of breakup (very loud!) and the only real options are cleaner tubes, which isn't what I'm looking for.

Glad to be of some help!

 

[greyskull]

i love my dsl 100, its great for leads and clean and crunchl; but its not my go to for heavy rhythm. Great on pop/punk type stuff . thats when the 5150 comes out to play

 

[Rupturemetal]

Does'nt Nile use dsl's. Notthe best tone ,but they get insane gain from them

 

[JonWormwood]

You're welcome! I think Marshalls are sorta underrated around here.

For what it's worth: I A/Bed a '76 JMP 2204 (essentially the same as a JCM 800, just in a sexier headshell) against my TSL when I owned both. The voicing is broadly similar- both are instantly recognizable as "Marshall" but there's a few differences between the 2000 series and the 2203/2204s. The older Marshalls are significantly brighter- or at least mine was. (Admittedly, it was a pristine stock 2204 that was pushing 30 years old when I got it. Probably needed new caps.) However, they are also tighter and clearer; there's a noticeable difference in the low mids. They're more "open" sounding as well; I feel they sound "bigger" than the 2000s, which I attribute to their less compressed feel, even when boosted into high gain. The older Marshalls have less bass on tap, but it seems to me the bass control affects a different, deeper frequency. So there's a bigger bottom end, but less of it, if that makes any sense. I tended to run the bass very high on both those amps- and I'm not big on having huge low end in my guitar tone. (I hate modern mode on Rectos; I can't dial out enough boom!) It's perfectly adequate with a band or in a mix. I think that's where these sort of amps show their true worth.

One thing about the 2204: it was the loudest thing I've ever owned, by far. Giggable volume with the master on 2. Not 2 o'clock, 2, as in 2 of 10. I usually ran my TSL on 6. Green/crunch should get you closest to an 800 tone on a DSL.

As far as the 6550s or KT88s, I'm not sure. You'd probably be able to get within the right ma range for the bias, but I don't know about the plate voltage and such. You could do it, but I don't know if you'd have to mod it to get them to run acceptably. KT77s are a direct EL34 replacement, and those might get you where you want to be. They're cleaner than EL34s, with a bigger bottom; I've heard them compared to an EL34/6L6 hybrid tonally. I haven't switched 34s out for something else, as I'm rather fond of how they sound run right on the edge of breakup (very loud!) and the only real options are cleaner tubes, which isn't what I'm looking for.

Glad to be of some help!

I think I'm going to pull the trigger on a DSL when the time is right. What do I have to loose I guess, I'll swap some tubes, OD's, Eq's, I'll actually try different things before I cross it off as being not good.

Once again, thanks for the review on the 2204 vs. TSL. It put things into perspective.