Whats a Marshall JCM 900 worth?

i never liked my JCM900 dual reverb 4100 with el34s, it wasnt bad recorded, but it couldnt get a multitude of tones. no power behind heavy rhythm playing. deffo more of a rock amp but the clean on it was unreal!!!

heres a completely raw JCM900 clip from my demo i recorded about 8 years ago. was recorded thru a 1960A cab in the sneap position, or dead on the speaker dome, i cant remember!!!:

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/369408/JCM900EL34S DBL.mp3

My preference would be a tad more gain via a pedal, but that alone sounds pretty awesome!

Bleccchhh, you still have that thing? If you REALLY want a Marshall, just get an 800 or a JVM and be done with it!

:oops: Yep, I still got this THING. I need something with a tad more features than a standard 800, ya know - fx loop, 2 channels n' stuff. I keep hearing REALLY good things about the JVM...

Anyway, around £300 for a JCM 900 here in the UK - I'll keep that in mind. The sensible thing to do would be for me to get off my lazy ass and try out some other Marshal amps to hear how they differ for myself.
 
[quote="Evil" Aidy;7981600]My preference would be a tad more gain via a pedal, but that alone sounds pretty awesome!



:oops: Yep, I still got this THING. I need something with a tad more features than a standard 800, ya know - fx loop, 2 channels n' stuff. I keep hearing REALLY good things about the JVM...

Anyway, around £300 for a JCM 900 here in the UK - I'll keep that in mind. The sensible thing to do would be for me to get off my lazy ass and try out some other Marshal amps to hear how they differ for myself.[/quote]

yeah this was when i had my sd1 but only used that for leads back then, but that was completely dry, no boost pedal and gain on max!! hate how it says Hi Gain on the front of the amp!!!

in general i dont like many marshall amps these days, especially the TSL, 900, DSL just all :puke:
 
[quote="Evil" Aidy;7981600]:oops: Yep, I still got this THING. I need something with a tad more features than a standard 800, ya know - fx loop, 2 channels n' stuff. I keep hearing REALLY good things about the JVM...[/quote]

They made a 2-channel version of the 800 with an FX loop - look for single-input models that are either 2205 or 2210! (50 and 100 watts, respectively)
 
Go for a Kerry King Signature! :lol: I thought the JVM was a pretty wicked model. You could always just cheap out and go for the Peavey Windsor!
 
Go for a Kerry King Signature! :lol: I thought the JVM was a pretty wicked model. You could always just cheap out and go for the Peavey Windsor!

I liked the look of the Kerry King signature at first. No FX loop though and the tribal pattern isn't my bag :lol: Haha I had considered the Windsor briefly for awhile. JVM :headbang:

They made a 2-channel version of the 800 with an FX loop - look for single-input models that are either 2205 or 2210! (50 and 100 watts, respectively)

Sorry, I should've mentioned before that I looked into those after reading the Marshall education thread on here. After a lot of web browsing researching these models a lot of the information indicated that their souind quality was inferior to the earlier models. If I come across one though dude I'll try it out for sure so I can hear it for myself! The raw clips from the FX send that were on another thread here were actually awesome. They seem quite nicely priced on Ebay too.

Cheers dudes!
 
Yeah plus the Kerry King only has one channel and the "beast" feature isn't even footswitchable. :erk:

But it sounds AWESOME!

Versatile as a light bulb but classic 800 tone + the beast for brootalz = win win win!

Missing FX loop is a bummer but at least the built in noise gate is quite usable...
 
I had a 4500 for a number of years. It'd be a fine rock amp, but needs some help for metal. I wouldn't go so far as to say that they = garbage, but if you want metal out-of-the-box you're better off getting the sl-x. I always ran mine with a ts-10 in front of it, output all the way up. You gotta get some volume going on them as well.

The biggest downside to the 4500 is the way the preamp is designed. It's pretty much half solid-state, and when you start getting more extreme gain settings (which would be like 2 on the lead channel of a 5150), they tend to thin out somewhat. Mine tended to thin out and sound rather lifeless. I found a really easy gain boost mid-boost mod for them that doesn't cost more than a couple of bucks and really brings the amp to life.

Any way you look at it, for $300 just buy the damned thing and if you don't like it just make money on it.
 
i never liked my JCM900 dual reverb 4100 with el34s, it wasnt bad recorded, but it couldnt get a multitude of tones. no power behind heavy rhythm playing. deffo more of a rock amp but the clean on it was unreal!!!

heres a completely raw JCM900 clip from my demo i recorded about 8 years ago. was recorded thru a 1960A cab in the sneap position, or dead on the speaker dome, i cant remember!!!:

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/369408/JCM900EL34S DBL.mp3

Just one quick last question for ya Jonesy, I think it was yourself in another thread recommended running an FX pedal in the loop with the level all the way up - which is something I already do coincidently as it sounds EVIL to say the least haha. Why was it you recommended that? What effect is it having on the sound in a technical sense apart from making everything louder? Is it driving the power section more for earlier tube breakup?

Cheers y'all!
 
For rock they wouldn't be that bad. But as unfortunate as it was, i had to smile on the inside when our other guitarrist's blew up the other night.

Had a ts9 cranked on the input and that thing still sounded like balls.

It is an extremely shitty amp, arguably the worst Marshall ever made (other than the MG series).

Of couse i'm only talking about the dual-reverb model.
 
[quote="Evil" Aidy;7984743]Just one quick last question for ya Jonesy, I think it was yourself in another thread recommended running an FX pedal in the loop with the level all the way up - which is something I already do coincidently as it sounds EVIL to say the least haha. Why was it you recommended that? What effect is it having on the sound in a technical sense apart from making everything louder? Is it driving the power section more for earlier tube breakup?

Cheers y'all![/quote]

ermm most recently ive just been running a noise gate in the fx loop. however i would maybe reccomend getting some sort of graphic EQ and EQing the distorted sound, to maybe taylor in on the lack of range in the mid area the thing had. i recall doing somehting like that with the boss GE7 but very clearly remember not knowing what i was doing, so cant really help other than maybe giving it a shot!
 
For rock they wouldn't be that bad. But as unfortunate as it was, i had to smile on the inside when our other guitarrist's blew up the other night.

Had a ts9 cranked on the input and that thing still sounded like balls.

It is an extremely shitty amp, arguably the worst Marshall ever made (other than the MG series).

Of couse i'm only talking about the dual-reverb model.

i agree, it can only really do rock...

however, ill stand by this, thie 4100 dual reverb had the nicest clean channel on any marshall ive ever played!!! was just unreal
 
[quote="Evil" Aidy;7984743]Just one quick last question for ya Jonesy, I think it was yourself in another thread recommended running an FX pedal in the loop with the level all the way up - which is something I already do coincidently as it sounds EVIL to say the least haha.[/quote]

Hmm, I'd think that'd really shorten the life of your power t00bz, though...
 
But it sounds AWESOME!

Versatile as a light bulb but classic 800 tone + the beast for brootalz = win win win!

Missing FX loop is a bummer but at least the built in noise gate is quite usable...

Dude no doubt it sounds good! I was just a little upset with the lack of features like no footswitchable BEAST feature. :erk: