Page 1 of 2
#1
So i've definitely settled on getting a used 50 watt marshall jcm 800, but i cant decide on wether to get a 2204 or a 2205. The amp i really wanted was a jubilee but it is too expensive so i'm looking for the one that sounds closest to the jubilee. I'm basically looking for a tone similar to aerosmith and gnr and i dont really need high gain tones . I sometimes use cleans but not very often. since i cant test teh amps i would really appreciate your help
thanks a lot
#2
I'd say 2205. Mainly because it has two channels, whereas 2204 has one I think.
#5
2205, Dual Channel, rolled back cleans on the 2203 don't sound to great and are a big inconvenience.
Live Rig:
Ibanez Rg 150R w/ Duncan 59s
Marshall JCM2000 TSL60 Head
Mark IV Combo
Marshall 1960a Cab w/ Vintage 30s
Ibanez RG1570 Prestige w/ Duncan 59s
Jackson SLSMG Soloist
Currently in Ontario, Canada.


#6
Quote by MrMateuszW
2203, look for them on ebay

i've heard 2203 has the best sound but i think it may be WAY too loud, that's why thought about the 2204 but i dont know if the tone is the same
#7
Yeah well, 100W and 50W is hug difference, at least with 50W you can play bit more quiet
#8
Quote by MrMateuszW
Yeah well, 100W and 50W is hug difference, at least with 50W you can play bit more quiet

and also i would be able to use it at a bit higher volume to get a better tone since this amps sound better when the volume is higher
Last edited by slashfan31 at Jul 28, 2008,
#9
Quote by MrMateuszW
Yeah well, 100W and 50W is hug difference, at least with 50W you can play bit more quiet


theres not going to be a noticeable difference in the 50VS100 with volume, the only difference is headroom.
"People worry too much about tone instead of just rocking out"
#11
Heres a refrence on JCM800's I have saved... Its a good read if you are looking at getting a JCM head...

"Early JCM-800's with diode clipping
By the early 1980's, Marshall was producing amps that mixed tube and transistor distortion. The transistor distortion was accomplished by adding "diode clipping" circuits among the tube preamp gain stages, which gave the amps a lot more distortion, but sacrificed warmth. The tubes before the diodes helped to push guitar signal into the diodes, where they were clipped (distorted), and the tubes after the diodes both amplified and "warmed up" the sound somewhat. These and later Marshalls had a bright, buzzy distortion, especially at low volumes. When cranked up loud, the power tubes would begin distorting, thickening up the sound to reduce the harsh, thin, buzzy distortion. Another unsual (for Marshall) feature was that the EQ was positioned early in the preamp, just after the first gain stage. This would be changed on later JCM-800 models: moved to after 3 gain stages, just like on the 2203 amps. And the new 4210/2205 amps sported (had) an effects loop, something new for Marshall. This allowed guitarists to put their delay pedals after the preamp distortion for cleaner delays. Finally, Marshall used a post phase inverter master volume for these amps. Marshall would later change back to a master volume after the EQ (but before the phase inverter) much like the 2203 amps.

Some metal players loved these new Marshalls, whereas many older rock and blues players hated them.

The 1980's marked a confusing period for Marshall, as they were simultaneously still making 1. non-master volume amps: circuits 1987 (50 watt model) and 1959 (100 watt model), 2. 1970's style Master volumes (circuit 2203-all tube signal path), and 3. the new models with tubes and transistor distortion mixed, like the 50 watt 4210.

Many players call all 2203 style master volumes JCM-800's, but these 2203 amps were being made long *before* Marshall began calling their amps JCM-800's. Also, there were JCM-800's being made which used diode clipping, and thus were *not* the older style 2203 circuit.

So, if you hear someone talking about a "JCM-800", he could mean an all tube 2203 master volume circuit (first produced in the 1970's, and which Marshall continued to make in the 1980's). Or he could be talking about one of the newer circuits with diode clipping, first made in the 1980's. You could ask him "What model number are you refering to?". Or "Are you talking about the 2203 circuit with an all tube signal path, or the circuits with the mix of diode clipping and tube distortion?" If he says something stupid like "All JCM-800's are the 2203 circuit! No JCM-800's have diode clipping!", then you can tell him he's full of ****. (i.e. he's either lying or just plain ill-informed) You can say, "Marshall's 50 watt combo (model 4210) and 50 watt head (model 2205) both use diode clipping. Just look in the "History of Marshall" book.

Marshall's later JCM-800's
Marshall modified the new design, and a 1988 schematic for the 2210 (head) and 4211 (combo) amps show an extra tube gain stage after the diode clipping. The diode clipping itself had been altered to a more complex arrangement-more like a diode bridge rectifier, and the EQ was repositioned to after the third gain stage. Much like the 2203 amps.

For Marshall's 25th Anniversary, they came out with the Jubilee amps, favored by Slash or Guns and Roses, and recently reissued as the "Slash" amps. These are among the most popular JCM-800 amps, which is somewhat ironic, as they probably have to greatest use of diode clipping. Which at low volume, to my ears, makes the amps sound too trebley. When cranked, however, they can get an aggressive, yet warm tone. Listen to any Guns and Roses record, or the guitar solo in "My Mama Said" by Lenny Kravitz. You'll notice Lenny's rhythm guitars sound edgy and bright, but when Slash starts his solo, his tone is thicker and meatier with less high end "buzz" and more "throat." It could well be the EL34's being overdriven.

Marshall's JCM-900 amps continued to rely on pretty much the same formula as the later JCM-800's. There were lots of differences (some of which added gain), but the basic style remained the same: two gain stages in series, diode clipping, third gain stage and EQ and master volume. Some JCM-900 amps used IC's (transistor opamps) for additional gain. Some claim that Marshall began using lower quality components in these JCM-900's, which reduced reliabity. I've heard complaints that the output transformer blows up more easily at high volumes than the output transformers used in earlier Marshall amps.

Marshall designed these amps with the late 1980's metal players in mind, so they have a lot of gain and thin, buzzy transistor clipping mixed in with the tubes. Some amp techs find old JCM-900's used for low prices, and peform extensive modifications to these amps to convert them either to the 1960's style circuits (#1959, #1987), or the 1970's #2203 circuit. These mods are not cheap, but they give the amp a warmer all tube sound.

Doug Hoffman makes some point to point wired boards perfect for converting some JCM-900's to an early Marshall/tweed Bassman circuit. It still requires a lot of work, but less so than making the boards yourself. "
#12
thanks a lot man. great read so if i got it right the double channel will sound closer to the jubilee cause of the diodes?? i mainly go for a hard rock and blues sound. and is it also better to get one from the late 80s??
#13
Quote by JaredFace
theres not going to be a noticeable difference in the 50VS100 with volume, the only difference is headroom.

what's headroom?? sorry i'm kinda new to tube amps
#16
Quote by forsaknazrael
No, it's not a huge difference.

What's your budget, threadstarter? How much are you going to spend on one of these?

between 800 and 900 dollars, but i live in south america so i hope i find one cheaper cause shipping is expensive
#17
Hmm...Well, I would look into a Traynor YCV50 Blue. They sell them on eBay for 650 USD brand new, from this one dealer. His name is...ProAudioStar or something? Plenty of UGers have bought from him. Find out the shipping, see the damage.

It'll definitely do Guns N' Roses and Aerosmith tones. Best Marshall voiced production line amp under 1000.
#18
Quote by forsaknazrael
Hmm...Well, I would look into a Traynor YCV50 Blue. They sell them on eBay for 650 USD brand new, from this one dealer. His name is...ProAudioStar or something? Plenty of UGers have bought from him. Find out the shipping, see the damage.

It'll definitely do Guns N' Roses and Aerosmith tones. Best Marshall voiced production line amp under 1000.

ok thanks. how does the sound compare to the jcm 800? cause i was kinda settled on the jcm 800 and my main problem was wether to get a 2204 or a 2205.
Last edited by slashfan31 at Jul 30, 2008,
#19
Quote by slashfan31
ok thanks. how does the sound compare to the jcm 800? cause i was kinda settled on the jcm 800 and my main problem was wether to get a 2204 or a 2205.


Hold on, your considering the Traynor? Why? It might be the best Marshall voiced product under 1000, but you'd be better to get the Marshall. Because it IS A MARSHALL so sounds more like a MARSHALL than a TRAYNOR.
#20
Quote by AdamDK
Hold on, your considering the Traynor? Why? It might be the best Marshall voiced product under 1000, but you'd be better to get the Marshall. Because it IS A MARSHALL so sounds more like a MARSHALL than a TRAYNOR.


don't always assume that.
#21
It's a JCM800 vs Traynor. Not MG vs Traynor. So obviously it's the better option.
#23
My opinion, get a 2203 and an attenuator. The later JCM800s with the solid state clipping are fizzy and do not sound that good. Good tone should not be sacrified for something as trivial as having dual channels. The 2203 doesn't clean up THAT well but can get you clean enough for GnR types of sounds. Besides, if you want sparkling cleans, get a Fender.

The difference in volume between 100 watts and 50 watts is negilible. You'd have to attenuate a 50 watter too if you wanted power stage saturation.
#24
Quote by al112987
My opinion, get a 2203 and an attenuator. The later JCM800s with the solid state clipping are fizzy and do not sound that good. Good tone should not be sacrified for something as trivial as having dual channels. The 2203 doesn't clean up THAT well but can get you clean enough for GnR types of sounds. Besides, if you want sparkling cleans, get a Fender.

The difference in volume between 100 watts and 50 watts is negilible. You'd have to attenuate a 50 watter too if you wanted power stage saturation.

would´n i be able to get the same tone from a 2204 or is it different?
#25
Quote by slashfan31
would´n i be able to get the same tone from a 2204 or is it different?


Yes, and no. It is a better option than the 2205 (I think that the 2204 predates transistor clipping) but not better than a 2203.

I usually suggest lower wattages... but while they are voiced similarly 50 watters have different characteristics from 100 watters, in particular the difference in headroom. The 100 watter has more headroom and more punch, it will stay cleaner for longer.
#26
The some of the JCM800's had diode clipping, not transistor clipping. If the signal was transistor amplified then they would be solid-state amps and that's certainly not the case. The diodes simply act as an overdrive pedal
#27
Quote by AdamDK
It's a JCM800 vs Traynor. Not MG vs Traynor. So obviously it's the better option.



Some people may like the Traynor better. I don't think you understand how good they actually sound.


Don't make bandwagon statements like that, it just pisses people off.

Marshalls are not the best amps in the world, don't always assume that, like Al said.
#29
Quote by slashfan31
so 2203, 2204 or 2205? or the traynor?



2203 sounds good to me, but I suppose it's personal opinion.
#30
Quote by Gutch220
The some of the JCM800's had diode clipping, not transistor clipping. If the signal was transistor amplified then they would be solid-state amps and that's certainly not the case. The diodes simply act as an overdrive pedal


My mistake, regardless, the ones with diode clipping (along with the JCM900s, and 2000s) all have that fizzy, buzzy quality about their distortion when played at lower volumes.

Slash31, see if you can try some out. I'd suggest the 2203 over the 2205. No matter what, you will be able to get gain at low volumes due to the MV circuit, but whether 50 watt, or 100 watt, you will need an attenuator to get the amp to its sweet spot.
#31
Quote by MrMateuszW
Yeah well, 100W and 50W is hug difference, at least with 50W you can play bit more quiet

Not really...
Quote by Pookie6
Yngwi3, You win this whole monstrosity of a thread.

Quote by uk.mace
For the best tingle, use Original Source mint. That shit feels amazing on your balls.


Godfather of The Diezel Mafia
#32
Quote by slashfan31
ok thanks. how does the sound compare to the jcm 800? cause i was kinda settled on the jcm 800 and my main problem was wether to get a 2204 or a 2205.

TBH, they're simlar in voicing, but the JCM800 has more midrange punch.
I mostly suggested it as an alternative if you can't find a JCM800 combo in your budget.
Quote by AdamDK
Hold on, your considering the Traynor? Why? It might be the best Marshall voiced product under 1000, but you'd be better to get the Marshall. Because it IS A MARSHALL so sounds more like a MARSHALL than a TRAYNOR.

Yeah, okay...
#34
Now that you've discussed options, it's time to try some

1- Research/Discuss options
2- Try out multiple amps
3- Choose a model and whether of not to buy it
4- Find one in good condition
5- Play it
#35
Quote by Gutch220
Now that you've discussed options, it's time to try some

1- Research/Discuss options
2- Try out multiple amps
3- Choose a model and whether of not to buy it
4- Find one in good condition
5- Play it

my problem is that i can't try them because where i live i can only find mg, avt and a couple jcm 2000. So 'im buying from ebay
#38
Quote by al112987
Then in that case, definitely go for the 2204 over 2205.

is it voiced more similarly to the jubilee than the 2205?
#39
I can't tell you, I've never played the Jubilee, but it should get Slash tones just fine.
Page 1 of 2