New Amp: Marshall JCM800 Model 2210 Split Channel

I put in this order as soon as I saw the listing pop up on Guitar Center’s used listings. It was listed as a 2203x Reissue, which I’ve really wanted for a while, and the price was about half the going rate for one of those. The store called me to tell me that it was no a 2203, but instead a 2210 model. I verified the serial number was from 1986, making it likely to have the later version of the circuit like my beloved 2205, so I went for it anyway and figured worst case scenario it’d be an easy flip for a profit.

Disappointingly, the amp arrived with some serious damage to the headshell, with the top piece of wood with the handle cracked and splitting from the vertical sides at the finger joints. It tore the tolex there and was only held together by the rivets of the plastic corner pieces. On top of that, the spring reverb tank was totally trashed, the springs inside broken so badly they actually damaged the transducers inside as well beyond repair. Luckily, the amp itself worked and it even came with a nice set of SED Winged =C= EL34 power tubes (which I immediately removed and packaged away for later use).

I gave the store a call and they were very understanding and able to work out a partial refund deal for me. That should cover the cost of either a headshell repair/replacement and the spring reverb tank, though I’ll have to do the work myself, but that’s okay.

This amp is a blast though - it sounds incredible. Very interesting to me, but when it arrived I immediately set the controls exactly the same as my 2205. However, this 2210 sounds quite different - it’s much less bright, a bit thicker sounding with stronger lower mids. Both amps still excel at what they set out to do, and share the same core tone and feel, but it is interesting that my 2205 with the treble on “3” is about the same as this amp with the treble nearer to “7.”

Probably the hardest part about that now is it’s so hard to decide which of these two amps to keep. I thought this would be a slam dunk - sell the 100 watter since it’s louder, but now I’m finding it just as easy to dial in at studio volumes and has a different tone altogether. I’ll have to open them both up and see if any modifications have been performed. I suspect this 2210 has at least some upgrades done, since during this time it should’ve been equipped with 6550/KT88 power tubes (and my 2205 has a pair of these), but instead came with EL34’s and runs just fine with those tubes.

Still, deciding between two fantastic sounding JCM800’s is a good problem to have.

New Amp: Mesa Boogie Mark V

I’m about ten years late to the party on this one, so there’s not much I can say that hasn’t been said before. But after owning a Mark IV for a couple of years and loving it, I finally picked up a Mark V. Is it better than the IV? In some ways, definitely. In others, maybe not - but barely.

How is it better? Well for one, the spring reverb actually works and sounds great. My Mark IV as soon as you turn the reverb above “0,” the drive channels instantly lose a ton of bass and fullness, and sound tinny. At first, I thought there was something wrong with my IV, but turns out that’s just expected behavior for them. Since the Reverb isn’t footswitchable, in my mind it may as well not even be there. The V corrects this problem on both fronts - reverb can be turned on and off via footswitch, dialed in different amounts of each of the 3 channels, and it sounds amazing with a nice long tail and doesn’t affect the core tone of any channel at all.

Other great features are 3 modes per channel, some of which are a little better than others but that’s the point - nearly anyone’s preferences are catered to in this amp. I find channel 1’s clean to be almost identical to the Mark IV’s RHY 1 channel, but with a more usable EQ. The Mark V also adds a fat and tweed mode to this channel, expanding the range quite a bit and can even double as a light crunch channel in tweed mode.

Channel 2 offers Edge, Crunch, and Mark I modes… the standout to me here is the Mark I mode by far. With the gain and treble maxed out, the Mark I mode could be a high gain amp all on its own. This is one of the best tones I’ve had from any amp really, and I’d even be happy if this was the only channel/mode of an entire amp! It’s much darker than your usual Mark tone, though it can get lost in the mix a little and probably isn’t the best pairing for lower tunings. Keep the treble maxed just like you would on a real Mark I or it becomes very dull and muddy. This is Fender EQ topology, remember.

Channel 3’s Mark IIC mode gets a lot of praise, but I’ve grown fond of my Mark IV, so I jump straight into IV mode. It is an excellent recreation - side by side nearly identical to my Mark IV the way I have it dialed. On my IV, I set my gain and drive to 8, and treble to max. On the V, I set the gain to about 7-8, treble maxed, so I’m not surprised they sound so close. However, the Mark IV does have a couple of controls that the V doesn’t have, and if you really use those then you might be disappointed by the V. For example, the IV has both a gain control and a “lead drive” control, which can be dialed in differently for some variety on the tone. I personally like them both set exactly the same, which is how the V works, but if you like lower gain and higher drive, or vice versa, you can’t get that same tone out of the V. Another missing features is the “harmonics” or “mid gain” switch of the IV, which changes the voicing of the amp. The V feels to me like it’s based on the “harmonics” voicing, which is the most popular voicing I’m sure, but if you like the “mid gain” voicing it isn’t here. And last thing, the IV has “shift” controls on the presence pull pots, which drastically changes the way the attack of the notes sounds and feels. I like to use the shift function on RHY 2 of the IV to liven it up, the V does not have this voicing at all.

One other issue with the V so far, on the IV I had a six button footswitch - the first four buttons being RHY 1, RHY 2, Lead, and Lead +EQ. I liked being able to jump from Lead to Lead+EQ directly from the footswitch without tap dancing, and the volume levels were pretty close on that channel. On the V, engaging the EQ on Channel 3 results in a HUGE volume boost, so much so that you either have to press both the “EQ” and “CH 3” buttons at the same time with your foot, or as I’ve done, just set it so that Channel 3 has the EQ “always on” and dial the master to match channels 1 and 2. It’s really a minor complaint, but I do feel like that’s the only way to use it - maybe if there were a total volume control as part of the graphic EQ, kind of like how MXR EQ footpedals are - that could balance the volumes a little better. Anyway, those are my only complaints and overall it’s a superior amp to the Mark IV as long as you are using multiple modes. If you live and breathe on the IV’s lead channel, I think the IV has the superior lead channel and offers a few cool features that the V doesn’t have.

More Details Here

New Amp: Blackstar HT-100 Stage

This is another amp from my early days of playing that I haven’t had the chance to try out in almost a decade. While looking for some small parts in my local Sam Ash, I spotted this head tucked away in a corner for a very reasonable price (and always nice to buy locally - no shipping costs).

Since I was so disappointed by the Egnater Renegade, and already owned the Marshall JCM800 I thought would cover the same ground as this amp, I decided I should really play it to find out if it’s as good as I remembered.

Well, it’s definitely no slouch! I remember only being interested in the HT-100 and HT-60 models back then, because the HT-40 and smaller models did not have the crunch channel (OD1). That channel alone is really great - and both OD1 and OD2 channels have a “voicing” switch that adds a lot of brightness and it feels like a little gain too. I think OD1 with the voicing switch out is a really great classic rock tone, pop on the voicing switch and the brightness really kicks in and it gets a bit more modern and grittier. OD2 is fantastic through and through, even if lacking a little clarity on top, adding the voicing switch brings some of that back in.

The digital reverb is very nice quality, and the ISF control seems less useful than I remember but it is still a cool feature to combine with the traditional 3-band EQ. I find there is one area where I think it sounds best for all channels, but for recording purposes the ISF can be used to dial in a pretty wide variety of tones, as long as you also adjust the 3-band to compensate appropriately.

These amps have a classic Marshall type design of 3 preamp tubes, and in this case 4x EL34 power tubes. The Mark II version of this amp only has 2 preamp tubes, so I’m not sure why kind of magic is going on there - tube gain stages replaced by transistors, or PI converted to solid state etc., but I’m happy with this 3-tube setup. It’s very difficult to find concrete answers as to the signal path of this amp, and now it’s been a whole decade since they were so popular it’ll probably be tough to really find out. I did find a schematic but this one is a bit more complicated than I’m used to, with a lot of op-amps and other things I haven’t learned the functions of yet, but a cursory glance shows a couple of tube gain stages and a few diodes, but I’m not sure if the diodes are used for overdrive or not. If I find out, I will update this post.

Op-amps, diodes, or not, it’s a great sounding amp and deceptively good - I paid under $400 for this amp and I feel it holds up very well to amps that cost 3x or 4x its price. A winner for sure - and no surprise these were all the rage when they came out, and why the HT5 and HT20 models still sell well today.

New Amp: Steavens Poundcake 25th Anniversary

Saw this and after reading some reviews and listening to clips of earlier Steavens amps online, I was very interested in an amp that seemed right up my alley.

See here for many more photos and details: Steavens Poundcake 25th Gallery

This is a heck of an amp - very nicely constructed, large, and heavy with huge transformers. The programmable footswitch allows memory access to some rudimentary “patch” settings for each of the 4 channels. Each channel has three modes (green, yellow, red), a mid boost, either of two master volume controls, and a switchable effects loop (all footswitchable and stored on a patch, each channel can store two different combinations of settings). The 3 overdrive channels also have a physical bright switch (not footswitchable).

The combinations of modes and the mid boost can really vary the tones from the amp, and it has a killer core tone already. The crunch channel is excellent and Meat and Heat channels are fairly interchangeable. My only major complaint is that the clean channel has a separate EQ and volume control, but all 3 overdrive channels share the same EQ and volume controls. Each has its own gain control however, and the volumes are pretty well balanced even at different gain settings so it’s not all bad. It’d just be nice to dial in a scooped high gain sound, and a mid boosted high gain sound with the EQ and be able to footswitch between them, but that’s not possible. In fact, the “mid boost” feature actually accentuates upper frequencies so in practice I’m using the mid boost for my rhythm tone and leave it turned off for fuller sounding lead sounds.

A previous owner modified this amp by adding another rotary selector on the back to change speaker cabinet impedance. I’m not sure why the stock switch wasn’t acceptable, the new one is identical to the old one but is just physically larger - and two new holes drilled in the chassis to mount it. Seems like kind of a stupid thing to do to me but maybe there was a good reason that’s now lost to time.

A great sounding amp overall and certainly one of the more unique amps in my collection.

Here are pages for the footswitch manual for this amp, as well as the Steavens Thunderstruck model: Manual Pg1 - Manual Pg2 - Manual Pg3

New Video: Mesa Rectifier Comparison

I recently acquired this Mesa Boogie Dual Rectifier Roadster, which in theory should be the end-all of Rectifiers. But is it really? I’m not so sure - it sounds a bit different in the room than my other two Rectifier amps. I decided to put together a quick recording to compare how all three of them sound while playing the main riff to Incubus’ “Pardon Me,” which to me is an iconic Recto chording sound. This style of playing doesn’t really emphasize the differences between the amps and shows just how similar they can all sound recorded, at least restricted to the Modern/Red modes. This also could explain why some players say they barely hear any difference between them - it can depend on the style of music they play.

Rectifiers compared:

• Triple Rectifier 2ch Rev G

• Triple Rectifier 3ch (non-multiwatt)

• Dual Rectifier Roadster (multiwatt)

Recording Chain:

1. Ibanez 540S with Seymour Duncan Blackout

2. Looper pedal (to repeat the riff into the amps)

3. <AMP>

4. Celestion V30

5. SM57 Microphone

Time Codes:

• 2ch Triple Rev G: 0:08 Stereo 0:22 Mono

• 3ch Triple: 0:36 Stereo 0:49 Mono

• 4ch Dual Roadster: 1:03 Stereo 1:16 Mono

New Amp: Orange Dual Dark 50

With the Thunderverb and Rockerverb in my collection now, I discovered the Dual Dark, which is truly an Orange unlike any other. While based on a similar platform to those other two channel, 50 watt Oranges, this one has 4 gain stages on each channel and can get far more saturated overdrive tones than either.

I always thought the cosmetics were very cool, kind of an inverted color look on the front panel with a strip of orange through the center and the crest so you can’t forget who builds this amp. This amp is now discontinued and very difficult to find as they didn’t sell all that well and really target a niche audience - heavy metal players who like Oranges. It has a bit of that classic Orange fuzz to the note attack, but is more open sounding, with a much more aggressive voicing, smoother mids, and far far more gain than any other Orange amp in the range.

It’s a heck of an amp, and if you’ve played the TV or RV amps, you already know how to dial this one in. Channel B’s shape control is very usable and that channel even does a great clean-ish tone, while Channel A’s traditional treble/middle/bass EQ gives that channel a little more versatility to dial in what you like. I found I really liked to use Channel B for high gain rhythm sounds and Channel A with a little more mids and less bass for my lead tones.

This amp has the same great “attenuator” master volume control, but lacks the spring reverb the other 50 watters have, which is a shame though I understand reverb is not really a priority on an amp like this. I think that extra tube just became the additional gain stages for this one. I expected it to be voiced much like the Thunderverb, and I’ve heard this amp compared to the TV50 and TV200 amps online, but now that I’ve played them both in person they are really different amps and cover different ground. That said, the TV with the right boost could probably get pretty close but the structure of the mids is so different that it’s difficult to replicate the Dual Dark.

New Amp: Marshall 1987X Plexi Reissue

Do I have too many Marshalls? The answer really is - there’s no such thing. I’ve been hunting a plexi style amp for a long time now and finally found my fit.

This 1987x is the 50w model, and came equipped with a master volume control replacing the low input on the normal channel. This simple crosswire design resulted in a lot of distortion at lower settings and really wasn’t all that usable - and this is one heck of a loud amp.

This was a great opportunity for me to learn the plexi circuit and try my hand at some light modifications. Since this one is equipped with a factory effects loop, and using a volume box in the loop sounded great to me, I thought I would just wire in a volume control directly to the loop instead of the various popular options online that are designed more for plexi amps without effects loops. Sure, a post phase inverter volume might work a bit better, but I’m sure it’s close and this was so much simpler. Additionally, I took out the original pot and used a push-pull pot I had as a spare, and set this up so pulling out on the master volume pot would engage the “one wire” mod, which essentially just cascades the gain from one channel into another.

Some quick background - plexi type circuits are very unique in that there are two channels running in parallel to each other, sharing the input gain stage but each with separate 2nd gain stages before hitting the phase inverter and output tubes. Linking these channels together by “jumpering” results in more overdrive and you can dial in the amount of either channel (both voiced very differently) and is the classic Marshall plexi tone. The JMP series introduced the 2203 and 2204 models, probably the most popular Marshall circuit designs, which are similar to the plexi circuits but with using a cascaded gain stage and two inputs - the low input simply skipping one gain stage.

So putting the master volume in the effects loop circuit retains the ability to jumper the amp, plug into the “high treble” input, and play away like it’s a classic plexi, just without the glorious power tube distortion until you get the volume way up. Then, pull out on the master and plug into the “normal” channel input, and you have an over the top, but not all that well shaped, high gain tone. It’s certainly no modern metal machine, and the voicing leaves much to be desired, but it has a certain charm as kind of a relic of early plexi modes and can likely be heard on some recordings in the early 70s since this was a popular mod even back then. Pop the master back in and the normal channel makes for an amazing clean channel and pedal platform.

Not bad for a couple of wires and one push pull pot!

New Amp: Mesa Dual Rectifier Roadster

Well here it is, the ultimate Rectifier (almost). Not quite the top of the range “Road King,” this amp shares most of its features. Four channels, including two clean channels supposedly ripped from the Lonestar amp series, a spring reverb tank, an insanely huge footswitch, and the two Recto distortion channels we all know and love, this seems like just about the perfect amp on paper.

And it is a hell of an amp, with one of the best spring reverbs and clean channels I’ve ever heard. My preference has been to run channel 2 in clean mode as my main clean sound, then use channel 1 in tweed mode for a slightly pushed clean sound. Channel 2’s “brit” mode replaces the “tweed” of channel 1, and I find the “brit” mode to be a bit underwhelming and too bright without enough bass to back it up.

Channels 3 and 4 are supposed to be the same as the classic rectifier drive channels, but it’s pretty clear they aren’t exact copies. These channels have a bit less gain than either my 3 channel or 2 channel Rev G rectiifiers, and unlike the 3rd channel of that triple rec, channel 4 on the roadster does not have the same very sensitive Presence control taper to manipulate the tone.

I also notice this amp, when compared to my other rectifiers, has a tendency to overwhelm the cabinet with bass frequencies resulting in the speakers farting out at volume. This problem is the worst on this amp, happens occasionally on the 3 channel, and only very rarely on the 2 channel - I guess this is intentional since it seems Mesa is designing their amps to accentuate this. Perhaps if I were using brand new speakers instead of vintage ones I wouldn’t notice as much.

It sounds like I’m not thrilled with this amp - I am, it’s a great amp. But I think in the quest to again offer more versatility, it falls a little flat as far as achieving the now classic rectifier distortion tones. It does get close though, and the extra versatility especially the dual clean channels can really add a lot of options. Coupled with the other cool features of this amp it’s hard to argue with its value, though I think it’s pretty indicative that these amps regularly sell for around the same price as standard 2 and 3 channel rectifiers. You’d think with all of these cool features and an extra channel it’d be worth more, but I’m sure I’m not the only metal player who would rather have a more standard rectifier.

More Details Here

New Video: Marshall 2555x Silver Jubilee

Put together my first video on this amp - I picked it up after calling the store and confirming it was a vintage (87ish) model - however a reissue showed up instead. Sadly I felt I overpaid for the amp despite how great it was, so I ended up returning it. I intend to get another one someday and hopefully have more time with it and be able to make a few more comparisons.

New Amp: Marshall Silver Jubilee 2555x Reissue

I saw this amp pop up in Guitar Center’s used section online for a reasonable price. I figured hey, if it’s a reissue it’s not a good price, but if it’s an original it’s a great deal and I’d be able to try it out and possibly sell it for a profit down the line. So I called the store it was located at and spoke with the associate who told me, with certainty, this was the real deal original.

Flash forward a week and a reissue arrives, with some weird blue spray paint on one side, and a big dent in the corner of the chassis on the back. Let’s just say I was disappointed.

Not with the tones mind you - in fact, I really enjoyed this amp. The rhythm channel is fantastic and gets a great dirty clean tone going, and the lead channel can be dialed in for some great 80s rock tones. The EQ on this amp is a bit more sensitive than the usual 80s Marshall design and covers a lot of ground, and is a bit darker as well.

I feel I have to return this one since it was not as described, and I feel I can get a reissue at a better price if I wait a bit longer. It’s a shame because it’s a really great amp and I’d love to keep it in the collection, but I’ll get another one someday - and probably a reissue at that as from my research it is a bit more reliable and has a better effects loop.