Marshall jcm 2000 dsl 100 vs marshall jcm 900 mk3 2100 - no talking
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- Marshall jcm 2000 dsl 100 vs marshall jcm 900 mk3 2100. Through a Mesa 2x12 with stock v30 speakers. Using a radial amp switcher.
The dsl is more modern sounding here. I didn’t do a great job of matching the amps. There is another video where the 2 are closer and the dsl is set more like the 900.
The dsl has more gain and a wider range of sounds but the 900 is more vintage marshall in the midrange.
Deep is on the dsl, bass at half, tone shift off.
Cool demo! The MK III sounds thick and punchy, like a good 800. The DSL has that fizz that makes the more modern edge tones. Bet if you add a SD-1 to the MK III it would rule!
The 5150 seemed to have a much lower output than the other two.
😂❤
the clean and crunch channel of the DSL is killer....Paul Gilbert,Gary Moore,Lukather use(d) it live or in the studio (like Lukather and Moore)
awesome tones man. two of my absolute favorite marshalls although i got an slx and not mkiii. i love the rawness of the slx but the power and over tone of the 2000
The 900s (all 3 Versions) are the Last Marshalls that have Chassis mounted Tube Sockets thats why they will live on....
The 6100 is the Last Marshall that Kicks ass Imho!
I have a DSL 2000 and love it. I still wish I had not sold my 900 mkiii a few years back. Bought it for like $600. Now they’re going for like $1000
People talk about the JCM 900 being underrated. The JCM 2000 is even more underrated.
The 2000 gets muddy and compressed in a recording. It doesnt punch through the mix like older marshalls. The only new marshall that did for me was the JS JVM.
@@cap217cap217 DSL doesn't cut through a mix lmao. Maybe try close micing lol
@@luca4352 I am talking about in a mix, recorded, close mic.
@@cap217cap217 it definitely cuts through a mix though, I own one
DCM2000 definitely cuts through a mix, just eq it properly.
I sold my 900 to get a DSL100 and even after replacing the motherboard I don't regret it. Really great amp. Maybe not the best at any one specific thing but just really solid all round.
DSL sounds fine in the room but when you record an 800 vs 900 vs dsl you start to hear the differences. The dsl sounds muddy and no clear definition. The key to the 2100 900s is to jump the fx loop.
New or old DSL?
@@therifflair724 old DSL. The new ones don't have the bias drift issue.
@@therifflair724 old
@@cap217cap217You’re doing something wrong.
Mk3 for me, i can hear that 800 bite
Most would take an 800 over a 900 and a 900 over a 2000, but that is ignoring the whole true argument though, and it's price difference. I think for the price, the 2000 is the best bang for buck of the three, and I would sell an 800 or 900, get a 2000 and pocket the spare.
Woow jcm2000 great sound
Mk iii
I wish that was the 4100 series dual reverb JCM 900 they sound better then the 2100's in my opinion
The 4100 is basically a solid state preamp with one V1 tube. Honestly not on any of these three amps level.
Is the mkiii stock or modded?
What do you think of jcm900 slx?
This is not the slx but I had an slx and liked this better. I thought they were close but this was more aggressive and less compressed.
@@cap217cap217 ok... I have offers of slx and dsl100h (asian made). Do you know that dsl?
@@NGS2410 Get the slx for sure. The new dsl is fine but more modern and wont hold value like the slx.
I sold my JCM900 SLX Head to Mick Jones of Foreigner via ebay about 10 years ago. His guitar tech bought it from me off of Ebay. Thought that was kind of cool and wish I had it back today. Sigh............
I had a 2203 800 and the 900 sl-x now, (I missed the sound of the 800) I had no money so I went to buy a sl-x for 400€ and whoaaa, it sounds almost the same I took it at the moment 400! !!!. the only thing that the 800 had more bass if you buy a jcm buy that model, the sl-x sounds better than the jcm2000 if you are looking for a wilder sound in the eq, if you are looking for a more modern sound without so much edge, the jcm 2000 is more profiled is more suitable
as far as i know the jcm900 sl-x is the 2100 that is a high gain dual reverb it is the 4100 they are completely different but for me the best of the 3 jcm900 is the sl-x which for me sounds better than the 2000, but this of course the 4100 does not
Fraid not, simply count the knobs my friend. This is not a dual reverb. The 900 SL-X yo're taking about too has an extra pre-amp tube also. This is some nice tasty 900 love. Many models
JCM 2000 for the win. 900 sounds too dark, compressed.
I think the opposite. Yes the 900 is darker here but I can eq that. But the dsl is more compressed. But thats because the dsl has more gain. The 900 mk3 is really the last of the true vintage marshalls in sound and feel. When the newer 900s came out it all changed. The 2000s were nicer and good amps but more modern. Neither is "better", just different.
@@cap217cap217 I have JCM 2000. Always thinking of that 900 MKIII. Never really heard a comparison until now. Which channel were you on 2000? I also have a JCM 800 and they can both be very bright amps. Was this od1 or 2. OD2 is too compressed. However OD1 with gain at 6, no higher or gets mushy, treble at 2-3, Presence 6 bass 8. It doesn't sound compressed. Plus it's pure tube distortion. Also can get much more low end from the DSL, push the deep swich in or keep it out on the green channel. Try the green channel with a SD-1 or TS9. Or put a clean boost in the loop like a TC SPark Mini add about 5db. The amp thickens up & has more punch. The Green channel should sound closer to the 900 but brighter. However, I concur with Neither is "better" just different. Good video.