Marshall's Big Problem ...?

[@RobertBakerGuitar]

What do you think the future of Marshall amps is?

[@JanLawicki]

Just watched Lee Andertons interviewing Terry Marshall and they were talking about the Marshall future. I think they are back in the game again... hopefully

[@pandaman9706]

A skip

[@justobserving7045]

Idk about the future: I just restored my Jcm800 50W Lead from 1985 and I'm good till I die.

[@8CountAudio]

More Bluetooth speakers

[@None888.]

All these companies get too big...that's the problem with everything from microwaves to Marshalls ...

[@briandumont4349]

The jcm 800 has its own sound man.

[@officialWWM]

Yep, it’s the sound of the 80s. Nothing does it better!

[@anotheryoutubed]

How much does he charge?

[@officialWWM]

@ 😂😂

[@realRonPetersen]

The award goes to Marshal Super Lead.

[@keolacam]

The low end on the 100w plexi with the vol rolled down to 5 with the strat thunderous! thunderous!

[@gktde9874]

Love mine ❤🤘

[@hackdog69]

100%

[@NotNeighbor]

No kidding! That thing sounded awesome! But I think the Friedman would be my pick in the 800 series

[@43dukedog]

Super lead !!!

[@utubehound69]

I preferred the Marshalls over the Freidman

[@RobSchauland1911]

The JCM definitely sounds better.

[@michaelj3959]

@@RobSchauland1911 Yeah, for sure. Way better.

[@roger1475]

Definitely agree

[@jsotelo5150]

100% agree

[@brandonbryson3317]

Agreed…owned several Friedman thinking they would be the grail tone…sold them all. I’d take just about any classic Marshall over a Friedman now. Friedman over filters his amps and makes them too smooth, and cuts too many do the “nasty” frequencies that actually give an all character and make it cut in a mix better.

[@johniedarko7457]

I preferred the actual JCM800 over the Friedman actually...

[@richardzajic3338]

I tried the new Friedman Plex recently and can't understand the hype and fuzz around it. There was just distortion from Vol 2 but no sound at all. 🤔🤷‍♂️

[@GolecLuka]

Yeah...

[@AndiKoehn]

Same

[@coleuzzell652]

@@richardzajic3338 Depends what type of cab you played it through. I have a Marshall 4x12 with old Greenbacks in it, sounds exactly like Van Halen. Every knob on ten except volume 2 is off. In low voltage (Variac) mode. Remember with a plexi, Volume 1 is the "bright/treble" channel and Volume 2 is the "bass" channel. That may be why you didn't like it. It is a one trick pony, but its a great trick.

[@russmills5103]

Big time!

[@mmrseed]

If guitarists would rediscover that E standard and Eb are great tunings they would rediscover that Marshalls provide great tone

[@jeffallen3382]

Yes!

[@gtdcoder]

Exactly

[@robertolsen9721]

Good point! I can't evaluate how an amp sounds below D standard.

[@vorpalblades]

It doesn't make a difference.

[@SamBrockmann]

An amp shouldn't ONLY sound good with 2 tunings. 😂😂

[@chrisboller46]

I have a Marshall JCM 800 2203 from the early 80s and have bought and returned several new Marshalls over the years because they simply didn't sound as good, but Marshall's biggest problem isn't whether they are better/worse than they used to be, it's that not enough people use real amps anymore. I saw an interview yesterday with Zakk Wylde asking when his Wylde Audio amps (basically JCM 800s) would finally go on sale to the general public and he outright said that they don't think there's a sustainable market for them.

[@danse777macabre]

That's lame I'll always use real amps

[@JimThompson-i3u]

The first thing that pops into my head when I think of Marshall amps is the 100 watt head and two 412 cabinets. The 100 watt double stack is a relic of a bygone era. There are very few opportunities to play two 4x12 speaker cabinets and a 100 watt tube amp. Between advancements in PAs, PA speakers, and the trend toward silent stages it makes it difficult to hit the sweet spot with a 100 watt tube amp. Even a 50 watter is only three decibels "quieter". So it seems Marshall, and others, has to adapt to this new environment with lower wattage amps while attempting to retain the tone & mystique of 100 watts and two 412 cabinets. That being said, if you ever get the opportunity to crank a Marshall 100 watt head driving two 412 cabinets up to eleven it's a bucket list experience for a guitar player.

[@kospandx]

"So it seems Marshall, and others, has to adapt to this new environment with lower wattage amps while attempting to retain the tone & mystique of 100 watts and two 412 cabinets." Is this not *exctly* what the Studio series sets out to do?

[@JimThompson-i3u]

​@@kospandx The trend appears to be lower wattage amps by a lot of amp manufacturers. I'd like to play one of those Studio amps to see how Marshally it is. Would be great if they weren't PCB and were handwired instead. That would make a better case for the price tag.

[@kospandx]

@@JimThompson-i3u I own the SC20 (the JCM 800 one), and I think they hit it more or less perfectly. I assume that you are in the US, where Marshall prices seem to be inflated for reasons I've never understood. In Europe, I don't think you could find a handwired amp for what you pay for them (which, for instance, is significantly less than half of what a Jake E Lee 20 watter would set you back).

[@absolutacoustic8878]

@@JimThompson-i3u I have a 1978 JMP 100w head and quad box, have had since 1993 and I now wanted a smaller amp to carry around for jamming etc so I bought the 20w sv20 combo. If I plug both amps through the quad box you wouldn't be able to tell which one I was playing through the 20w sounds so close. As for volume, if I put the 100w on 4, I only have to set the 20w on 4.5 to get the same volume! I can get very low volume from the 20w by plugging in the low imput in channel 2 and using the 5w setting. The SV20C only cost me $1,299 Australian on special, is usually around $1,750.

[@darkogst]

​@@kospandxI guess Marshall US prices are "inflated" for the same reason Mesa's or any other US brand's are here in Europe 🤷‍♂️

[@kristofdevlamynck4786]

That Friedman sounded muddy and not defined , give me that Plexi everyday

[@keithowensmusic37]

He probably had the Thump dial to high, it's on the back. The Presence dial is on the back also.

[@chriscollier2268]

They need to bring back the jcm800 2204 with an efx loop!

[@oofballz4328]

Or better yet, the master volume JMP 2203s and 2204s

[@Bloor005]

There was a company that did an effects loop in a rack that sat in between the amp and speaker, but it was a janky way to doit

[@chrisboller46]

I have a Fryette Powerstation between my 2203 and the cab and it not only adds an FX loop but also let's me crank the main volume past 2 without needing an iso cab (or going deaf).

[@GeneSchmidt]

I have a 1983 JCM800 and the fact it doesn’t have an effects loop is the reason I don’t even use it anymore (had it for 30 years).

[@johnmaloney1681]

Silver Jubilee should fit the bill.

[@billmarchant8531]

Hey Robert. I enjoy watching your channel. Keep up the great shows. I’m a guitar player from the 80s. Paul Rivera modded my 1971 Marshalls back in the day. I had the first Marshalls JCM 800s when they came out and dumped them within weeks of owning them. I’ve also had player endorsements with Rivera amps, Kitty Hawk amps and lastly BedRock amps. Bedrock would take my #1 amp, bring me a replacement and try new preamps in my amp to try live. It was a lot of fun back then. More recently I played Voodoo V-plexi amps from Trace Davis, a fantastic amp guy and person. I guess what I’m trying to say is, Marshall had the right idea, but never took the amps to the next level. They didn’t listen to guitarist, which is why we all had ours modded. The best sounding Marshalls I own and use today are my Voodoo V-plex amps and Bogner Helios amps. With the Helios amps, I run them in the Plexi mode. They have a better mid range, tighter bottom, and the highs aren’t harsh. They are what Marshall should have made. Friedman amps sound good too, better than Marshall, but they are too distorted for me. For my taste, the Voodoos and Bogners are what we were all after in the 80s, when we were getting our Marshalls modded. Marshall should have listened to the musicians but they never did. It’s why Reinhold, Dave, Paul and Trace all modded amps. To make up for the shortcomings of Marshall.

[@CaptainRon1913]

Yeah, sure you did

[@MrScrofulous]

I tried to sell my SV20 recently. After I demoed it to one guy, I kicked him out and took the ad down.

[@saltpeter7429]

That is hilarious! Ive run into that a little bit selling pedals on Craigslist. I think " I dont like this", but after I post it I try it out to make sure, and then I dont know if I want to sell. I bought a Revv Northern Mauler pedal a year ago. Hated it. Played it after putting it up for sale and Im wondering if I should just plumb the depths some more...

[@timothymcnaughton531]

I tried to buy a jtm60 2x12 combo off a guy once, he brought it to my house (no small feat as they are HEAVY) and he decided he didn't need to sell it just after I started playing hahaha.

[@mr.howard1]

I tried to buy 2 Ceriatone Plexi clones and both guys changed their minds.

[@MrScrofulous]

@@timothymcnaughton531 To be fair, it was a tone I set up and my playing that changed my mind. Somehow, I managed to dial in an amazing John Mayer tone.

[@1972LittleC]

The problem with the Friedmans imo is that it's too broad in tone. A Marshall is made to be used in a band setting, and it's making sure it's not crouching in on bass territory. Music still is a team event, although with the internet guitarist age a lot of people tend to forget that.

[@DR._PAUL]

I'm doing Headfirst Drop In mod on an Origin. There are two directions I can go with it. One is simply hot-rodded JCM800, or modified JCM800 to Jake E Lee specs. Both of the mods use Zener diodes for additional clipping but the biggest difference is very minimal. --Like a resistor change and a capacitor being paralleled on another. There are a lot of tweaks that can be made to the JEL Robert is playing, with the SAT and FAT switches on the front of the amp. Freidman is known for articulation, and that in part is obtained with a reduction of bass. Most people including myself don't like the JCM 900 because it comes across as too treble heavy. I play a Mesa or DSL most of the time. But, I have high hopes for the Origin mod. I agree with you about team event. It is all about adjusting an overall sound. I think one of the best things a band can do is make every member sing. When everyone is aware of vocals needing to be heard it makes them self-adjust everything they are doing.

[@Mister_Greg]

@@DR._PAUL I’m pretty sure the JEL50 doesn’t have Fat or Sat, just a bright switch on each channel. The third switch is a channel selector. Back has just Presence and Thump controls with no additional switches. Of all the anti-Friedman commenters, I wonder how many have used a JEL-50 or Plex. These two amps are different from the Dirty Shirley, BE and their derivatives which have been on the market a lot longer.

[@kudtarkarsandroid2500]

For the 800 comparison, the Friedman seemed to have more gain/distortion, but the marshall had Miele saturation and less gain

[@keolacam]

Low mids was the diffrence. But I'm only listening with ear buds I'm not in the room with the speaker cab

[@castleanthrax1833]

​@@keolacamI don't think anyone was in the room with the cab. Wasn't he using an IR?

[@JoelDucote]

What I hear is that the Friedman sounds bigger. Which is great when you sitting alone in a room. The Marshall sounds like it will take less post EQ to actually sit in a band mix or recording.

[@DigiEvoluido]

It's actually the opposite Marshalls need more filtering and I'm saying that as a wizard guy.

[@JoelDucote]

@@DigiEvoluido respectfully, we will agree to disagree. I hear bottom end in the Friedman that will need to be shelved out to sit in the mix of a recording. The Marshall has a tighter bottom end. So less will need to be removed to make room for bass guitar and kick drum. Friedman builds an excellent amp. However, I'll take an old Marshall over one all day long.

[@DigiEvoluido]

@@JoelDucote if you ever recorded them you'd know the Friedman is all mids, great for recording, not a single frequency out of place. Although not to everyone's liking.

[@tremdoctor007]

My first tube Marshall’s are the DSL100H, DSL100HR and DSL20HR. Great amps, especially the 20 which can do no wrong. The 100’s are 2 channels but 4 modes, the newest having 6 new features over its predecessor that are quite good. Both have 50/100 watt modes, but the HR has master volumes so you can dime it and not make your ears bleed 🩸 in a bedroom, small home studio or club. I love them. I think Marshall is on the right track with these 20 watt versions. SC20 (JCM800), SV20 (Plexi) and DSL20HR. People love these 20’s you can actually crank.

[@MARK-r6c3k]

I bought a new DSL 100h from Sweetwater. I kinda felt like it needed a push to get the tone I wanted. It went bad within a week and SW sent me another one. That went bad too. They sent me a 100HR and that's been fine. I also immediately thought it sounded better and didn't need the push I thought the first ones needed. Not sure what the exact difference is but I like the HR better.

[@antilaw9911]

Them amps sound like shit. You must be young fella.

[@tremdoctor007]

@ I bought my H model used. I replaced the tubes, but it wasn’t till I reset the bias that I liked it. The Ultra Gain channels have too much gain, maximum gain being 6, it starts getting flubby (muddy) at 7. I bought my HR model from Guitar Center, it’s simple with Ultra Gain but indeed has more bite. I set the bias to 90mv and both are better. My 100HR came with the bias set to 70, that’s pretty cool. Marshall recommends 90mv.

[@tremdoctor007]

@@antilaw9911 Nope, Guess again. The H model took some time to tweak but it sounds good now. The DSL20HR is amazing.

[@honkytonkinson9787]

@@antilaw9911I’m not young and I think the DSL5cr, with a speaker upgrade, sounds amazing for what it is. I also have a high end reproduction of a fender tweed amp The Marshall doesn’t sound as good as the tweed but it also cost a lot less money Seems like Marshall reliability is hit or miss, but mine has had zero issues and I’ve played it a lot, cranked a lot of the time, and have had zero issues I’ve noticed something over the years: metal and hard rock guys have their own opinions that are drastically different than people who are into vintage sounds, and the two groups rarely agree on anything, except maybe that Gibson guitars are expensive

[@skullheadwater9839]

I like the Marshall's better than the Friedman they seem smoother and have more clarity and the Freidman was doing this slight staticy thing on the top end. Nothing is wrong with the Friedman it is just a slight difference, but the difference is there for someone with the skill level to tell the difference. I build, mod and convert old tube gear into amps I have been wanting to build a Marshall style for myself but don't know what to build. I have toyed with building an 18w with the EL84's, a 6V6 JCM800, a 50-watt late 60's plexi, an OG JTM45 or even a tweed bassman because I have beaucoup killer vintage 6L6's. Probably should build them all.

[@tshouse2782]

I heard that too

[@skullheadwater9839]

@@tshouse2782 To someone with a good ear it is obvious.

[@realRonPetersen]

@@skullheadwater9839 That static thing is what turned me off of the Friedman. I heard it through my crappy phone speaker. Dare I listen to it with headphones? I liked the Super Lead.

[@sundayscaries11]

In all fairness, you could put three 800s in a comparison and they would likely all sound at least slightly different. The bottom line is that all these capture the Marshall sound. And that is reason enough for Marshall to keep making the same JCMs, Plexis, etc. There is clearly a demand for people who want “the sound.” Be it tweed or black face Fender, Marshall, Vox, or whatever name you can think of, these are all standards of sound that people reach for. If someone wants something a little more nuanced, there are brands and markets for more nuanced takes on classic circuits. I have no problem seeing the classic brands staying true to their DNA and letting others pick up on nuanced trends that eventually shift (usually back to the vintage thing).

[@2550marshall]

The Friedman and the 800s always sound muddy/buzzy to me....the Plexi all day long but hit the front with some good sauce aka boost pedals like an Exotic EP Booster and a Klon and it is the holy grail tone. I think what Marshall could do for a modern take would be a foot switchable 2 ch version of a 4 holer (4 channels) so you could switch between clean and dirty and have two Master volumes plus add in a switchable Modern/Vintage power amp section. In other words, one 4 holer with it's own master volume for the cleaner settings and then switch over to the other 4 holer preamp for the dirty settings with it's own MV. All midi switchable and with FX loops per channel. They could name it the "Double Plexi".

[@wfd245]

I like to hit the front of my 76 super lead with a boss ge7 sounds great

[@timothymcnaughton531]

​@@wfd245 I do the exact same thing with my Origin 50 head, works a treat.

[@offbeatbassgear]

Maybe in some ways Marshall is trapped between two paradigms: Wanting to be an audio/lifestyle company dependent on selling several lines of headphones and speakers as its primary income source, while sustaining a legacy amplifier series of products that tends to be larger and pricier than the current market standard, and, if it intends for its amps to remain relevant and accessible, then it needs to market some amps that are smaller, that retain the classic Marshall tone, and that include several more modern features, i.e. Bluetooth, interface outs, etc. That is a tall order for any company, and would require investment in developing new products. That may not be very feasible

[@stricknine8623]

Looking at tube amplifiers, Marshall is NOT more expensive than other brands. Can you please provide a worthy tube amplifier that is consistently cheaper than Marshall ? I would like to know.

[@offbeatbassgear]

@@stricknine8623 Read it carefully, I said it is a smaller market for high powered fifty and hundred watt heads and large cabinets now than it is now. There are any number of builders making tube heads in the 10 to 30 watt range that most players use now. I have two, in fact, an old Mesa Boogie TA and a Laney Lionheart 5W, both of which work great, and sound great, and cost less used, and cost less new, than Marshall's traditional higher powered heads. Fewer and fewer players need the power of the traditional Marshall head and the larger cabinets that are paired with them. That reality is something that Marshall and a host of other builders need to respond to.

[@offbeatbassgear]

@@stricknine8623 I don't know why a reply I typed up earlier didn't post, but I'll type it in again. If you read my post, I said that there is less interest in high powered tube heads, which are really what Marshall is known for and I think that that's a fact. The 50W and 100W Marshall heads into the classic 4x12 cabinet isn't the standard anymore; players are using ten to thirty watt tube heads, and that's an area that Marshall isn't a leader in. There are several, if not dozens, of builders in that space already. I'll name two that I've played and enjoyed for years, but there are others: The smaller Boogies like the TA-series of lunchbox heads, the Lionheart 5W by Laney, and there are many others. In a more traditional model, how about a Twin?

[@kospandx]

​@@offbeatbassgear The Studio range seems to be exactly what you are describing here, and lo and behold, those are the amps that seem to have been selling in recent years. So except for filling these with more functions (diverting them away from being recreations of classic models), I am not sure what Marshall could be doing better in this field.

[@offbeatbassgear]

@@kospandx That doesn't address the larger question, in that is Marshall an amp company, or a company that produces a line of amps and relies on Bluetooth speakers and headphones as its main sources of income?

[@stevenmoulton6147]

Distribution is their biggest issue these days in the US. You can’t find new ones in stores to try out and test in order to figure out what one you like and can buy. From what I’ve read online, this issue is US specific as Europe isn’t having this issue. I want to buy a Marshall but can’t find a new one to try and buy most of the time

[@PaulCooksStuff]

Apparently their whole USA distribution is in a mess. There were two distributors in the chain and two markups, which was why USA prices were so high. Marshall have been trying to undo that pricing mess by streamlining distribution middle men, but it seems like inventory levels (partly the distributors job) have been the casualty.

[@CaptainRon1913]

Issues are magazines and newspapers... "Problem"

[@AngryPeasants]

We have the same issue in Canada atm.

[@Zwidawurzn]

My local store here in Austria has all sorts of new Marshalls, must be an US issue. But i know that from other brands like Mesa Boogie which are kinda hard to find here in the EU, especially as new ones.

[@ScottfromBaltimore]

My five watt is too loud for my room. I need a big room to care about real amps.

[@kxmrock]

Cool run that in to a 2x12 you'll enjoy it more! My 22wt Victory never gets above 3 on Volume I have a old 5wt Jet City Pico Valve as well that i modded the living crap out of with all the mods you can find online. It really brought it to life also with superior Cap's&Resistors. Remember, good speakers are EVERYTHING as it can be the difference between Night & Day

[@JimThompson-i3u]

Being a considerate neighbor I think even one watt cranked up is too much.

[@alexanderhanksx]

Snag yerself a good ol attenuation pedal. You can turn down the volume and maintain the sound of a cranked amp. It'll change ya life.

[@ScottfromBaltimore]

I want the big room so I can play loud. I want feedback.

[@ScottfromBaltimore]

@@alexanderhanksx I did. It's great. Big rooms, tho.

[@arshist]

Marshall is kicking ass in the bluetooth speaker market, their amp line only needs to do enough to support the image and culture of the brand. The 20 watt lead amp, the Studio Vintage, is a big hit. If they can do something like that, 20 watts, but get a decent IR loader and speaker load built in, for silent or quiet recording, along with a preamp works for modern metal styles, I can see that being an exciting offering. I've got some 50 and 100 watt tube heads, but these are not commonly used by guitarists anymore, they're legacy products (that I hope never go away).

[@JHSmithmusic]

The Friedman outdid the jcm800 just slightly imo. I felt that it had more of a blend of JCM and plexi chirp that I really liked. The Plexi however well outdid the Friedman in this case. I think it’s probably the extra headroom, but the clarity and sparkle was much better too

[@Eelbackwards]

Hi Robert, I personally like the bottom end of the JCM 800. The saturation breaks a little differently. The other day Pete Thorn was comparing the JEL Head (Jake E. Lee) to his Marshall which sounded a tad closer than the Friedman. None are bad, the Marshall just has more bass and is less compressed or EQ sounding. Thanks and Happy New Year!

[@Guitarjosii]

I recently took part in the Marshall Factory Tour. Marshall took over 2 hours to show my buddy and I around the factory. Everything is super informal there and you get the impression that they preserve their heritage with great pride. Since this experience, I look at my Marshall amps with even more pride. It's nice to be part of this family. But I also see the problem that Marshall is not keeping up with the times enough. The Studio series is great, but it lacks a modern approach. Why doesn't the SV20 have EPA power scaling like the YJM100 or AFD100? Why is there no internal reactive load box? Why is there no Marshall competition to the Fryette PowerStation? There isn't even the PowerBrake attenuator anymore. I understand that Marshall don't have the expertise to bring a counterpart to the UAFX Lion onto the market, for example. But they could work together with other companies.

[@johnycat7373]

As an AFD owner since day of release….I completely agree. The power scaling is awesome. But it is very sensitive. It works in hand with the auto biasing feature as it’s very sensitive and imperfect current supply can disrupt it. But the auto valve biasing feature if used before every start up ensures a great tone even at low (power scaled ) volumes. Just because this amp has Slashes name on it , it gets criticised by people who have never had one. And they don’t know how to EQ it. It EQ’s differently to other Marshall’s . But if they just read the manuel….. I wouldn’t sell mine, ever. And like you, other than financial cost necessary, I can not understand why all Marshall’s don’t have these features…

[@billtownsend]

Bringing the PowerBrake back at an affordable price would be great for consumers and would help owners of the the big Marshalls make their amps more usable.

[@Guitarjosii]

@@billtownsend In my opinion, they shouldn't bring it back - who would still want a resistive load attenuator? They should bring out a reactive load attenuator, with a built in tube driven poweramp like in the Fryette. BadCatAmps tried it with a ClassD poweramp in their Unleash attenuator series. Or even better: put a reactive load attenuator IN the amp. So you also would have a great loadbox feature.

[@Murphy_R9]

I really liked the Vintage Modern series. That was the last Marshall released i liked a lot.

[@cruller23]

They all sounded great! I love the 2203/2204 platform. It’s my jam: a medium gain, straight ahead amp. I had a killer ‘84 2203 and ‘69 1959T in the 90s. Both were modded or had replacement parts when I got them. However, a quick visit to the tech had them running and sounding proper. The OG Marshalls from pre 1989 have many things against them: high volume production, wider component variance, aging components, and the chance they were modded or maintained well or not. Friedman takes the platform and builds it with modern, tighter tolerance parts and better attention to detail. Then he tweaks various parts of the circuit to achieve a fine tuned version of a classic circuit. It’s no wonder that plugging into a Friedman amp is cool: it’s new and fine tuned. Checked out a Dirty Shirley and it was everything I liked about Marshalls. Plugging into an older Marshall is a gamble… My only Marshall now is a ‘97 DSL50. It’s great. C12 clipped, speaker jack ground mod. Stable, great sounding amp. Sure, I’d love a Dirty Shirley, but my DSL50 was 10% of the price of a Dirty Shirley.

[@bluesoverlord]

I agree, 2203 is the Goldilocks. I love me a plexi, but I can just hit a tweed Bassman hard with a boost and get 99% there.

[@justo316]

I think the studio series was a brilliant idea. Affordable and plenty of power. I'd love them to update them with a built in attenuator because even though my Mini Jubilee has a "master volume", it still sounds best when the power tubes are cranked a bit in 20W mode. Also, getting stock always seems to be an issue here in Australia. Can literally go half a year without seeing any stock available.

[@joermnyc]

Perhaps the issue is: there are tons of pedal “amp in a box” that can sound like overdriven and distorted vintage Marshalls and they cost a lot less! (Catalinbread Dirty Little Secret, Wampler Plexi, Carl Martin PlexiRanger (which has a Dallas Rangemaster boost on the side). All you need is a “pedal platform” amp, or just go direct in and simulate a cab virtually.

[@Rainyman63]

I remember my guitar buddy having a Friedman in our rehearsal room for testing. At first we were pretty impressed but the longer he played it the more we realised that it lacks something. As soon as I played my rig along (Nothing special, an Egnater Tweaker 40 Head) the Friedman went under. Worse, it caused hearing fatigue. There is something exhausting going on in the upper mids that is kinda artificial and "digital" for lack of a better word. I hear the same here. The Marshall is just more rexaxed in a certain unnerving frequency range which probably makes it the better choice in a band context.

[@slayjwood]

I agree with yr take... could be the 50 vs 100 thing on the 800, but the marshall plexi sounded better... nothin some eq and or speaker or tube differences couldnt probably fix tho! Both sound great!

[@sirtogii5216]

The JCM the clear winner in my ears, but then again I am listening with a pretty crappy headset so I might be missing something. Marshall's problem is that amps have gone from a necessity to a cool luxury item. With all the modellers out there able to capture all the tones, it's now just a "feel" thing to have the real deal. And you need the money, the room and friendly neighbours to even use it.

[@anthonyb5279]

You can't hear. Modelers suck.

[@sirtogii5216]

@ Mmm must be the reason why musicians use them live… 🤔

[@thegreatdel]

Top end on the Friedman is in a very different place to the two Marshalls. I prefer the two Marshalls over the Friedman, which to me, sounded brittle in the top end, like the presence control needed winding back a load

[@KyleSG88]

800 Marshall sounds tighter and less fuzzy. Tubes used in them could also affect that a touch. Overall Marshall sounded better in these clips for sure.

[@Zwidawurzn]

Had a DSL20H which i sold because i'm mainly an Engl player. But Marshall are legendary, their amps and Marshall branded cab stacks are pure pop culture, and many people play Marshall amps. I've seen they're going after lifestyle products like headphones and bluetooth speakers and i have no idea how well that goes but i see Marshall in a good spot on the market when it comes to tube amps, they offer something for everyone from affordable 1 Watt to hand made premium stuff.

[@kennethbecker2545]

Happy New Year's to you and your family as well Robert as we all look forward to another year of you videos. To my ear the amps sound almost identical which makes sense given Friedman was trying to simulate the Marshall sound as they are almost indistinguishable in your videos other than the Friedman 800 being a little more saturated than the Marshall. Hope Santa was good to you and your family

[@robk7091]

Freedman Mid Q is at different point, lower compared to the marshalls. The Freedman has way more base, coupled with the lower Q mid, making it more muddy, mushy, woolly ...Freedman will sound better in the room, but the Marshalls will cut throgh the mix and live on stage.

[@SimpleManGuitars1973]

I solved my Marshall problem by getting Friedman Runt 20 and a Friedman Little Sister 20 combo. A subscriber commented on one of my Shorts the other day and told me how much he loved my "Marshall sound" and I told him I loved it too and that's why I got 2 Friedmans. LOL! I literally just use two Friedmans at the same time with zero overdrive pedals whatsoever and I absolutely ADORE the tone I get from them.

[@finishin.my.coffee8780]

The Friedman had more of a darker sound. I like that the best.

[@rikardlarsson437]

I agree! The Plexi was a little clearer and less muddy than the Friedman...👍❤️

[@picktheblueone]

It seems that in almost every example, the Friedman was set for slightly more gain which made me lean toward the Marshall sounds - which sounded undeniably great. With that said, I have a Freidman Small box and feel it does what a standard plexi cannot.

[@brianmckenzie1318]

They all sound great, just pick you poison (and application). For me it comes down to application. I'm just a home player, plug in and go. I don't record or play into an OX or etc. So the Friedman's fit the bill for me with their great master volume, where the Marshall needed to be cranked to ear blistering levels to get that tone. I could be wrong, but that is my take. I've also learned to be very careful in my choices as all amps sound great in direct recordings, but I really prefer to hear a room mic so I can tell what it may sound like when I get the gear home.

[@bengibson3955]

I absolutely loved the “Decadence Dance” solo. I lost track of which amp was providing the tone, because all were amazeballs. Marshall’s kick ass, Friedmans are awesome, and all sound great the way you play ‘em.

[@BetterMixes]

I was actually pretty surprised at how much more I liked the 800 than the Friedman, ESPECIALLY with the P90s.

[@EL_DUDERIN0]

Marshal JCM 800 all day and day. The Friedman probably has some more high-end harmonics that sound a little hotter on the high-fret wailing but it sounds a bit fizzy and scratchy on the low end-- not my cup of tea, but would sound great in a mix.

[@g_man2177]

The Marshall has more clarity, but Friedman has more punch. It all depends on what you want for your sound. Happy New Year!🎉

[@JoeBattle]

Marshall plexi for the win. Just such a clear and concise sound. Never got too muddy just always had that perfect ring.

[@MrZerohour1967]

Have to say, based on how good the BE is in my Helix, I really expected the Friedman to win hands down, but in every clip I preferred the genuine Marshall JCM800 and Plexi.

[@jarrusjenkins]

People overlook the JVM, DSL and the Origin amps all the time. They weren't mentioned here and Glenn from SMG overlooked them as well and just said "Marshalls are all too expensive and just trading on the name" While that is somewhat true, they still make some killer amps that aren't a JCM800 or a Plexi. Id like to see more of the JVM, DSL and Origin stuff come out of Marshall in the future. Id also argue that Friedman amps ought to be as good as they are considering how much they cost (quite a bit more than a reissue marshall) Id argue that a JVM410H could easily hang with a BE100 deluxe

[@kospandx]

Which is odd, because Glenn was name-dropping the JVM every now and then in years past. But you are right. It seems like a lot of people commenting here don't even know about the Studio series.

[@charlesreynolds7239]

The only complaint I have is lack of availability here in California. There is inventory for the combo amps but good luck getting heads and cabs for the high end.

[@RkicF8]

Love my JVM, never considered switching.

[@IndianNuclear1]

Every one of those amps sounds great. The Friedman seems a little fizzier than the rest, the JCM 800 sounds tightest in the upper mids. Man, my favorite amp is a 64 Fender Deluxe, but I always use a ZVex Box of Rock with it, so maybe I’m just a sucker for low wattage Marshall’s now that I think about it 😂

[@terrymoseley1449]

I had the 50 watt JCM 800. I loved it but it was destroying my hearing so I sold it and went to a 18 watt Suhr Badger with power scaling. I'm doing a weekly gig with a Marshall Class 5 miked up. I have all the tone I need.

[@4GuitarTrance]

Marshall Super Leads ALL DAY LONG! Been doing it for more years than I'd like to count at this point in my life. For Rock (and other genres if one knows how to squeeze a Marshall) there is all-around nothing like an original-style 100-watt Marshall through a 4x12 bottom. And 2 100-watt SL's through 2 4x12 bottoms in stereo is even more audio eroticism. Others can come close and will do in a pinch... but really, IMO, no cigar! 50-watt Super Leads do not even come close to the 100-watt. Bottom end is not as tight, not as much punch, not nearly as much sonic variation. Thanks for the vid!

[@greendayray]

The studio size amps were a good deal, but the last real new amp Marshall had that was good was the JVM series.

[@kospandx]

This is pretty much it. Marshall has its classic models, for whom there will remain a market, and pretty much perfected their modern flagship amp with the JVM (except for a few matters that were resolved in the Satriani version, which sadly is no longer available). It is hard to know where they should go from here.

[@christosfragias592]

I bought a Marshall JVM 205H when they first came out and sold it soon after. I then bought an ENGL Ritchie Blackmore Signature 100 and recently, an ENGL Artist Edition 50, and never looked back.

[@Fret-knot]

Give me all your love tonight, as I'm cryin' in the rain, because I've just been bitten by a Whitesnake. I need a little fire water.... and a Marshalll is a Marshall. Nuff said. Happy New Year.

[@tfbattag]

Best comment of all! Love the creativity!

[@julianbenedict9720]

Al depends on the user. The settings on the gain matter quite a bit. I have the 100 watt JEL and it is a Marshall killer for sure. DEPENDS ON THE SETTINGS****** great side by side video.

[@Tomekkplk]

Unpopular opinion. I couldn't afford a 100w 4x12 Plexi or JCM800 when covid started but I found an 83' 100w Laney Protube (Pre AOR era) 4x12 with original Fane speakers and bit the bullet for $1400 shipped from England. Having since played a JCM800/900 but not the Plexi.. I can safely say I do not regret passing on the JCM800 for this thing. One thing to note about Marshall is the hole Gibson fell in to and why they haven't fully gotten themselves out. Their quality about 10 years ago was absolute shit and for the price you paid it wasn't worth it. New people came in and cleaned up the QC mess and it was steered ion the right direction. Look at the price part now. $5500 for a Gibson les paul custom and $1300 for an Epiphone (inspired by Gibson custom shop) With all the same electronics. Replace the bridge/tail piece/tuners and for less than half the price you have basically the same thing. That is the hole Marshall is in now. Other companies are coming in and building 90-95% jcm800ish amps and selling them for 1/3-1/2 less than what Marshall is charging. Time to win over the new players and not try to keep the legacy fans happy. You need new buyers, not previous buyers.

[@jaredt3985]

It is an unpopular opinion, but it’s getting more and more popular every year. If Marshall wants to stay relevant in 10-15 years, they have to get with the times. I love their amps, and their legacy, but nobody under 30 gives a shit. And once all us old farts die off, that’s who will be buying music gear. The smart companies will cater to both and transition smoothly with products that cover the entire spectrum.

[@fromalongtimeago]

I bought a brand new DSL100 watt head from Guitar Center in 2024. Hooked it up to my JCM800 flat face 4x12 cab. Played it for approximately 20 minutes, heard a click, and it went silent. Lights were on but no sound, no hiss, no nothing. Hooked up my 1983 JCM800 100 watt head and it worked fine. Hooked up the DSL again and nothing. Took it back to Guitar Center and got my money back. Firhot to add, the DSL sounded really thin and brittle. Almost solid state. Hated the sound so I am glad I got rid of that POS

[@sunnibird]

I went down the amp repair rabbit hole one day and there are not many amps that are both well made and well designed. They still function as they should but under the hood there are issues, and they will crop up eventually. The Friedman may not be the better Marshall, but it's the better made amp.

[@Dirty06-wh2wv]

What are the few amps that are both well made and well designed if you don’t mind me asking. Thanks for your input.

[@cer_ruzz]

My problem with these legacy brands is, that they keep the same specs they had 50 years ago. A lot of innovation has happened but they charge a premium for yesteryear products. It's fine to have vintage options for those who prefer that, but they could offer something for the modern player too.

[@dude_crush_]

For Plexi I'm going with the Marshall Super Lead, the Friedman sounded a bit fizzy. For the 800 I'm going with Friedman, it just sounded so good!

[@omarheavy2009]

Few years ago, i used to say im not a Marshall guy. Becuse i like modern high gain tones. Anyway, now i have Jvm cutom tattoo, Silver Jubilee & Jcm800 stealth in my collection & i still would like to add Dsl 20h, Sv20 or Jtm20! 😁

[@compucorder64]

Wangs do a great HW JCM800 & Plexi too. But, I'm with you here, and in other comparisons, the Plexi just sounds classy. Unless you really need the higher gain, without pedals. And want that JCM800 grit, which is nice and satisfying but I would only sometimes want that. And there's pedals that can add that type of flavour.

[@JohnnyBgood548]

I've had 0 problems with any Marshall product I've used over the years. Just consistent beautiful cleans and that Marshall edge of break up to distortion gold!

[@tomw1970]

The Marshall jcm took all 3 instances, hands down for me. The super lead slightly edges out the other slightly except with the les paul.

[@Mister_Greg]

Tasty. Dave’s “take” on a Plexi doesn’t deviate much beyond practical differences (bright switch, fx loop, master volume and component sourcing), although the JEL only employs the high input of the bright channel. With that in mind there are plenty of good shootouts between a 1959 and a 1987 where the differences are fairly stark. Or there’s Pete Thorn’s video where he compared the JEL50 to a 1987 and a 2203. Ignoring 50W vs 100W, the most apparent difference to my ear is Dave’s JCM800 is tighter thanks to the 2.2nF coupling cap after the first gain stage.

[@mikeyjhn]

That surprised me preferred both the Marshalls. Maybe Marshall could make them with built in IR's and attenuator but for me Marshall is the sound.

[@jdw2150]

Not a fan at all of NEW Marshalls. I'm all about old 800s and love the sound of the old plexi amps. Almost don't care if they went out of business at all as they are NOT doing anything these days I care about. That said, I expected the JE to beat up the Marshalls. As you said, it's a great take on the Marshall circuits, and I'd own one happily. But in this video's examples I largely leaned to the Marshalls. Although the leads in one of the Friedman 800 takes was brilliant around 4:10 I'm sure they could be dialed differently and things could be different. And I definitely hear a chewy organic sound in Friedman amps that I just love. Reminiscent of Page in the Song Remains the Same live album. Sometimes, that is just settings and conditions. At this point in time I'd probably buy a Friedman rather than the money on a clapped out old overpriced Marshall.

[@InsaneWayne355]

I think that both Marshalls sounded way better than the Friedman. The Friedman sounded overly fizzy and scratchy, and just harsh to listen to. The Marshalls sounded smoother and more pleasing.

[@ricdale7813]

I owned both a 50 and 100 watt Marshall Super Lead in the early 1980's. Stellar and Insanely loud amps. Now a days if I want a quality and refined Classic Marshall without having too have it modded for modern gains and with a MV and loop I look at Friedman. Marshall is living on its past Flagships just like Gibson. In their defense these Classic models are what 70% of the brand fan base wants. Only a smaller percentage of about 20-30 percent want "new" Models.

[@alec7364]

To me the Friedman always sounded a lot "browner" and more saturated/compressed which is what we buy Friedmans for. The Marshalls sounded much more open and what I would expect a JCM or Plexi to sound. They all sounded great for different things, but the Friedman sounded like it would be way more fun to play through.

[@s.e.n3264]

I'd rather get a Splawn Comp 50. Probably the best modded Marshall style amp.

[@markrehling3141]

I preferred the Marshall’s. They sounded more raw and open. What I’d like to see from Marshall is recreations of the classic amps but with real useable modern features. Like decent attenuation etc. But so they actually capture the sound of the old ones. With amps like the JVM. I thought they tried to put way too much on them and the quality just wasn’t there.

[@myblues6532]

The problem with this demonstration is, Robert makes these amps sound great, no matter what. Which means, it's not the amp, it's the musician that makes a amp sound good or bad.

[@jublaim]

Also, would have been informative to show how the knobs were set on the amps.

[@AmericanNationalist852]

So what your saying is: if you're a crappy musician you'll sound bad... Who'd a thunk?! 🤪

[@carsonfee1964]

Friedman is a close second to the JCM 800 but the Marshall just has a bit more warmth and the top end is mellow vs the Friedman. I'd still own both.

[@chain8847]

I have a vintage Marshall jtm 100. It sounds awesome. The only issue with it is that it only goes up to 10. That’s one less than 11.

[@smc8144]

Imagine if car manufacturers could do what guitar and amp manufacturers do. Everyone would just make copies of Mustangs, Camaros, Corvettes etc., hot rod them and put their name on them and say that they are better than Ford, Chevy, Dodge or whoever they copied. What would happen? So everyone makes a “Les Paul”, a “Strat”, a “Tele” or in amps a Fender circuit, a Marshall circuit or a Vox. Seriously! And people are bashing Fender, Gibson, Marshall …. I think they deserve a little more grace. These are the tools that changed music forever and are still the benchmarks. Bravo Marshall, Bravo Fender, Bravo Gibson! Thank you for what you have given us.

[@Hadouken5150]

I think it’s the new generation of musicians doing all the whining. They’re playing short scale basses at this point 😅.

[@robbgnarly]

I liked them all, but from what I heard the 800 sounded a little less articulate than the Friedman, but that could easily be an eq setting. Hell I have a JCM2000 DSL100 it will melt faces and actually does a pretty decent 800/Plexi sound on the classic channel. But I think some prefer the Friedman and others like that because they typically have the original circuit of the 800/Plexi but also include some very popular mods that can or can not be engaged depending on your taste. But I argue anyone stand Infront of a dimed Marshall with a 4x12 and a LP and tell me it isn't one of the best sounds ever

[@Ambergoo532]

Nice tone on the AB riffage! Both amps sounded great on the Strat neck!

[@craiglizt8074]

I’m a big fan of Friedman amps (I own the SS-100 v2), but I preferred the tone from the Marshalls in this video.

[@redearthpaul178]

The JVM amplifiers were some of the best/cleverest design I've seen. A plexi, 800 and bogner all in one amp? 4 channels with 3 modes?

[@gear-head]

They are both excellent amps. Marshall's have that open, fat sound while Friedmans are a little more compressed snd really shine at high gain levels.

[@Gearslayer92]

Still use the Marshall JVM as my main amps for years. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[@NWTMasterWolf]

I love my VS100 stack. But the newer stuff doesn't appeal to me. My next amp will be a JCM 800. I love the sound. IMO nothing beats a JCM 800 for sound in the styles I like to play. But I think style and tone are big factors in the amp/speaker you use.

[@PaxtonStJohn]

The Super Lead sounded the best to my ears.

[@rogerfurer2273]

Happy New Year! Sell the Freidman, it sounds like you're using a cheap overdrive or fuzz pedal with it, even when the guitar volume was reduced.

[@billyboy65leath84]

When playing through the 800 why wasn’t the power light on?

[@RobertBakerGuitar]

the bulb died in it years ago and ive just never changed it

[@em001868]

First of all, Great comparison and great playing as alway. This clearly (to me) is an example of why Marshall retains its tone throne. It is extremely difficult to out Marshall a Marshall. And Friedman falls short in my humble opinion. The 800 was close but as we all know, the 800 has a distinctive tone that Judas Priest pulled off in the 80’s that the Friedman cannot quite attain. As for the Plexi, Friedman fell WAY short in this comparison. Almost embarrassingly. There is an annoying buzz from the Friedman that Marshall’s don’t have. Your Plexi is clear, crisp and all Marshall. Pick your weapon of choice, but mine will always be Marshall.

[@tobiasryan8378]

I have an old JCM800 2204 and a Friedman JEL 20 - either through my 412 with Greenbacks and V30's is tonal bliss!

[@JasonCGuitarOfficial]

For me the 800 is better than the Friedman. There top end is way smoother and it warmer overall. The Friedman doesnt sound "bad" its just really brittle on top.

[@scottsennsibaugh885]

I used to have a JCM 800 Marshall two 12, 100 w. combo amp. back in the late 80's to the mid 90's. So the sound of that was more familiar to me. And when I saw Joe Satriani back in the late 80's that's what he was using on stage was a JCM 800 combo amp like mine. And he was using the same Boss effects pedals I had and a Vox wah wah pedal. That was it. And he was getting such an amazing sound out of it.

[@rickw5024]

I'd be happy with any of them as they all sounded good. Nice chops showcased them all as damn good sounding. I could never use them in my bedroom so I'll stick with my GK Spark and 250ML combos and my EVH Lunchbox, Blackhearts and Panama Fuego heads

[@SyrusEtube]

I liked the JCM 800 best.

[@JeighNeither]

The problem w/this take is that modern audio testing has clearly shown the cab is more important that the head. Not enough players put enough emphasis there. That said; I was busy typing when Bob started playing thru the amps, but it was very clear which one was the Friedman. Far more interesting & dynamic tone from it.

[@keithowensmusic37]

I'd be interested to know the EQ settings for the amps because the Friedman sounded darker/muddier.

[@arustydodge2111]

Love that JCM 800. Personally would like Marshall to stay with original specs. That sound they created is; “The Marshall sound”. Many of us strive for that, and want just that! Like a Gibson Les Paul R9, a ‘63 Strat, a first run Gretsch White Falcon. THAT sound, that feel. For me, that’s the brass ring that I want to grab! Great jamming, Robert… gimme that JCM 800, for Life! 😉 👍👍⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️👍👍

[@Disembodied_Voice]

The Marshall's are more open sounding. Friedman has the extra gain going, but the Marshall's have the organic thing happening. I have a Silver Jube 20 watter and the Victory Jack, which is Marshall adjacent, and a Kraken V4 preamp. I can get close to the Marshall, but the Marshall has it's thing. I wouldn't give up the Marshall, but I also love the Victory stuff. It's all personal.