Marshall Silver Jubilee Original vs. Reissue Comparison

Today we do a comparison between the new reissue Marshall 2555x Silver Jubilee head and an original 1987 Marshall 2555 Silver Jubilee head.
Both heads are running into one Marshall 2551AV Cabinet with Celestion Vintage 30 speakers.
Learn more at any Guitar Center store or online at: www.guitarcente...

[@satch4u3]

Both sound great. The vintage amps is obviously a little warmer probably due to the caps going a little dull over time.

[@kierenmoore3236]

Yeah, the RI sounds brighter, and maybe a little cleaner ... which I might prefer on a clean setting, but not for anything else ... I've always used a Fender or Vox for cleans, anyway - Marshalls are for crunch and Lead!! ;) Though I've found some good , clean tones, dialling it back on vintage JCM800s (2203 VI, equivalent combo), and a few others ...

[@ramsesespinosa5057]

@@kierenmoore3236 for better sound try a 1959 slp for clean

[@ramsesespinosa5057]

@@kierenmoore3236 For better clean tone use a marshall 1959 slp

[@NickB-md1oy]

I always love people using the word warm to describe tone.

[@MrJackal43]

“Capacitors going dull…..” 😂yeah…. No. 😂 it’s the tubes burning in.

[@guitarcenter]

Get #MarshallMonday going with this comparison of the ***** Silver Jubilee Original vs. Reissue! Available for pre-order now: bit.ly/2555XJubilee

[@nearkissace1316]

There is a definite difference. The Vintage has more bottom end and in certain settings, as he engaged more options, the Vintage had a full tone that I would call "Barrel chested". Whereas, the Reissue if stood alone would sound like the original, but on a side by side comparison, the fullness and character fall flat and if I were inclined to want this sound, I would save up for an original and pass on the Reissue.

[@SSVplus]

Jason Davis Happy to pad your old vintage amp's value just before selling it?

[@nearkissace1316]

Not selling anything. Can't someone have an opinion other than Wow,cool! ... Sounds like to me someone is afraid my comments might influence consumers not to buy the new reissue model.

[@SSVplus]

Oh don't you wish. I hear that difference between 2 vintage jubes with different tubes.

[@nearkissace1316]

Which will happen with Any amp that uses tubes. But for a more drastic change in sound, try different speakers. I have converted my speakers to early 1970's Celestion G12H30 with pulsonic cones, makes all the difference in the world.

[@Jcaburianhimself]

Just being honest, but the new one doesn't sound that bad. I haven't played a reissue so I can't fully speak for it. Another thing to keep in mind is the tube compliment in both the amps, it wasn't mentioned if the tubes were same brand etc. which could possibly account for the slight tonal difference. I'm not sure how true the schematic of the reissue is to the original which could also contribute to the difference in sound. In the end I found the reissue to be a tad brighter with a little more pronounced upper mids; that does not mean it sounds bad!

[@Acehan]

My first reaction was "the new one is garbage". Actually, in the big picture, the 2555X is a phenomenal amp. The tone is amazing, the crunch and lead are there to rock. I definitely would buy it. The original 2555 is just something else entirely.

[@IGarrettI]

reissue doesnt sound the same at all, i prefer the vintage one

[@leibstandarte1stSS]

IGarrettI Ja !

[@MarchPancake]

IGarrettI wrong answwer. GC wants you to like the reissue -so you will buy it

[@IGarrettI]

KjellGibson THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG!! FREEDOOM OF SPEEAACHH

[@MKRocker2012]

IGarrettI I don't think they're supposed to sound the same. Personally I prefer the Reissue.

[@literalemu2815]

Vintage seems a tad warmer and a bit more analogue, reissue is a bit crisper and dare I say a tad fizzier. Definitely prefer the vintage

[@erichemard7066]

Both are excellent heads. As he mentioned, there’s variables at play here. As tubes age they tend to mellow, lending to that warmer tone everyone likes. There’s also the differences in materials during manufacturing. I’m sure a lot of components that was readily available in the 80’s are replaced with inferior grade components that are manufactured in China vs UK or the States. Power transformers play a big roll in tone (you hi-fi guys can back me on this one), caps in the tone stack, down to the pots used in the eq. All in all, it’s still a great sounding amp.

[@gavcantrellofficial]

You can definitely tell the difference, and the original really does sound better, but it's not the end of the world. These amps were on the exact same settings. I think with some tweaking, and maybe if you were to patch an external EQ, you could get the new version a lot closer to the original than it is here. I'd still buy it.

[@TonyEdwardsBand]

As a addition to the review, a couple of points. 1) They do sound different, but that's not surprising to me at all. I just bought one of the reissues, and I tried more than one of them before I found one that really excited me. The one I bought had a definite lower volume sweet spot. For this I'd definitely blame Marshall's tube suppliers 2) The old one no longer sounds as it did when it was new. The difference in tone sounds (on the video at least), like the kind of difference you'd get from a bypass capacitor on the first stage drifting a little bit and allowing more bottom end through the preamp. That would make the break up a little darker and that lovely low midrange would poke out a bit more. (And if you want that, it's an easy mod) 3) Tubes again, I can't imagine that someone who owns a vintage amp like that wouldn't be using very good tubes, or choosing tubes that they felt suited the amp. Marshall however, are a large manufacturer who buy tubes in bulk. I know several service engineers who simply throw away the purchase installed tubes at first private service to get massive midrange improvement and warmth from both DSL and TSL heads. 4) Marshall is my 'local manufacturer' - I'm 90 minutes down the road and they have been great on service for customers and friends, and for me on a real old one that I owned. Yet in the last 20 years I've never owned a modern Marshall (tried a 30th Anniversary, sold it quickly). I've tried all of them, never liked a one of em, none of them floated my boat at all. I hear other players play them and they sound great, but when I play them I sound terrible! I played one of these in the rehearsal room of Rock Hard Music in Milton Keynes at the end of a long day's rehearsing (thanks guys!), and bought it on the spot. It's by miles the best Marshall I've ever played through. And when I put some Cryo tested Harma tubes in it, it's only going to get better.

[@richardmiller191]

I love the sound of both. Vintage is warmer but you could possibly get close by turning up the bass of the re-issue. But I don't think it was a big difference. Also - the posts with the name-calling - not necessary. We all love music or we wouldn't be on these sites, so we can agree to disagree with respect.

[@tiagooliveira7730]

I think that the diference in tone can be overcomed by just searching for other EQ settings. I have a 2525C and it sounds very very good. Amp is very sensitive to EQ settings, so I dont think that one should dislike the reissue by virtue of those comparison videos.

[@brpadington]

The 2555x is known to have shipped with bias issues. For one thing Marshall ships the 2555x with a bias of 60 per side. This is much lower than the recommended 70 per side. Mine came with one side at 60 and the other at 80. It sounded terrible until I put both at 73 and it came to life.

[@michaelbennett9127]

Don’t suppose you could slightly elaborate on that could you? I just brought one, and the sound is good, but I’m interested, if like you say, my amp could have bias issues. Thanks!

[@brpadington]

@@michaelbennett9127 Sure. The 2555x has external bias points in the back behind the backplate. Marshall recommends that you bias each side to 70mv on your meter. Mine sounded weird so I checked. Instead of both sides at 70mv one side was 65 and the other was almost 90. I turned them both to 70mv and the amp came to life.

[@michaelbennett9127]

@@brpadington Much appreciated mate! I need to do my research to fully comprehend, but that’s some useful information right there. Thank you! Sorry to be a pain, but do you think this is the case with Orange amps too. I have a Thunderverb 200w, and I fear for it’s safety. Well, maybe it’s not that extreme, but important to know as a valve amp owner

[@brpadington]

@@michaelbennett9127 The Orange amps are different but I would imagine they have external bias points as well. The bias setting will be different based on the amp and the type of tubes it has. If it doesn't have external bias points I would recommend sending it to a tech.

[@KevinCoblerOfficial]

Well in this clip on the lead channel the original sounds flubbier and smoother and the reissue sounds throatier tighter and meaner. I like the reissue more.

[@guilhordas]

the difference is very big, vintage has much more body

[@timwhite5562]

+1

[@blankenator62]

Vintage is just a tad more compressed too. During the clean part it started breaking up more.

[@EronPlaysRocknRoll]

The problem with comparing an old amp with a reissue is that because of changes in safety laws the components in the amps won't be exactly the same. Plus the components in the older amp will have changed in their sound characteristics over time, especially with a lot of use

[@aquilarossa5191]

Two vintage ones usually will not sound the same with the dials at the same spot. Better off trying to match tones than having settings exactly the same on each amp. That's because components like pots and caps et cetera vary in value 5-10%, or sometimes even more in old amps. Ten percent on a capacitor that is dumping treble to ground is going to make quite a difference for example, or variations in taper could see one gain pot begin overdriving the amp hard at four, while the next does it at six etc. P.S. Why am I watching Silver Jube vids? I recently put a mini one on lay-by here in NZ and have a few hundred left to pay. A mini one because my puny Captor 8 can not cope with my Ceriatone JMP 50 build. That amp is a beast with Marstran transformers that overwhelms the little load box. I bought the amp with the intention of modding it and learning all the common Marshall mods. Having the mini Jube will mean I will still have an amp if my modding goes tits up. :D

[@LasseLammert]

The original one has so much more depth and "chunkiness" going on. MAJOR difference IMO, the more gain you add, the more obvious it becomes. I really hoped the new one would sound close to the original, but this shows very clearly it doesn't...bummer. The new one just sounds small thin and congested, the old one sounds juicy and thick

[@briankeller1849]

Lasse Lammert and minus the furious power section of legend and its associated 4+ filter caps, when you turn up the power tubes there's going to be some very major problems. Think a 2-cap 2203 is a gyp? How about these, with NONE. Maybe it was because it was their "legendary" model, but my 1959HW is made far BEEFIER than the original, not missing 1/3 of the parts, and the crucial parts, at that. They did a great job for basically what is a "fake" Jubilee. Alas, "fake" reissues let alone post-recession, post-corporate-greed built Marshalls are DEFINITELY not why I got into this. Same with the KK head. Nothing left of the 2203 there. Put a 2203X or KK next to a 1981-85 2203, put everything but the master on 7, and then compare the amps with the MV on 2, 4, 6, and 8. Once you get past 4 you'll walk away where the original design ones start sounding otherworldy, the reissues will, and have, begin to sound like that one brand everyone hates. Marshalls are supposed to sound better the more power tube you let them run with. Those days may be over except for the YJM/1959HW/1959SLP/HW series/Hendrix. Those are actually more heavily built than the originals, and have bigger transformers due to current safety regulations. I was thrilled seeing the KK and Jubilee reissues, until I found out the builds on them. Just get a Vietnamese DSL, fuck it, save your money. Nothing left of what the original amp was except the controls, and the cosmetics, and the memories. :(

[@briankeller1849]

Brian Keller I mean, for the kids who don't hear any better because of their younger age and ear for tone, and don't plan on cutting the master past 3 or 4 (typical shit club allowed stage volume), fine. You get your new Jubilee. Not whatsoever the same amp, and the stuff about Marshall "coming as close as they can" is BS. There's 13 differences between my HW and an SLP, and they used the EXACT materials, steel, components, and build quality as the originals, and as far as the all-important Dagnall transformers, went way bigger but with the exact same wire and inner materials as the 1968's. Did people think they just forgot how to make Jubilees or something lol

[@ToneFreak]

Brian Keller +1 on the Filter caps. That has a lot to do with the tone. That's part of the magic in the older Marshall's.

[@SaintFredrocks]

Brian Keller You need to try the JVM 410HJS. Killer Marshall amp.

[@thesoundpurist]

ToneFreak do you mean it still possible to get the same old tone with the new one? Cheers.

[@Teleman76]

An amp that’s 30+ years old is going to sound a bit different than a new one even if it is 1:1 exact part replica. Ever notice how an old amp has a sweeter sound. All the electricity that has passed through the components. Does make a difference. Sounds good both do.

[@GuitarwoodStudio]

btw, 30+ years old is going to sound a bit different even than other 30+ years same model amp

[@drivers1959]

yea, also are the tubes new in both or just the reissue? I owned both the old and the reissue..the original model 2555 had a warmer sound, the new sounded good but obviously being a new amp the components need a breaking in period..but both are great amps, I have since sold the newer one and I kept the original..I also have 100 watt plexi and a 30 watt Orange AD model amp

[@rodneycampbell2645]

I have shopped at Guitar Center many times and I have never been disappointed. Thanks to everyone at Guitar Center!

[@georgejetson1923]

I bought my 87' SJ 2553 stack back in 1995 , still my main amp to this day. I will never part with it. Definitely my favorite amp of all time.

[@soundboy57]

I have many vintage and Modern Marshalls and played 40 years. The original sounds like a classic Marshall: Note definition, crunch, tone, singing leads, and dynamics. The reissue sounds like my Malmsteen Plexi compared to a vintage one: about 70% there. I think it is the transformers, myself. You can bet that they made the reissue sound as good as they could for the video. I have changed many transformers in more modern Marshalls, both power and output, and it is night and day difference. I find it amusing that so many try to blame the tubes, or make excuses that it is "real close" etc. It isn't. Nothing has the articulate roar of a Marshall made before the 90's, and I have them all back to 1967. Playing it yourself is way more noticeable than a video. Any of my 60's or 70's JMP's tonally blow away a Malmsteen reissue, or a new JVM, for that matter....no comparison... It is what it is. Maintaining vintage stuff can be tedious, yes, but don't knock what you haven't experienced.

[@analogaudiorules1724]

You can thank all the stupid rohs regulations...

[@rixxortiz8744]

@@analogaudiorules1724 im kinda new to the amp world, i googled a bit about rohs regulations but can you explain me how those affected the silver jubilee reissue? did they use a now prohibited component in the originals?

[@greatvanzini]

The new Jubilee holds up quite well I think.

[@GazMoz78]

The original sounds better but the reissue still sounds great. Thing is though if you swapped the tubes between the two then we would get the most accurate representation of the difference in the actual construction of the amps.

[@agnfluidspy]

Never played an original jubilee, gigged a JVM, JCM800 2203, DSL, and now currently gigging a jubilee reissue, I love this thing, has its own unique sound which i LOVE! when have Marshall ever made a reissue that has sounded identical?? I don't think they have, and ever will, however that being said, the original has been around and played for nearly 30 years.....of course its not going to sound exactly the same, but its close enough for me.

[@DSilvergun]

stephen hope I didn't know the reissue Jubilee was out yet.

[@agnfluidspy]

Depends where you live

[@kolbybell6735]

You make a good point, that the reissue may have been what a jubilee sounded like brand new in the 80s, there would be no way to know, as were comparing it to an amp that's been broken in for years. Interesting. However, I think each as it's strong points

[@penguin99ify]

Not enough variance in tone between the old and new amps to really make a difference overall. There wasn't any sound that couldn't be matched on either head, especially if slight tweaking of the tone controls were permitted (in this demo they were identically set). I'd pick the newer one strictly due to improvements and more reliability than a nearly 3 decade old amp.

[@mickrotella3944]

Vintage really does have some magic and more body. New one is ok, not bad, its got more clarity, but sounds more like a copy than an original. good video.

[@alward6700]

I also hear a difference but I'm buying one to see for myself. Thank you guitar center for this. This is exactly what I've been waiting for!

[@dk70]

I am usually not able to distinguish the differences in tones but i really feel like the reissue sounds thiner.

[@matuldamegasen8562]

+Davis Klavins My exact reaction as well, more nasal.

[@amcclintock0]

+matulda megasen I have a new 2555x and it sounds different than the one in this video. I wonder if it has to do with the mic or the cabinet.

[@matuldamegasen8562]

+Anthony McClintock Probably. Also, it IS a different amp, not a reissue.

[@amcclintock0]

matulda megasen it is the same circuit as the original. I have heard other comparison vids that were closer. Here they set everything the same but they could have adjusted them by ear.

[@matuldamegasen8562]

I saw this clip with the chief engineer, tellling about the differences. Was more than I expected, and definately enough to make an none reissue (In my book). Great amp, but sad they're capitalising on the legacy, without properly honoring it. Just my personal perspective.

[@markiemark7578]

Line up 5 original Jubilees and they all sound different as well. I have the original 2x12 combo, love it!

[@MotoRiff77]

Good job GC, now nobody is going to buy the new one

[@chs7516]

Justin Gomes The old one does sound nicer, I think, but not because it's better, just older. It's got a 'worn in' thing going on. Brand new amps often sound harsh, and It's fair to say that the reissue will sound better as it gets older too. That said, eventually amps get 'worn out' too, there's a point at which they start sounding worse in many cases.

[@bmark7951]

J PrOvost bullshit amps are not bottles of wine you’re an idiot

[@1977raider]

Hahaha lmao!

[@WizardBallz]

There nothing you like better about the new one you a salesman and this is your job to sell this new crispy fried turd

[@alankotler9971]

@@bmark7951 This is funny because your so correct that they are not bottles of wine.

[@TheFunkym4n]

I actually like more the clarity of the RI for clean and crunch tones, but as you turn up the gain I prefer the chunky tone from the vintage.

[@aevans692]

this is a good demo , and the difference can be heard between the two, I would say that even tho the amp is built to the same spec , the differences is prob more to do with the Eq , I would think that these two amps could be dialled in closer with the Eq

[@DSilvergun]

Please release a 50 watt Silver Jubilee combo!!

[@geet77777]

make your own, copy the schematics and call it the boomstick.

[@jurekwoz]

When I hear the vintage one I immediately think of John Frusciante and his (to my ears) amazing tones. The Reissue is very fizzy, clean and sterile at clean sounds and very fizzy and quite cheap sounding on the more gainy sounds. The difference is huge! At the high gain setup they sound like an amplifier put through two completely different cabs.

[@jonyq]

Both are good, but I think the reissue will work out better on today's stages.

[@adamcontreras9710]

Based on this video alone, I would’ve definitely agree, without a doubt that the original was the best. This is an argument that can’t be beat when it comes to many vintage instruments. I recently tried out and bought the reissue. Love it! As a matter of fact an employee came up and asked me how I “got that tone”. I said, “what do you mean?”. He said his friend has been wanting to buy the amp but said it sounded too thin and trebly. I showed him that increasing the Bass cut the highs and thickens the tone in a surprisingly good way. I’ve seen many musicians dime the bass and use a tube screamer to increase the gain an attenuate the bass on their JCM800s. I don’t really need to do that with the Jubilee, it’s extra gain seems to already attenuate some bass frequencies. I highly recommend everyone try a reissue, play with bass knob a bit and you’ll probably be surprised by the tones that come out of the amp.

[@charvelguy]

The original I thought had more girth to the tones, the reissue was more boxy. I preferred the original overall. Thanks for the demo. I am considering one of these but almost 1300 can be used for another consideration for an amp as well.

[@fullmetalfunk]

I think the original sounds better, especially on higher gain settings but I'm not mad at the reissue. It sounds pretty good, and I'm not about to turn my nose up at it. It does not, however, sound $1800 good.

[@user-fu9vj9ix3g]

Original sounds thicker. I had a 1987 stack and a 1988 Les Paul Studio years ago. The quintessential Les Paul/Marshall tone, exemplified. While I regret selling both, they were meant to go together, into the hands of a friend, now passed, who was IMO one of the finest guitarists I have ever heard - on any recording - anywhere - at any time in the last 70 years. That setup became his everyday rig with no changes for many years.

[@bullseyestrat]

They do sound rather similar. I noticed the vintage model had a bit more low end and resonance whereas the reissue had more midrange and high tones. To do a better test though they should have the same brand new tubes in it. Like some good JJ Teslas or Groove Tubes. Both sounded great either way though

[@patrickarinellirodrigues6096]

I have the original ( different caps and resistors , i put mullard mustard ( plexi 68 capacitors ) ). And i love the reissue, has that mojo when you do chords... IMO both are great.

[@donarmando916]

The original Silver Jubilee amp was the best hard rock amp ever made in my opinion.

[@sixslinger9951]

I concur , I have one...full 100 W stack

[@rrguitar1]

BTW, I think you a good job comparing both amps. You said it at the end of the video exactly what i was thinking regarding tube life in both amps and about Marshall getting as close as they could get. People need to understand that it's a reissue. I happen to think that it's a great sounding amp and one of their best amps in a long time. Besides the yjm, this is my next favorite. Good job Marshall and GC for the demo !

[@HenryKhiev]

The vintage version definitely has more warmth and beef.

[@nickanthony4979]

Such a shame no one can make reissues of any amp that sound anywhere near as good as the original 😿

[@JudahBrunone-yk4jn]

Dude what are u talking abt the reissue is killer

[@mazklassa9338]

The difference is very noticeable. Makes you wonder how something that's engineered to an original spec can be phenomenally dissimilar in the slightest of ways.

[@Kruizzer]

This really helped me with my decision if I could ever go for the new model. Vintage has the win but that was expected. Next time add a strat for the fender users in the video. 🤘🏻

[@TheEngarn]

The amps used there have very likely different tubes on. Put the same tubes in both and they sound almost the same. At least that's my experience with these..

[@deliveryboy555]

Age, usage and make of valve will make a difference. Despite that the cleans are nicer on newer amp - cleaner and glassier than original, but the lead channel can't be beat.

[@taxo]

I'd gladly hear the comparison between the Vintage and the Ceriatone replica.

[@JInfinity7]

Id bet some cash the Ceriatone sounds better.

[@LotharOfTheHillPeople]

I guess I'm in the minority - I like the reissue more. It's a bit more suited to modern rock tones and overall just sounds a bit less saggy. Pretty interesting video!

[@mohawkbear8768]

the reissue sounds tighter in the low mids. was the eq the exactly the same?

[@guitarnut7438]

on my laptop speakers these 2 sounded pretty much identical! I think a reissue will be just as good as an original one, which are very hard to find in an unmolested clean condition. I would go with a reissue.

[@lousekoya1803]

Change your Laptop !

[@arisl2370]

The low end in the original is the silver jubilee sound.. The reissue doesnt have the balls but it may sit in the mix a little better simply because its a little brighter and more mid focused.. The originals were famous for their lead tone , more so than rhythm and thats where the JCM 800 fit in.

[@TyGerhardt]

Glad I saw this. I was really wanting to get the reissue but there wasn't a single example of the reissue that sounded good to me. A couple of buddies of mine each have a vintage one and they sound great. Even the vintage one in the video sounded pretty close to theirs. The reissue was just an ear raper. Very harsh sounding. It's the kind of Marshall someone who didn't know any better would buy...like the guitarist from the Jonas Bros. or something. Hell, even the Silver Jubilee model on my AxeFx II sounds better than that thing. :( I've got a Plexi, a Bluesbreaker combo and an original JCM-800 (along with a ton of other tube amps) and I have access to vintage Silver Jubilee Marshalls...There's not one of them I wouldn't choose above the reissue amp in that clip in any situation. This just saved me a huge chunk of change. Totally feel like I dodged a bullet.

[@twidget59]

I have an 80s 'short box' 50 watt. The little 25 watt Jubilees sound awesome.

[@linguafranca86]

To me the reissue has better transients and the vintage is on the edge of sounding a bit chunky to muffeld. Could just be the tubes and bias. But even with new tubes and a good bias it probably will never sound as clear as the reissue. I have both and I will have the vintage one serviced soon so can't wait to compare them for myself. For now my reissue new out of the box sounds way better.

[@kentbeery4697]

The new head is a little thinner sounding but the Vintage head has a lot more wear on the tubes and is much warmer sounding

[@spiritualcramp8000]

get the original here kzbin.info/www/bejne/iGfIdIiFjtunldE

[@Todesnuss]

I actually like the new one more, judging form this video. Sounds a lot tighter and more usable in the mix too.

[@BrentHarmon]

Vintage sounds warmer sounding. The Reissue not so much.

[@zelon1983]

Pretty sure you could dial the reissue to sound very similar. No two potentiometers will have the same taper. Add the +/- 10% tolerance on resistors, caps etc. and it becomes rather obvious that there will be slight differences between any two amps. A little less presense on the reissue, a tad more gain and bass and it would probably get very close to the original.

[@tomursu2995]

Thank you. You'd think there are no tone controls on these things the way people talk. I have a re-issue and an '88 model in black and gold. I had to replace the LCI filter caps on the '88 when I got it due to hum. The voltage went from 458 to 482 after the change as well. I had to replace the original jacks on the rear panel due to intermittent signal issues which the originals were known for. My re-issue gets better cleans than the '88, and the EQ on the new one is every bit as responsive as the '88. But they do not sound alike at identical settings. I don't why these geniuses think they should.

[@CaptnGeetch]

Of course they are gonna sound different. Close yes, but different. First off tube life is a factor, second even though the reissue was built to exacting specs of the original, the components used in both (capacitors, diodes, resistors etc) are different ages and most likely different manufacturers. Also there is bound to be drift on the originals, breakdown from age and a lot of variance. Tube brand has very little to do with the difference. Plus the caps in the original are also a factor. I bet that exact reissue used in this video sounds closer today. I would be happy to own either of the two. They both have what us Marshall fans/owners/users have come to love tone and power wise. You can hear the “new” on the reissue just as much as you can hear the broken in on the original.

[@bossman1208]

I'd say the new 1 is a lot older and more broken in per se while the reissue sounds very close and one day will sound almost exactly like the original after hours of operation

[@snapascrew]

That les Paul reminds me of the one bob seger is holding on that one album cover 😀😃

[@theguitarczar]

are you running through the same cab? if so the clean arpeggios on the reissue totally outshine the original.....tbc

[@jahakon7309]

Different amps from what I can hear. I prefer the vintage.

[@jimtaylor519]

new tubes in the original for this test?...there is something to be said for break in....plus tweaking the setting slightly on the reissue might be able to match up tone better....stack any two heads on there and they'll be different I guess..

[@James57AOL]

same on the lead channel as well....individual note differences were noted in my ear.

[@jholl7339]

There's definitely a tome shift taking place between the two. The vintage has a more upper-mid, whereas with the re-issue, that drops in the spectrum.

[@marc1kim]

i agree, the tubes in both amps may have played into the slight difference in tone.

[@surfnorthwest1]

As someone with inside knowledge on the design of the reissue it is in many ways better than the original. If nothing else it is much more quite than the original and the loop is superior. I appreciate your comparison but a little more drive in that master setting on the reissue and the amps would have been indistinguishable. The reissue comes with JJs for valves, loose those and put a NOS RCA in V1 and some RFT EL34s in it.

[@guitarcleveland]

Nice demo. Thank you for not playing a bunch of stupid solos, but actual chords.

[@Locoandchooch]

Like the reissue JCM 800, it's brighter, the vintage Marshalls are warmer, but this reissue has a better mid bite.

[@marchuzansky]

The vintage tone is much warmer and full. Stinks because I wanted a reissue but now I'll get a clone of a Jubilee

[@BurntRubber]

if I were to listen to just the reissue, i'd probably think it sounds amazing. but listening to the reissue next to the original, the original sounds so much better. the reissue sounds boxy and thin. im listening through my beyer dynamic dt-770 pro headphones, so i can actually hear the differences very easily.

[@peteyoung7665]

It’s not a”slight difference”in the pre and power tubes it’s everything!So to make a”correct”comparison would be to use the same tubes in both amps and im not talking the same brand but acctually switch them over to the other amp and check bias of course then you would be able to do a real comparison.

[@jspete64]

I bought 2 of these back in 87...a head and a 2x12 combo...I kept them until the mid 90's,at which point you couldn't hardly give the damn things away..Now they are worth thousands and everybody loves them...I personally was never that taken with the Jubilee...too thin and bright..I didn't like it that much back then,Damn sure don't want another one now...

[@rjo8500]

jspete64 True. I bought a 50 watt 1x12 (2554) back in 2000. I was mint and I grabbed it at a music store for $400 after talking them down $50. They also had a 2x12 combo for $500 I probably could of got for $450. It actually sat there for months. I do wish I kept mine though. I have a DSL20HR now and I don’t know if this Jubilee RI sounds 3x the price better.

[@RichardMontgomeryKK]

Thanks for the comparison- it was to the point much appreciated. -- and yes they do sound super close-- No tin ear here. I owned the 87 when it was released and always thought it was a bit dry and weak compared to some of my JMPs. But again the tubes etc were brand spanking new too at the time. Just bought a re-issue we'll see when it arrives- Going to put some better tubes etc - we'll see with some decent spkrs and some play time if it'll turn out a winner this time.

[@chrisjames5645]

This reissue rips ... Fantastic amp !

[@spiritualcramp8000]

get the original here kzbin.info/www/bejne/iGfIdIiFjtunldE

[@mrthunder8190]

Hmmmmmm...the vintage one just sounds "bigger" to me. Don't know what it is, but glad that they are reissuing this amp!

[@joanesinu]

The old one: More bass, darker, fuller sounding, warmer. Reissue: Brighter, more detailed. 3:54 vintage one wins no questions. You notice the big diference in the dirty channel. And the clean of the vintage is far enaugh for me. I go with the old one. No question.

[@ScotDvorak]

Yeah the original's gain in the midrange frequencies in this example is much better, and the low end is "right there". But, that could be matched pretty closely with a few EQ tweaks, and maybe some tube swapping to better quality NOS tubes.

[@WDeranged]

+Scot Dvorak I was thinking along these lines, I'll bet the reissue could sound like the original with some decent tubes and an eq adjustment.

[@edwardmacnish1802]

I'm wondering how big of an impact the speakers had along with no switching the reissue to 100w? Yes....Vintage had a classic warm chunk to it but you could say that about any amp that's almost 30 years old. I'm thinking about getting the reissue and would really love to hear it in my 4x12 (CB75&GB).

[@Aerospace_Education]

Once the clip was engaged I liked the vintage way better. Was rooting for the reissue.

[@spiritualcramp8000]

get the original like new here kzbin.info/www/bejne/iGfIdIiFjtunldE

[@kylecoats4444]

The mids are more punchy in the newer one forsure. But the older one has fullness to the sound that the new one is missing. That old one likes that Les Paul and I bet that new one would like a strat better.

[@ddzanovski]

nice demo! I've got a 2558 & 2550 and they sound killer. i'm interested to know your thoughts on engaging the rhythm clip on the lead channel with the 2555. tonal difference and if so how would you describe it? cheers. david from down under.

[@stigare83]

Nice comparison! I have the vintage top and have been using it for years on a cheap 4 x 12 cab that used to belong to a Valvestate. Due to the bulk I would like to try one of the new 2 x 12 cabs. Would that be a good idea? Do these fit the old top? Cheers ;)

[@HalfLifeAMD]

id love to have that amp..but marshall is so proud of that amp they priced it kinda high. in that price slot..id look at an orange.

[@dquillen1]

The reissue is about $900 - $1,300 cheaper than an original, and I bet your audience couldn't tell them apart... There is a difference, but nothing to gripe about --- they both sound good...

[@stevendobias2960]

Wine gets better with age. So do guitar amps. Would love to hear a comparison again 15 years from now :).

[@cnemi22]

new one sounds brighter...definitely prefer the vintage...but the reissue has potential

[@CarstenMoreno]

I'm not an amp tech, but the brighter sound out of the reissue jubilee could be a certain bright cap used or the transformers used (compared to the Drake transformers in the original Marshall silver jubilees).

[@earthshaker61]

Also don't forget that no 2 marshalls sound exactly alike with identcal knob settings..I would have set the vintage one one way and then tweak the gain presence bass treble and mid knobs on the reissue to get as close..setting knobs identical even on 2 vintage one are going to sound different...but on this demo the Vintage head sounds better on the distortion side for sure!!

[@Tone5DP777]

Vintage 2555 sounds richer and thicker. The reissue has more of a nasally midrange in this video. I have a 1990 2555 in black. I find that the tone is very dependent on the preamp tube used in V1. I tried a JJ 12AX7 and didn't like it at all. Replaced it with a Mullard Reissue 12AX7/ECC83 and it made a WORLD of difference.

[@denforundrade695]

And as usual modern/reissues sound more harsh than vintage/original amps. Good thing that vintage marshalls don't cost a fortune like a Trainwreck for example..

[@moonkef]

I think with eq tweaks you could get close enough with a new one. Even the original here isn't dialled in to how they really sound.

[@AmDsus2Fmaj7Am]

I bet you the tubes in those are what explain the difference. Tubes make a huge difference and they are not made with high quality spec as in the good old days, so the sonic variability is really expected. And what do you expect of GC? Brand new... Chinese tubes :)

[@soundboy57]

Whether on my laptop, or through Dynaudio monitors, the original has a more open and more raw tone to it. Kind of that throaty 2203 tone with more gain. The reissue sounds fine....just more rounded off and softer. The clean chime of the original, compared to the more dull rounded tone of the reissue is quite noticeable as well. I own a 2555, black version from '88, and it sounds just like the original here to my ears. Having said that, the small 2425 Jubilee would be a killer addition to a studio or music room, as they never had an original. Marshall did a good job...but I think the original transformers could be the difference. Most likely you can't get the same wire and iron available back then. The same differences can be heard when comparing an original 60's/70's JMP with a reissue 1987X or SLP. I had a Malmsteen signature...and in a room full of old JMP heads, it just sounded rounded off on the edges and lacking a tiny bit for raw tone and dynamics. The difference is the old ones "roar"...The newer ones are all great amps. regardless...most anything modern sounds 2nd place when compared to vintage Marshall's for rock tones and chimey, but slightly gritty cleans. Just my two cents.

[@johnspina318]

Same tubes in both and bias? Would make a big difference.

[@aarongrimwood5350]

I watched with the screen off... Every time I chose the reissue, seems to have a slightly higher midrange and slightly more headroom, adjusting the bias and change the tubes would very likely get it to sound more 'vintage'...

[@adamgulcu375]

Does the rhythm clip do anything in the lead channel because I heard it doesn't from other videos?

[@BelchevKalin]

No one mentioned the valves... Are they identical in both amps? I don't think so... at least it doesn't sound so.

[@kexmanable]

For me the issue with the newer one is the lack of warmth. I kind of like those snarly upper mids, lets you cut right through. When jamming for yourself I imagine that the reissue would feel kind of stale but in a live or studio situation, live in particular, I imagine it may be the better choice.

[@kexmanable]

Hampus Sundqvist If you check out the video in which they only demo the reissue the EQ is set flat-ish and there it sounds much better.