Marshall Silver Jubilee Original vs. Reissue Comparison

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@rodneycampbell2645]

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

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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?

[@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

[@greatvanzini]

The new Jubilee holds up quite well I think.

[@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.

[@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!

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@DSilvergun]

Please release a 50 watt Silver Jubilee combo!!

[@geet77777]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@HenryKhiev]

The vintage version definitely has more warmth and beef.

[@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.

[@markiemark7578]

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

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@mohawkbear8768]

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

[@jonyq]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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 !

[@motoriotofficialbandpage770]

Is it possible that the original '87 Jublilee sounded like today's reissue back in 1987? Are there any original owners that can testified that there original '87 sounds exactly like it did from back in the day when they purchase it? Or, did it get better with time? Just curious - Thanks

[@plexilespaul1956]

MOTORIOT BAND no

[@plexilespaul1956]

MOTORIOT BAND the reissue a different amp alltogether than the original

[@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.

[@James57AOL]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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..

[@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.

[@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

[@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..

[@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

[@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).

[@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. 🤘🏻

[@jahakon7309]

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

[@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 ;)

[@theguitarczar]

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

[@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.

[@marc1kim]

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

[@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!

[@johnspina318]

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

[@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.

[@taxo]

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

[@JInfinity7]

Id bet some cash the Ceriatone sounds better.

[@adamgulcu375]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@viciouswasinnocent8575]

Vintage all the way. Great comparison vid.

[@bornhard17]

What you think of the Slash head (SLASH 2555 SL) ? Is it closer technically (filter caps/construction/transformer) and soundwise to the Vintage Silver Jubilee?

[@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!!

[@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

[@flagstamp]

The original has a nicer tone to me. Any chance that the tubes have something to do with it? I think it could

[@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.

[@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 !

[@AndyK.23]

Great comparison! The original sounds way warmer and smoother. Same tubes? Same bias setting?

[@cookiezztest7702]

Marshall is boasting the reissue very conservatively at around 70 per tube pair. The original in this demo is probably pushing 80.

[@cookiezztest7702]

That's BIASING. Not boasting. I hate auto spell correction.

[@AndyK.23]

Makes sense. I bet two reissues will even sound slightly different, side by side.

[@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

[@Todesnuss]

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

[@BelchevKalin]

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

[@Lollygagger-k4p]

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.

[@nickanthony4979]

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

[@elithegreat113]

Dude what are u talking abt the reissue is killer

[@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.

[@soykanmuri7277]

I can hear a difference definitely, even on the guitar it seems. That's a nice guitar. How much do you get feedback? Can you get to the input spot, cud on the original the instrument cable just was never at a good spot. So when I got it I had to constantly tamper with bending and positioning it to sit in there right just to play guitar. I just had to stand right in front of it so the input jack wasn't accessible to fix. So much greatness for the amp though. Lots of good loud fun.

[@spiritualcramp8000]

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

[@soykanmuri7277]

@@spiritualcramp8000 yeah I had one, up top a Laney 4×12. It wasn't that I didn't like it, I just was told not to use pedals on that amp.

[@spiritualcramp8000]

@@soykanmuri7277 i frankly never used any in my whole little carreer except a crybaby. but it's not because of the ampli, it's because of my school : Angus, Ace and Rikk. don't get me wrong, i love some FX especially flanger and delay, but i never felt comfortable. The more the noise the more my cup

[@soykanmuri7277]

@@spiritualcramp8000 well that's a keeper amp, I had one but couldn't fix the input jack problem. It was a family amp that we kept about 25 years. So when I got it I knew it was worth trading for a brand new one.

[@spiritualcramp8000]

@@soykanmuri7277 i'm trading mine for money beacause i'm into Alfa Romeo restorations and the damn Covid sucked my already poor funds. At the times nobody really cared for the jubilee, or imagined it would have become an icon. I was looking for a JCM 900 and was not available, then SADLY switched to the Jub. for my sound (noise / punk) was even too sophisticated, but the bass and the gain was top class and it worked for me too. It was for the last 25 years sitting on my room. and it's time to give it to someone who can appreciate its classy sound more then the rythmic punky strummer i am ;D

[@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.

[@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.

[@chocolatecookie8571]

I owned one. And every day the amp sounded a bit different than the day before. But is that the amp itself or my ears? That's the question. I am convinced that if you would compare 2 vintage amps they both would sound their own way. Same with the reissue or any other tube amp.

[@snapascrew]

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

[@rosinantedelafuente]

is the slash 2555 sl model the same as the old silver jubilee?

[@chrisjames5645]

This reissue rips ... Fantastic amp !

[@spiritualcramp8000]

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

[@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'...

[@rayrivera1830]

would be cool to hear some new tubes vs broken in ones

[@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.

[@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.

[@herson1982]

Is that a 68 reissue LP Custom?

[@TomPark1986]

What is that fizzy rattling sounds at 1:45?

[@slayer2008]

That's a Marshall Clean Channel :D He should've rolled down the Volume on the Guitar far enough so the fizzy distortion goes away

[@markozerjal9851]

Hi Are the final valves and preamps the same?

[@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.

[@jgmopar]

I guess it would depend on the type of music you play. I prefer the reissue only because its a little brighter and tighter sounding with higher gain. But would love the Vintage because they were so awesome. but the few i have seen on sale in classifieds are way to expensive to buy. so have to settle for second best a reissue.

[@ollypowell]

Put two "identical" plexis together and they will sound different. Thats half the fun.

[@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).

[@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