The much maligned Marshall TSL

Drew_TNBD

So last night I was doing my recording gig thing, and a band called Sergeant Thunderhoof (lol!) were playing. One of the best singers I've seen live anyway.

Their guitarist used a Marshal TSL - I think it was the 100watt version. And he was making it fucking SINNNNGGGGGGG. Sounded amazing on riffs and leads.

Dangers of perceived wisdom I reckon. Coz I heard none of the fizzy crap that you'd expect to hear from the TSL.

ICBM

I'll sell you one if you like.

Comes with a 30 minute warranty.

Drew_TNBD

No thanks. 

ICBM

I will admit I don't quite understand all the hate for the sound - they're not *that* bad, although I seem to have accidentally improved mine while trying a slightly unorthodox method of fixing one of the usual problems - but really they're no worse than any other modern Marshall. The orange 'crunch' channel in particular can sound really pretty good.

It's the build quality that's the issue for me. They simply have far too many serious design faults to be properly reliable in the long term, although it's true that many do seem to work well enough for quite a long time. Even after Marshall re-designed the main PCB twice, there are still other problems - some of them really stupid, like a fail-unsafe bias adjustment scheme, and running the whole speaker current through a switch in a jack, which can only be the result of design by people who don't know enough about valve amps to spot the potential failure modes - that were entirely obvious to me from the start. Which is quite concerning given that Marshall have been making amps for longer than I've been alive.

I still think I'll end up scrapping this one for the parts - I just don't have enough confidence in it to sell it to anyone with a clear conscience, even if I find what's still causing the hum/loss of volume problem on the clean channel after it's been on for half an hour. Currently I'm using it (it's the combo) as my workshop speaker cabinet...

Drew_TNBD

Who designed the tsl, was it the same dude who did the JVM?

ICBM

Drew_TNBD said:

Who designed the tsl, was it the same dude who did the JVM?

Not sure - there's about ten years between them, and the JVM avoids most of the mistakes of the DSL/TSL, so it could be someone different… although that could also be from feedback from the repair department. But it does seem that even with the JVM, they needed Joe Satriani (and/or his amp tech I think) to tell them how to do it right.

ThePrettyDamned

ICBM said:

I will admit I don't quite understand all the hate for the sound - they're not *that* bad, although I seem to have accidentally improved mine while trying a slightly unorthodox method of fixing one of the usual problems - but really they're no worse than any other modern Marshall. The orange 'crunch' channel in particular can sound really pretty good.

It's the build quality that's the issue for me. They simply have far too many serious design faults to be properly reliable in the long term, although it's true that many do seem to work well enough for quite a long time. Even after Marshall re-designed the main PCB twice, there are still other problems - some of them really stupid, like a fail-unsafe bias adjustment scheme, and running the whole speaker current through a switch in a jack, which can only be the result of design by people who don't know enough about valve amps to spot the potential failure modes - that were entirely obvious to me from the start. Which is quite concerning given that Marshall have been making amps for longer than I've been alive.

I still think I'll end up scrapping this one for the parts - I just don't have enough confidence in it to sell it to anyone with a clear conscience, even if I find what's still causing the hum/loss of volume problem on the clean channel after it's been on for half an hour. Currently I'm using it (it's the combo) as my workshop speaker cabinet...

It'd be a shame to scrap it. 

I tried a tsl 100 half stack against a jcm900 slx (very different amp, I know) into the same cab and the slx absolutely destroyed it. 

Obviously it's a single channel amp, but it really was a huge difference. The tsl just sounded buzzy and fizzy, no matter what I did. I didn't try cleans as, at the time, I was into The Most Brutal Stuff(tm). 

The slx was high gain, and had a bit of top end fizz, but it's needed to some extent I think. I've never tried a tsl since, such was my dislike for it. 

ICBM

ThePrettyDamned said:

It'd be a shame to scrap it.

I know what you mean, which is why I haven't already… but there are thousands of them, and the parts are worth at least as much as the amp. If someone needs a transformer for one before I get around to finding the fault, it's gone.

I don't mean binning it either - everything in it from the cabinet down to the knobs will be kept and re-used.

ThePrettyDamned said:

I tried a tsl 100 half stack against a jcm900 slx (very different amp, I know) into the same cab and the slx absolutely destroyed it.

Yes, I agree. When the 900 series came out I was appalled at how bad they were compared to the 800s and older Marshalls, but everything they've brought out since has increased my appreciation of them .

I have a friend who owns a lot of Marshalls, most of the versions from JMP up to a JVM Satriani model, and his favourite is actually the JCM900 Dual Reverb. (Despite it being notoriously a hybrid amp!)

Plectrum

ICBM said:

Drew_TNBD said:

Who designed the tsl, was it the same dude who did the JVM?

Not sure - there's about ten years between them, and the JVM avoids most of the mistakes of the DSL/TSL, so it could be someone different… although that could also be from feedback from the repair department. But it does seem that even with the JVM, they needed Joe Satriani (and/or his amp tech I think) to tell them how to do it right.

JVM was designed by Santiago.

Bucket

I sometimes use one in rehearsals as a clean pedal platform, and it doesn't sound bad in that context at all.

Voxman

ICBM said:

I'll sell you one if you like.

Comes with a 30 minute warranty.

That's a long generous warranty for a TSL - usually its 5 minutes or 10 mins if you go on line to register it!  Registration is easy - it only takes 10 mins. 

polotska

Plectrum said:

ICBM said:

Drew_TNBD said:

Who designed the tsl, was it the same dude who did the JVM?

Not sure - there's about ten years between them, and the JVM avoids most of the mistakes of the DSL/TSL, so it could be someone different… although that could also be from feedback from the repair department. But it does seem that even with the JVM, they needed Joe Satriani (and/or his amp tech I think) to tell them how to do it right.

JVM was designed by Santiago.

Yes—that would be Santiago Alvarez, who left Marshall about a year ago.

I think the TSL was the last hurrah (if you can call it that!) of Steve Grindrod, who designed the Vox Custom Classic range, etc., shortly thereafter. He had been at Marshall since the 1970s and was in charge of design of the JCM800s, Jubilee, JCM900s, etc. I think he’s responsible for the Club and Country, too.

He started Albion Amps after leaving Korg/Vox. Haven’t heard anything about those in some time…

Aidanspaghetti

Drew_TNBD said:

So last night I was doing my recording gig thing, and a band called Sergeant Thunderhoof (lol!) were playing. One of the best singers I've seen live anyway.

Their guitarist used a Marshal TSL - I think it was the 100watt version. And he was making it fucking SINNNNGGGGGGG. Sounded amazing on riffs and leads.

Dangers of perceived wisdom I reckon. Coz I heard none of the fizzy crap that you'd expect to hear from the TSL.

We're they hatchet loud? Volume makes most amps sound waaaaaaay better imho than when playing at home....

timmysoft

I never get the tsl hate, it's not my favourite Marshall but I still think they sound good

SidNewton

I had one about 20 years ago. At the time I recall it sounding pretty good but then again it did replace a JCM900 Dual Reverb............

digitalscream

I never liked them, but then I don't like the Marshall sound so it's not surprising. On the other hand...I know three people who've owned TSLs, and coincidentally I also know three people whose TSLs blew up and no longer have TSLs.

TimmyO

Similarly I got a fab classic rock sound out of a Mode Four half stack. 

TTBZ

You can get a great sound out of an MG if you don't over do the gain! Still sounds marshally.

ThePrettyDamned

TTBZ said:

You can get a great sound out of an MG if you don't over do the gain! Still sounds marshally.

Yeah, I don't mind the mg range. They're perfectly decent for practice and the big one can do some pretty cool sounds. 

The huge mode 4 sounded okay too, but had a tendency to asplode. The cabs were good though. 

ICBM

ThePrettyDamned said:

TTBZ said:

You can get a great sound out of an MG if you don't over do the gain! Still sounds marshally.

Yeah, I don't mind the mg range. They're perfectly decent for practice and the big one can do some pretty cool sounds. 

The huge mode 4 sounded okay too, but had a tendency to asplode. The cabs were good though. 

Remarkably, I still don't know what the current 'carbon fibre' MG series sounds like - I've never seen a single one for repair, and they've been out for a good few years now.

I have seen the schematics, and it appears that Marshall have learned not to repeat the mistakes of the dreadful MG-DFX series and the AVTs and Mode Fours, with their fan-cooled IC power modules, which are absolutely notorious for failing - the new series use discrete transistors. I can't remember how many MG100DFXs (the most commonly failing model) I've fitted aftermarket power sections to or simply turned away when the owner doesn't like the repair estimate. I will not replace the power module with the factory one, there's a high chance it will come back and I have to replace it again for free. (And I won't work on a Mode Four, ever, for any reason - too risky.)

I'll admit the MG100DFX can sound quite decent if set up right though.

siraxeman

my bandmates used his TSL601 for the last 3 years with only a valve failure on one gig about 18months ago...and it always seems to sound good to me. I've owned a TSL122 and when A/B'd against my DSL50 I kept the DSL and let the TSL go...but even that said I didn't think it sounded bad at all...just not as good as the DSL...which still beats my JVM410 also IMO.