Alternative to the JVM410

MatthewShreddery

monquixote said:

What do JVMs go for these days?

I'm having so much fun with my DSL that I kind of want one although I really don't need one at all!

What DSL do you have? 

monquixote

MatthewShreddery said:

monquixote said:

What do JVMs go for these days?

I'm having so much fun with my DSL that I kind of want one although I really don't need one at all!

What DSL do you have? 

I have the DSL 40CR which I think is the same preamp as the 100 watt head.

It's very flexible 4 channels, 2 masters, 2 reverbs, midi.

Clean is kind of a marshall interpretation of a Fendery sound and is good with a compressor.

Crunch is a 2203 type thing

OD1 sounds like a boosted 800

OD2 is higher gain with shifted mids. I struggle with this channel. 

I'm really happy with it but I can't get a modern metal sound but that might just me being rubbish!

monquixote

It does seem to be a common Marshall problem.

The 20 Watt DSL has channels 1 and 4 when 2 and 3 are where the magic happens same as the JVM.

TTBZ

@monquixote try using the tone shift and boosting it with a TS or something. Should get some decent saturation and tightness, and the tone shift will drop some of those "classic" sounding mids out of it. I prefer OD1, more than enough gain but less fizzy.

I'm not sure that Ultra on the 20 actually is OD2, it sounds great whatever it is though! I was able to dial in the Ultra Gain channel to sound really similar to the SC20H when I was a/b'ing them, just got to keep the gain low for that, but it can do metal too. The quality of the gain is just a bit fuzzier and it feels more compressed/less percussive. I do still wish it had the Vintage Green crunch mode as an option though.

fastonebaz

monquixote said:

MatthewShreddery said:

What DSL do you have? 

I have the DSL 40CR which I think is the same preamp as the 100 watt head.

It's very flexible 4 channels, 2 masters, 2 reverbs, midi.

Clean is kind of a marshall interpretation of a Fendery sound and is good with a compressor.

Crunch is a 2203 type thing

OD1 sounds like a boosted 800

OD2 is higher gain with shifted mids. I struggle with this channel. 

I'm really happy with it but I can't get a modern metal sound but that might just me being rubbish!

I have the dsl40cr too and agree with this description and really like the OD1 channel which sounds awesome esp with a little boost for leads with delay chorus and reverb. 

Bidley

I've got a DSL100HR. Sounds great but wasn't quite as thick and meaty as the JVM210H I compared it to in the studio the other week. But I will say the DSL was going through a Jety City 2x12 with the stock speakers, and the JVM through an Orange 4x12 with V30s, so I'm putting it down to the cab difference. Still kicking myself for not trying the DSL through the 4x12.

The only things I don't like about the DSL100HR are the shared EQ and the cleans not being quite clean enough - they sound very Marshally and not quite big and bold enough for me. But at about half the price of a JVM it's a really good deal. Add to that the midi capability, the ability to use the JVM footswitch and the assignable master volumes, and it's a great package.

Oh and the reverb is pointless, if that matters.

monquixote

The clean comes alive with a compressor.

The reverb isn't terrible but its not as good as a decent pedal.

rockmonster

Bidley said:

I've got a DSL100HR. Sounds great but wasn't quite as thick and meaty as the JVM210H I compared it to in the studio the other week. But I will say the DSL was going through a Jety City 2x12 with the stock speakers, and the JVM through an Orange 4x12 with V30s, so I'm putting it down to the cab difference. Still kicking myself for not trying the DSL through the 4x12.

The only things I don't like about the DSL100HR are the shared EQ and the cleans not being quite clean enough - they sound very Marshally and not quite big and bold enough for me. But at about half the price of a JVM it's a really good deal. Add to that the midi capability, the ability to use the JVM footswitch and the assignable master volumes, and it's a great package.

Oh and the reverb is pointless, if that matters.

Friedmans, Suhrs, Bogners all have shared eq’s and cost more than 5 times as much. 

If you want Fender cleans and Marshall gain you need to spend a shit ton more money! If your fussy about reverb you need to buy one for all of those expensive heads anyway! I don’t understand your reasoning.

Bidley

rockmonster said:

Bidley said:

I've got a DSL100HR. Sounds great but wasn't quite as thick and meaty as the JVM210H I compared it to in the studio the other week. But I will say the DSL was going through a Jety City 2x12 with the stock speakers, and the JVM through an Orange 4x12 with V30s, so I'm putting it down to the cab difference. Still kicking myself for not trying the DSL through the 4x12.

The only things I don't like about the DSL100HR are the shared EQ and the cleans not being quite clean enough - they sound very Marshally and not quite big and bold enough for me. But at about half the price of a JVM it's a really good deal. Add to that the midi capability, the ability to use the JVM footswitch and the assignable master volumes, and it's a great package.

Oh and the reverb is pointless, if that matters.

Friedmans, Suhrs, Bogners all have shared eq’s and cost more than 5 times as much. 

If you want Fender cleans and Marshall gain you need to spend a shit ton more money! If your fussy about reverb you need to buy one for all of those expensive heads anyway! I don’t understand your reasoning.

My reasoning for what?

rockmonster

Bidley said:

rockmonster said:

Bidley said:

I've got a DSL100HR. Sounds great but wasn't quite as thick and meaty as the JVM210H I compared it to in the studio the other week. But I will say the DSL was going through a Jety City 2x12 with the stock speakers, and the JVM through an Orange 4x12 with V30s, so I'm putting it down to the cab difference. Still kicking myself for not trying the DSL through the 4x12.

The only things I don't like about the DSL100HR are the shared EQ and the cleans not being quite clean enough - they sound very Marshally and not quite big and bold enough for me. But at about half the price of a JVM it's a really good deal. Add to that the midi capability, the ability to use the JVM footswitch and the assignable master volumes, and it's a great package.

Oh and the reverb is pointless, if that matters.

Friedmans, Suhrs, Bogners all have shared eq’s and cost more than 5 times as much. 

If you want Fender cleans and Marshall gain you need to spend a shit ton more money! If your fussy about reverb you need to buy one for all of those expensive heads anyway! I don’t understand your reasoning.

My reasoning for what?

I have no idea! I just don’t understand…….anything really!?!?!?
Ignore me! Lol!

WiresDreamDisasters

@TTBZ ;



This has all the bollocks!!! Like some weird Cthulu bollock based GOD!!

lysander

The Friedman BE is a smoother, darker sound. Personally I much prefer the more agressive voice of the Marshalls.

TTBZ

WiresDreamDisasters said:

@TTBZ ;;;;



This has all the bollocks!!! Like some weird Cthulu bollock based GOD!!

I take it back this does sound good! Still feel like it's missing some of that Marshall midrange "snarl" though.

Another decent budget option is the Laney VH100R if you can be bothered to lug something like that around. I still miss my old GH50L sometimes, regret selling that for £200! The Laney's are quite dry and stiff feeling without a boost and the mids are in a different place to a Marshall, but the GH/VH series are beasty sounding amps that go for super cheap. A Klon or TS in front and an EQ in the loop can sort a lot of that out.

PolarityMan

Oh the other thing that pissed me off a bit with the JVM (other than obviously the switching delay) is the amount of noise on higher gain settings on OD1 and 2. I actually ended up using crunch red with a boost as my main metal rhythm sound because of that..which did sound good but doesn't sound as modern as the OD channels and I always felt like I was compromising a bit with hat amp. 

I agree the cleans are very respectable though. 

Tbh if my VH4 goes down I'd bring my JCA50H in preference to the JVM. 

WiresDreamDisasters

@TTBZ ;

The Laney VH100R is an amazing amp. They really don't get talked about enough. They're noisy, sure. But so what.... it's guitar!  

@PolarityMan ;
Try OD1 Orange with the gain low enough to reduce the noise, and then boosting that. Should be better. Or get the Satch version

PolarityMan

Wonder why I didn't think of that. Rarely actually use the JVM any more though. 

MatthewShreddery

PolarityMan said:

Wonder why I didn't think of that. Rarely actually use the JVM any more though. 

What kind of pickups were you using with the JVM?

MatthewShreddery

TTBZ said:

I take it back this does sound good! Still feel like it's missing some of that Marshall midrange "snarl" though.

Another decent budget option is the Laney VH100R if you can be bothered to lug something like that around. I still miss my old GH50L sometimes, regret selling that for £200! The Laney's are quite dry and stiff feeling without a boost and the mids are in a different place to a Marshall, but the GH/VH series are beasty sounding amps that go for super cheap. A Klon or TS in front and an EQ in the loop can sort a lot of that out.

I never got on with the VH100R I had a few years back

PolarityMan

MatthewShreddery said:

PolarityMan said:

Wonder why I didn't think of that. Rarely actually use the JVM any more though. 

What kind of pickups were you using with the JVM?

2 main guitars have gibson 59 tribute humbuckers and seymour duncan humbuickers of some kind (not sure the model) but the noise is bad with all my guitars and noticeably different from the VH4 with the same guitars

spirit7

Buy an 800.  Send to Dan Gower. Bask in the meatiest heavy sound known to man.