BBC4 Friday 28th November, 10pm

ICBM

On a purely geek level , there were some flaws too…

They went to a great deal of trouble to try to imply that the original JTM45 circuit was "designed" and "inspired by the Bassman", whereas in fact it's a straight copy with different parts - identical in circuit and every single component value apart from the output transformer - and that was because it was what was available and not a design choice. As a result the NFB ratio is totally different from the Bassman, which is the main reason it doesn't sound the same.

But it's not true that the sound is very different - the Bassman is *not* clean like later Fenders. Last week I had a Bassman reissue and an original JTM45 with a 4x10" cab here, and they're almost identical - the Fender was slightly louder, more open-sounding and a bit brighter, but otherwise they sounded extremely similar. The difference in speakers - Eminence alnicos in an open-back cab vs Celestion ceramics in a closed cab - could account for almost all of the rest of it. (I couldn't try running each through the speakers of the other because one is a 2-ohm cab and the other 16-ohm.)

Marshalls were not "the loudest amps in the world" when they came out, either - not only is the JTM45 not quite as powerful as the Bassman (the different transformer limits it slightly), the Fender Showman had been available from 1960 and was 85W at that time.

If anything, Jim Marshall's contribution to the design was missed, too - which if anything is more important - he didn't design the amp, but he *did* design the most iconic cab ever, including the idea of angling back the top half of it. The story about Townshend insisting on stacking up the cabs against Marshall's instructions is wrong too - to go with the 100W amps, at first Marshall made 8x12"s, but these proved very unpopular with The Who's roadies, so they were made into two separate cabs and always intended to be stacked up. There are photos of the original 8x12"s so this is provable.

I did like some of the early stuff that hasn't been seen before as far as I know (eg Blackmore at 17), and hearing Charlie Watkins (RIP ) saying "we wanted distortion!" but overall it was definitely only the usual standard of TV journalism, rather than really accurate.

I only got as far as Jimi before my wife wanted to watch Take That on Graham Norton, but I've got the rest on iPlayer .

mart

ICBM said:

On a purely geek level , there were some flaws too…

They went to a great deal of trouble to try to imply that the original JTM45 circuit was "designed" and "inspired by the Bassman", whereas in fact it's a straight copy with different parts - identical in circuit and every single component value apart from the output transformer - and that was because it was what was available and not a design choice. 

...

Actually, I thought the programme made it fairly clear that it was a direct copy. In fact, I was surprised how candid they were about that. Ok, then CSM went on to shout about how different the sound was, but the point had already been made that it was a copy, and if they could've got the components to make it identical, they would have.

not_the_dj

mart said:

ICBM said:

On a purely geek level , there were some flaws too…

They went to a great deal of trouble to try to imply that the original JTM45 circuit was "designed" and "inspired by the Bassman", whereas in fact it's a straight copy with different parts - identical in circuit and every single component value apart from the output transformer - and that was because it was what was available and not a design choice. 

...

Actually, I thought the programme made it fairly clear that it was a direct copy. In fact, I was surprised how candid they were about that. Ok, then CSM went on to shout about how different the sound was, but the point had already been made that it was a copy, and if they could've got the components to make it identical, they would have.

That's how I saw it as well. Copied it but had to use the closest alternative components available over here.

ICBM

I think if you know it's a straight copy, it was more obvious than if you perhaps didn't. I think they tried to fudge it to imply that they had "designed" it - including employing Dudley Craven as a "designer" - and that it was intentionally different from the Bassman, being more aggressive and distorted. Can't have it both ways because they are neither significantly different nor identical-sounding.

If they had been trying to make a direct copy soundwise and known what they were doing then they would have been aware of the very different OT ratio and changed the NFB to compensate, which would have been simple - just one resistor value - but they didn't. A happy accident, basically.

57Deluxe

Don't forget that in turn the Bassman and the other Fender 5xx circuits were also lifted direct from Westighouse's 1940 era designs as there was no copyright due to War effort......

ICBM

57Deluxe said:

Don't forget that in turn the Bassman and the other 5xx circuits were also lifted direct from Westighouse 1940 era designs…

Originally, and the basic ones like the Champ didn't change much, but by the time they got to the 5F6-A there were very big changes, most of which were original Fender ideas.

I'm pretty sure it's known that Fender developed the classic TMB tone stack for example - and certainly driving it with a cathode follower - which is the real heart of the 5F6-A circuit and is the big 'fork in the road' between what became the "Fender" sound and the "Marshall" sound once Fender changed to the BF-type circuits with the tone stack after the first gain stage.

I've watched the second half now and there's another big error and omission - far from "gambling" that valve amps would be the future in the 80s, Marshall did the exact opposite... they hedged their bets by making a parallel series of solid-state amps, some of which were exactly equivalent to JCM800 valve models, from the Lead 12 up to the 5150 (they beat Peavey to that ) and including the Mosfet Lead 100. These are some of the best-built solid-state amps ever, and sound very good too. In the catalogues of the time - I had one from 1985 - they were given equal place with the valve amps, and the write-ups made very little distinction.

impmann

I'm sure I've seen a 1960s advert for Marshall saying something to the effect of the loudest amp *without* distortion...

Funny also that Townsend has repeatedly said in the past that he didn't like Marshalls due to the way they distorted and that's why he went for HiWatts as they behaved more like old Fender amps - just louder. But then he does tend to bend stories to fit his current thinking...

I enjoyed it. But the Vox Ac30 thing they did a while back was better.

EricTheWeary

Did they mention the period when they sponsored Come Dancing with Terry Wogan?

Dave_Mc

It was actually better than I thought it was going to be )

Though I don't disagree with a lot of the complaints posted in here either. )

drwiddly

EricTheWeary;429638" said:

Did they mention the period when they sponsored Come Dancing with Terry Wogan?

No, but I loved the idea of winning a ballroom dancing competition and getting a trophy that looks like a Marshall stack - brilliant!

Neil

Saw it last night and really enjoyed it.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to understand all the amp nuances mentioned already but the early part as a snapshot of the time with JM starting off as a drummer turned tutor, opening a shop and getting into amps (an area he really knew nothing about) was really interesting.

The interjections from Pete Townsend and Charlie Watkins were great.

Ex-army valves and parts really summed up '50's Britain. 

Skipped

p90fool said:

Is it very "general interest" slanted or will it actually tell guitar players anything they don't already know?

It was very general interest slanted.

But if you have to make a prog with a wide (for BBC 4) interest base, from mainly old footage, I suppose it was OK.
I would have liked a more special interest approach, but not really in the sense that ICBM has outlined. More in the sense of a couple of players giving us a demo of a Les Paul and then a Strat through a few classic Marshalls. Maybe re-create the Beano album session.

ICBM

Skipped said:

It was very general interest slanted.

But if you have to make a prog with a wide (for BBC 4) interest base, from mainly old footage, I suppose it was OK.
I would have liked a more special interest approach, but not really in the sense that ICBM has outlined.

Yes, I didn't mean that it should have been more narrow and geeky - I understand that TV is a general-interest format, even on a minority channel like BBC4. It's just the factual errors in things like this that annoy me - most are easily checkable too. I'm sure the same is true of other specialist fields where those with a bit of knowledge will sit and fume!

The non-technical historical stuff was very interesting though.

Anyone else freaked out by the 1984-ish 'futurism' of the early Milton Keynes housing schemes?

Drew_TNBD

ICBM said:

Anyone else freaked out by the 1984-ish 'futurism' of the early Milton Keynes housing schemes?

Not really no.

EricTheWeary

It was nice to see a lot of Graham Oliver, my hero when I was 16. I'd forgotten the porn star tache he had in the 80's though.

ICBM

EricTheWeary said:

It was nice to see a lot of Graham Oliver, my hero when I was 16. I'd forgotten the porn star tache he had in the 80's though.

I'd forgotten what Bernie Marsden looked like in the 80s too - I almost didn't recognise him for a few seconds in one of the clips. Spotted the Les Paul first!

impmann

Yes in recent years he has become a bit of a Greggs Loyalty Card holder....

EricTheWeary

I saw him the other week and a few years ago ( and jamming with JoBo at some point). Plays PRS amps now though...
Round as he is tall but comes across as a lovely man does Bernie.

Philly_Q

ICBM said:

EricTheWeary said:

It was nice to see a lot of Graham Oliver, my hero when I was 16. I'd forgotten the porn star tache he had in the 80's though.

I'd forgotten what Bernie Marsden looked like in the 80s too - I almost didn't recognise him for a few seconds in one of the clips. Spotted the Les Paul first!

I saw him (Graham Oliver, that is) a few years ago on one of the daytime antiques programmes - he collects fine china, teapots or something like that.

I do worry a bit about Bernie Marsden's health, but he seems like a very nice man.  The more time passes, the better the early Whitesnake albums seem to sound (and the more ludicrous the recent ones...)

Headphones

I know it sounds harsh, but even when still in Whitesnake he was known as "fat Bernie" around our way.  His work though was always excellent.  Really loved his solo albums from that time too and the more recent "Snakes" thing he did with Jorn Lande (and Moody/Murray) was a really great record; had it followed Ready 'n Willing I think their story would have been very different.

Shame Alaska was so half baked!

Smiled at the Page/Supro bit too.