Shootout 1959 vs 2203

wkcchampion · 12-07-2010, 05:36 AM

Hello everybody. Here, u can hear two 100W amps of the same series (JCM800). A "metal panel" Superlead 1959 vs the Master Volume 2203.

There's just one clip, because I could play the 2203 for 10 min before it started makign soem crackling noise (the tech is already informed). So sorry, but just oen clip for now. More will come as the issue is fixed.

Both clips were recorded with the same guitar (Parker Fly Mojo), the basketweave with Pre-Rola Greenbacks (how they sing!!!) and the same EQ settings on both amps:
Bass 1 Middle 4 Treble 6 Presence 8

The only difference is, of course in the gain controls. I set the 2203 with Master 6 and Preamp 5. However, I had to crank the Volume I of the 1959 up to 8 to get the same distortion.

you'll notice how the 1959 sounds ruder, rawer, more "in your face", and if u want, less polished, less defined, eventually losser and more uncontrollable. The 1959 has less gain on tap (no cascaded preamp), and has to be pushed hard to distort (roughly, the 2203 has the 1959 sound with master on 10 and pre on 2 or 3!). However, in my opinion, it's more touch sensitive and has a better clean sound when rolling back the volume of the guitar.
This is the nature of the beast. No EQs, no pedals, nothing. Just guitar, amps and.. Pre-Rolas.
I hope that is may help peopel who wants to buy a vintage Marshall and are undecided between these two.

Here are the sound bites, enjoy!

(click on QUI if Altervista shows up)
2203 Master Volume: http://pregnosplatter.altervista.org...ojo%20demo.mp3
1959 Superlead: http://pregnosplatter.altervista.org...9%20crunch.mp3

EDIT: health warning! I recorded thse sounds at bedroom volue, but I sue a dummy load setup. Be aware that they are both insanely loud!!!!!!
EDIT 2: sorry for the clic at the beginning of the 2203 clip. It was very probably a glitch by the MP3 encoder. Don't bother it.

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-07-2010, 05:40 AM

Thanks! You rock, Marco.

wkcchampion · 12-07-2010, 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lespaulnmarshall

Thanks!!! You rock Marco!

You're welcome. Which oen do u prefer?
I know, just one clip is too little for a fair judgement. More will come as the 2203 gets fixed.
My tastes go for the 1959 metal panel. I'd like to try a "Plexi" 1959, who knows... maybe one day I'll get a Metropolous haha

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-07-2010, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

You're welcome. Which oen do u prefer?
I know, just one clip is too little for a fair judgement. More will come as the 2203 gets fixed.
My tastes go for the 1959 metal panel. I'd like to try a "Plexi" 1959, who knows... maybe one day I'll get a Metropolous haha

I don't know... In real life, I think that I prefer the 800, from these clips, the 1959, they sound very similar though. But I think the amp you need is a JTM45. One of the clips had wierd reverb, again. And your guitar had a little bit of fret buzz. It needs a set up.

wkcchampion · 12-07-2010, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lespaulnmarshall

I don't know... In real life, I think that I prefer the 800, from these clips, the 1959, they sound very similar though. But I think the amp you need is a JTM45. One of the clips had wierd reverb, again. And your guitar had a little bit of fret buzz. It needs a set up.

Fret buzz?!?!?!
I never played a JTM45.
They do soudn similar. One is the son, the other the father.

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-07-2010, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

Fret buzz?!?!?!
I never played a JTM45.
They do soudn similar. One is the son, the other the father.

Yes I can hear some fret buzz.
You should also try out a JTM45, they rock. Make shure they're cranked to 10 though.
In one way they are like father and son. Tonewise they're like brothers.

wkcchampion · 12-07-2010, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lespaulnmarshall

In one way YES. Tonewise they're like brothers.

They are. The only differences are the Master volume, the addition of one more gain stage in the preamp, the drop of the normal channel and maybe some minor changes in the values of some resistors or caps. I'm not a tech, take this piece of info cum grano salis.
The 2203 has more gain and it can be got at lower volume. The 1959 really has to be cranked up! I love it.
Plus, you're hearing them with the same settings, and more importantly, with the same guitar and the same cabinet!

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-07-2010, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

They are. The only differences are the Master volume, the addition of one more gain stage in the preamp, the drop of the normal channel and maybe some minor changes in the values of some resistors or caps. I'm not a tech, take this piece of info cum grano salis.
The 2203 has more gain and it can be got at lower volume. The 1959 really has to be cranked up! I love it.
Plus, you're hearing them with the same settings, and more importantly, with the same guitar and the same cabinet!

Some say the master volume is a diference, I don't think so as I think 2203/4only sound the way they should sound when they're cranked.
Then thegain control can be used like a volume control on a plexi without getting any louder or quieter.

wkcchampion · 12-07-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lespaulnmarshall

Some say the master volume is a diference, I don't think so as I think 2203/4only sound the way they should sound when they're cranked.
Then thegain control can be used like a volume control on a plexi without getting any louder or quieter.

Well that clip was recorded with the master on 6.
Certainly the master volume gives more versatility, in order to get a pre-only hi gain tone, by cranking the preamp with a boost pedal and keeping the power amp clean(ish). You can't do this on a (stock) Superlead.

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-07-2010, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

Well that clip was recorded with the master on 6.
Certainly the master volume gives more versatility, in order to get a pre-only hi gain tone, by cranking the preamp with a boost pedal and keeping the power amp clean(ish). You can't do this on a (stock) Superlead.

The master volume is good for pratice, but live it just needs to be cranked!

wkcchampion · 12-07-2010, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lespaulnmarshall

The master volume is good for pratice, but live it just needs to be cranked!

I actually always use high voluem settings 'cos I like power amp overdrive.

Strateuphoria · 12-09-2010, 12:40 AM

a Marshall JCM 800 is a 1959 with the cascaded front end (onewiremod), basically.

Australian · 12-09-2010, 01:10 AM

I like the 1959, because its a bit warmer. But both sound great!.
Marco when are you going to start the "Marco's secrets on how to record classic amps" thread?

wkcchampion · 12-09-2010, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Australian

I like the 1959, because its a bit warmer. But both sound great!.
Marco when are you going to start the "Marco's secrets on how to record classic amps" thread?

LOL

Thanks Australian, but really, there are no secrets at all. I always explain what gear/settings I use. You have Pre-Rolas too, you can easily get this sound with a simple SM57 and a decent audiocard.
I don't think Parker Flys are the "secret". Possibly the opposite, they are great guitars IMO but they are not designed (active circuitry) to be used with such vintage amps - therefore I never use the volume pot on the guitar fully open, but I back it off at around 70-80% (or less) to reduce the output a bit. The Les Paul I bought will probably give a warmer sound, we'll see.

If you need some specific advice for recording, feel free to send me a PM. I'll be glad to help if I can.

wkcchampion · 12-09-2010, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strateuphoria

a Marshall JCM 800 is a 1959 with the cascaded front end (onewiremod), basically.

I leave this to techies, I think there's some differences in the filtering (caps) values as well.

diesect20022000 · 12-09-2010, 01:59 AM

That's a really tough call man and they have a very different character but, i would say the 59 for leads and the 2203 for rhythms the way you dialed them in. I think i like the chime in the 2203 but, the compression of the 59's better. I would rather OWN a 59 though for sure but, if it was just by these clips i'm hard pressed to choose one over the other. the 2203 is more open sounding though which i like. I usualy use the "bigger" sound for single note progressions and the more compressed and gainy sound for my rhythms which is arse backwards from most players.

diesect20022000 · 12-09-2010, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

I leave this to techies, I think there's some differences in the filtering (caps) values as well.

regardless of gain stages they both (in your clips) sound very different to me...surprisingly different actualy. there was glassyness in the 2203 and the 59 sounded more compressed and actualy gainier to me. it clipped in the upper mids and highes where the 2203 seemed to only clip the lower mids a tad and dig into the upper mids. I may be describing this incorrectly but, the WAY they clipped (aside from voicing which was different too to my ears) was VERY different, and WHERE they clipped as well.NICE tones dialed in by the way. i love that crunch tone on both.

wkcchampion · 12-09-2010, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diesect20022000

regardless of gain stages they both (in your clips) sound very different to me...surprisingly different actualy. there was glassyness in the 2203 and the 59 sounded more compressed and actualy gainier to me. it clipped in the upper mids and highes where the 2203 seemed to only clip the lower mids a tad and dig into the upper mids. I may be describing this incorrectly but, the WAY they clipped (aside from voicing which was different too to my ears) was VERY different, and WHERE they clipped as well.NICE tones dialed in by the way. i love that crunch tone on both.

Well, the 1959 has no MV, while I set the MV on the 2203 on 6, as said. Therefore the way the clipping occurs is different, with the power amp being less overdriven on the 2203.
Well... in general the 2203 DOES provide more distortion.

j2112c · 12-09-2010, 10:28 AM

Nicely recorded clips as mentioned by Aus. You always seem to get very clear recordings from your set ups.
I also heard a little fret buzz on the 2203 clip, but either way, I loved the 1959's raw fuller tone best in these clips. Less gain but more rounded and gritty. I bet as you turn down the volume it's a sparkling clean... I had a hint of it near the end of the 59 clip.

I should have picked up a 1959HW when I was offered one at £440, twelve months ago!

wkcchampion · 12-09-2010, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j2112c

Nicely recorded clips as mentioned by Aus. You always seem to get very clear recordings from your set ups.
I also heard a little fret buzz on the 2203 clip, but either way, I loved the 1959's raw fuller tone best in these clips. Less gain but more rounded and gritty. I bet as you turn down the volume it's a sparkling clean... I had a hint of it near the end of the 59 clip.

I should have picked up a 1959HW when I was offered one at £440, twelve months ago!

Hey john, how u foing?
Oh well maybe I played too hard then. I don't hear any problems at all on my Flys. They play great, both.
It's exactly as u say on the 1959. Great clean if u roll back the volume

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-09-2010, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

Hey john, how u foing?
Oh well maybe I played too hard then. I don't hear any problems at all on my Flys. They play great, both.
It's exactly as u say on the 1959. Great clean if u roll back the volume

It was just a minor buzz. Losening your truss rod with 2/8th of a turn would be enough to fix it.

wkcchampion · 12-09-2010, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lespaulnmarshall

It was just a minor buzz. Losening your truss rod with 2/8th of a turn would be enough to fix it.

I just think I picked too hard

chuckharmonjr · 12-09-2010, 02:18 PM

Nah..I think you need to loosen it 1/4 of a turn.

Strateuphoria · 12-09-2010, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

I leave this to techies, I think there's some differences in the filtering (caps) values as well.

The JCM 800 sounds a little brighter and tighter than the 1959 SLP, cap wise.
But the main increase in gain, comes from that extra (tube gain stage) half of a ecc 83 which was previously used for the bassside normal loudness channel.
Its not rocketscience.

LPMarshall hack · 12-09-2010, 02:29 PM

Wow...awesome! They were close, but I think I liked the 2203 a tiny bit better. Although I wouldn't complain one bit if I was forced to use either. Good job.

wkcchampion · 12-09-2010, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LPMarshall hack

Wow...awesome! They were close, but I think I liked the 2203 a tiny bit better. Although I wouldn't complain one bit if I was forced to use either. Good job.

Lespaulnmarshall · 12-09-2010, 02:44 PM

.

core · 12-09-2010, 04:26 PM

Honestly I think the 2203 is ruder and more raw sounding, aggressive. The 1959 is tamer, cleaner and more clarity. They both have a great feel and show how they each are there own tone needed to be used accordingly. I prefer the 2203.

Marco, it would've helped to play the same passage on both recordings to get a true 1 to 1 comparison otherwise they sound like different usages due to song requirements and styles.

wkcchampion · 12-10-2010, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by core

Honestly I think the 2203 is ruder and more raw sounding, aggressive. The 1959 is tamer, cleaner and more clarity. They both have a great feel and show how they each are there own tone needed to be used accordingly. I prefer the 2203.

Marco, it would've helped to play the same passage on both recordings to get a true 1 to 1 comparison otherwise they sound like different usages due to song requirements and styles.

True! As said, this is just a quick demo. A more serious comparison with various tone and styles will be made as soon as I fix the plate resistors and eliminate the crackling noise. Be patient and it will pay off

diesect20022000 · 12-10-2010, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkcchampion

Well, the 1959 has no MV, while I set the MV on the 2203 on 6, as said. Therefore the way the clipping occurs is different, with the power amp being less overdriven on the 2203.
Well... in general the 2203 DOES provide more distortion.

Yeah i know it has the MV and more distortion as in design but, it sounded like there was more being used with the 59 to my ears but, that's likely due to the power tube compression, i still have a hard time describing what i hear but, yeah they sounded very different to me. I know for value intent i would rather have the 59 but, i think the 2203 is actualy the one i would be more suited to. the clips both sounded really good though, the eq'ing and the recording came out great. definitely makes me consider a 2203 a little more and if i had the cash the 59.

12-07-2010, 05:36 AM	#1 (permalink)
wkcchampion Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Italy Posts: 2,241	Shootout 1959 vs 2203 Hello everybody. Here, u can hear two 100W amps of the same series (JCM800). A "metal panel" Superlead 1959 vs the Master Volume 2203. There's just one clip, because I could play the 2203 for 10 min before it started makign soem crackling noise (the tech is already informed). So sorry, but just oen clip for now. More will come as the issue is fixed. Both clips were recorded with the same guitar (Parker Fly Mojo), the basketweave with Pre-Rola Greenbacks (how they sing!!!) and the same EQ settings on both amps: Bass 1 Middle 4 Treble 6 Presence 8 The only difference is, of course in the gain controls. I set the 2203 with Master 6 and Preamp 5. However, I had to crank the Volume I of the 1959 up to 8 to get the same distortion. you'll notice how the 1959 sounds ruder, rawer, more "in your face", and if u want, less polished, less defined, eventually losser and more uncontrollable. The 1959 has less gain on tap (no cascaded preamp), and has to be pushed hard to distort (roughly, the 2203 has the 1959 sound with master on 10 and pre on 2 or 3!). However, in my opinion, it's more touch sensitive and has a better clean sound when rolling back the volume of the guitar. This is the nature of the beast. No EQs, no pedals, nothing. Just guitar, amps and.. Pre-Rolas. I hope that is may help peopel who wants to buy a vintage Marshall and are undecided between these two. Here are the sound bites, enjoy! (click on QUI if Altervista shows up) 2203 Master Volume: http://pregnosplatter.altervista.org...ojo%20demo.mp3 1959 Superlead: http://pregnosplatter.altervista.org...9%20crunch.mp3 EDIT: health warning! I recorded thse sounds at bedroom volue, but I sue a dummy load setup. Be aware that they are both insanely loud!!!!!! EDIT 2: sorry for the clic at the beginning of the 2203 clip. It was very probably a glitch by the MP3 encoder. Don't bother it. __________________ *Marco* http://pregnosplatter.altervista.org/index.html The Brown Sound is HERE: http://www.marshallforum.com/cellar/...ally-here.html Marshall gear : - JMP-1 midi valve preamp - 1981 JCM800 1959 SuperLead - 1983 JCM800 2203 - 1987 Silver Jubilee 2555 - 1969 Basketweave replica with Celestion Pre-Rola G12M 25W T1221 Guitars: 2008 Parker Fly Mojo, 1995 Fly Deluxe "Eldy", 1959 pre-CBS Strat and 1993 ObG 1959 Les Paul replica

12-07-2010, 05:40 AM	#2 (permalink)
Lespaulnmarshall Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Burning hell Posts: 5,576	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 Thanks! You rock, Marco. __________________ 1987x .Every guitarist should have experienced it at least once

12-09-2010, 12:40 AM	#12 (permalink)
Strateuphoria Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: UK Posts: 2,129	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 a Marshall JCM 800 is a 1959 with the cascaded front end (onewiremod), basically.

12-09-2010, 01:10 AM	#13 (permalink)
Australian Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Saneville Posts: 9,156	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 I like the 1959, because its a bit warmer. But both sound great!. Marco when are you going to start the "Marco's secrets on how to record classic amps" thread? __________________ .................... 1971-JMP 1959 1977- JMP 1959 1982-JCM800 2203 1989-JCM800 2205 Silver Jub 2550 30th Ann1992-6100 2007-JVM410 Super JTM/100JH 2008-1959RR .................... Soldano Hotrod 100+ Boogie Mark V Marshall cabs AHW+BHW/G12H30's; AX+BX/G12M's; White A/GT75's+B/V30's; JCM800 A+B/preRolas; Hendrix A+B/G12C's; Classic/G12M's; Classic/G12h30's; JCM800 B/G12-65's; 1936/V30's; 1936/G1265's; 425B [Blackie:] "Is this the new Marshall Forum sans the bullshit?"

12-09-2010, 01:59 AM	#16 (permalink)
diesect20022000 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 16,631	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 That's a really tough call man and they have a very different character but, i would say the 59 for leads and the 2203 for rhythms the way you dialed them in. I think i like the chime in the 2203 but, the compression of the 59's better. I would rather OWN a 59 though for sure but, if it was just by these clips i'm hard pressed to choose one over the other. the 2203 is more open sounding though which i like. I usualy use the "bigger" sound for single note progressions and the more compressed and gainy sound for my rhythms which is arse backwards from most players.

Today
Marshall Amps	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on Marshall Amp Forum

12-09-2010, 10:28 AM	#19 (permalink)
j2112c Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Wales, UK Posts: 3,678	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 Nicely recorded clips as mentioned by Aus. You always seem to get very clear recordings from your set ups. I also heard a little fret buzz on the 2203 clip, but either way, I loved the 1959's raw fuller tone best in these clips. Less gain but more rounded and gritty. I bet as you turn down the volume it's a sparkling clean... I had a hint of it near the end of the 59 clip. I should have picked up a 1959HW when I was offered one at £440, twelve months ago! __________________ John C

12-09-2010, 02:18 PM	#23 (permalink)
chuckharmonjr Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: About as far south in Alabama as you can go without swimming Posts: 5,539	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 Nah..I think you need to loosen it 1/4 of a turn. __________________ JCM2000 DSL100 JMD-1 100 Watter JMP800 2204 MG50DFX Vox AD30VT Valvestate 20 1960A 1960B MG412A Seismic Audio 2-12 Black Cherry Les Paul Tobacco Burst Les Paul Black Les Paul Custom Honey Burst Les Paul R8 Les Paul in Tea Burst ES-175 in Cherry EDS-1275 in White Fender Strat in Tobacco Burst Black Charvel Fusion "When it comes to electricity, make sure it's dead before it makes sure YOU ARE!" Im not a Real Tech, But I do play one on TV

12-09-2010, 02:29 PM	#25 (permalink)
LPMarshall hack Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 4,272	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 Wow...awesome! They were close, but I think I liked the 2203 a tiny bit better. Although I wouldn't complain one bit if I was forced to use either. Good job. __________________ 2500 1960BC Peavey Vypyr 15 1989 LP Custom Piece of crap Epi LP-100

12-09-2010, 02:44 PM	#27 (permalink)
Lespaulnmarshall Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Burning hell Posts: 5,576	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 . __________________ 1987x .Every guitarist should have experienced it at least once

12-09-2010, 04:26 PM	#28 (permalink)
core Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,321	Re: Shootout 1959 vs 2203 Honestly I think the 2203 is ruder and more raw sounding, aggressive. The 1959 is tamer, cleaner and more clarity. They both have a great feel and show how they each are there own tone needed to be used accordingly. I prefer the 2203. Marco, it would've helped to play the same passage on both recordings to get a true 1 to 1 comparison otherwise they sound like different usages due to song requirements and styles. __________________ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ Aces & 8's

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode