The particularities about Eddie Van Halen plexi 12301

ELS

Active Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2021
Messages
234
Reaction score
127
I think it is the only one we got. It was supposedely taken during a past restoration of the amp. However i have my doubts about the picture like the missing tube socket and many capacitors seeming to be not stock, but who knows if marshall was out of stock of mullard caps and used whatever they found ? :

View attachment 119740
however despite not looking legit at the first look, the components mentionned by friedman are there. The big cap on v1 is a .68 phillips chiclet cap. and the black cap seems to be what he has been refering to as the 220-470uf cap. The big blue cap is supposedely a 32+32 uf cap like in the jtm50.

here is a variation with it :

View attachment 119741

i just found a picture of a 100w 68-69 sl and the chiclet phillips capacitors seemed to have been used at marshalls :

View attachment 119742
that first picture looks like it's from a super PA with the board swapped in from a regular plexi
 

playloud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,467
I think it is the only one we got. It was supposedely taken during a past restoration of the amp. However i have my doubts about the picture like the missing tube socket and many capacitors seeming to be not stock, but who knows if marshall was out of stock of mullard caps and used whatever they found ? :

View attachment 119740
however despite not looking legit at the first look, the components mentionned by friedman are there. The big cap on v1 is a .68 phillips chiclet cap. and the black cap seems to be what he has been refering to as the 220-470uf cap. The big blue cap is supposedely a 32+32 uf cap like in the jtm50.

here is a variation with it :

View attachment 119741

i just found a picture of a 100w 68-69 sl and the chiclet phillips capacitors seemed to have been used at marshalls :

View attachment 119742

No idea whether the top amp belonged to EVH, but:
- Nothing unusual about the "missing tube socket". In this era, Marshall used the same chassis for the PA models as bass/lead, so if they didn't need the extra tube, they put a metal cover over the socket.
- They did use coupling caps other than mustards (green Hunts, Dubilier, RS, Wima), but these "chiclets" were later ('72?) The ones here are certainly replacements.
- Just about every original solder joint on that board has been disturbed. The 250/330uf cap (far left) may be original, and the 2x22nf mustards probably are, but every other capacitor is a replacement. Who knows what this amp might have looked like a year earlier, let alone 10. (I don't know when this pic was taken, but guessing 80s or later?)
- Interesting that Chris Merren noted a shared cathode on V1 in his notes, as this is entirely plausible when the 0.68uf cap in this pic is an obvious replacement (would be good to get a closer look at the relevant turret).
- That black cap is the "fat cap" (and note the other cathode on V2 doesn't have a .68uf bypass cap, like in your diagram). That is a significant deviation from stock, but most who try it doesn't seem to like it.
 

XTRXTR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2021
Messages
1,088
Reaction score
1,325
Location
Some City, USA
I think it's impossible Here is why:

EVH was in constant search for new ways to get new tones whether it was his guitar, a technique, an amp, speakers, a pedal, a mod to any and all of those etc. Then you are listening to his studio tracks. Isolated or not most of that finished tone was recording mic placement, and then effects added after the track was laid down. Its well known the dual track tone, one with far mic/reverb sound and the other with closer plate reverb sound. You just can't do that live.

Eddie's technique was the biggest part of it and you can hear that in interviews when he was playing or showing something he just came up with or that 12 minute solo Live. Every time the amp tone was different but the playing style and technique was the same.

If you master a few of his solos or eruption, or out of this world intros, his elephant trumpeting, his rhythms. Yes you will get high praises for your excellence. The question is later are you being you or trying to be someone else. In a bar band you may need to be other people but you don't have to be perfect. 99.9% of the audience have no clue if you are playing it right, in the same key, or missed a note. If you make it yours with your own personal flair it will be just fine. Ten pieces of flair? C'mon, twenty pieces of flair? How many pieces of flair does it take to be a part of the EVH community?

Keys points: Loud (3), not much pedal or preamp (2), technique (1)
 

Jethro Rocker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
11,052
Reaction score
18,162
Location
Saskatoon, Canada
A real tube plexi with a miniaturised real copy of a transformer, a master volume for low bedroom volumes
Not being Joe Technical but I would think if one ran a master volume and loop in a 20 watt Plexi, it wouldn't sound like a vintage 100 watt plexi. Rrgardless of the componenets used. Lower voltage etc
 

pat_rocks

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
50
No idea whether the top amp belonged to EVH, but:
- Nothing unusual about the "missing tube socket". In this era, Marshall used the same chassis for the PA models as bass/lead, so if they didn't need the extra tube, they put a metal cover over the socket.
- They did use coupling caps other than mustards (green Hunts, Dubilier, RS, Wima), but these "chiclets" were later ('72?) The ones here are certainly replacements.
- Just about every original solder joint on that board has been disturbed. The 250/330uf cap (far left) may be original, and the 2x22nf mustards probably are, but every other capacitor is a replacement. Who knows what this amp might have looked like a year earlier, let alone 10. (I don't know when this pic was taken, but guessing 80s or later?)
- Interesting that Chris Merren noted a shared cathode on V1 in his notes, as this is entirely plausible when the 0.68uf cap in this pic is an obvious replacement (would be good to get a closer look at the relevant turret).
- That black cap is the "fat cap" (and note the other cathode on V2 doesn't have a .68uf bypass cap, like in your diagram). That is a significant deviation from stock, but most who try it doesn't seem to like it.
True about the .68 lacking on V2. However i believe what friedman and suhr say. I saw that on amp garage there was a discussion about this cap with suhr. Apparently what happened is that eddie was hunting for more gain at some point after the early records and he added it. Probably it had a .68 stock and at some point it was bypassed by an electrolytic cap then those were both replaced by a bigger eletrolytic cap. That's my assumption. Knowing that both friedman and suhr seem to say that on v2 there was a .68 bypassed by an electrolytic cap.

if you look suhr sl68 or sl67 guts it has a .68 brown drop bypassed by a sprague 250uf on v2. I believe sl68 and sl67 to be close replicas of eddies plexi. Moreover those amps have an integrated virtual variac on the stanby switch (on-on-on) with high and low voltages. If it wasn't to be a faithfull close copy it wouldn't have a variac in it with a dual bias system for high and low voltages. The exta amount of work for this is crazy. Suhr wouldn't do it if it wasn't supposed to be a close copy of the amp.



about the picture of the 68-69 marshall, this one is priced at 12k so it might be completely stock and uses chiclet phillips .68 uf. I think they were probably already used in 68.
 
Last edited:

mickeydg5

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
27,303
Reaction score
14,696
Location
The middle east of the united states of America
I have said before Eddie used many effects that cost way more than any of the amplifiers in his sound.

So did Jimmy Page and others.

All you have to do is listen to their final recorded or live sound.

That is why I would never modify any amplifier to achieve a specific sound.

A good effects loop in a good amplifier is better than any other amplifier voicing modification in this realm.
 

pat_rocks

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
50
Not being Joe Technical but I would think if one ran a master volume and loop in a 20 watt Plexi, it wouldn't sound like a vintage 100 watt plexi. Rrgardless of the componenets used. Lower voltage etc
You should check this :) ! Scroll dowan and hear the audios not the videos. Yeah it is expensive... but it sounds like it : https://davidbrayamps.com/bray2022.html 6v6 plexis were made by a niche of amp builders on the hoffman forums and by mark huss it was such a discovery that those amp builders began to build 6v6 plexis some being extremely close to a 100watt plexi on steroids despite not having el34.

yeah the bray doesn't have a fx loop but metro amps use their own 0 loss fx loop and those don't suck you amp tone.

it is not because marshall doesn't care to try that the hobbyist amp builders stop. Marshall would make a huge leap forward if they went on forums like wattkins, el34, 18watt.com, hoffman and took some of their ideas...
 
Last edited:

pat_rocks

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
50
I don't believe this to be true at all. Do you have a reference where Suhr makes that claim? I believe they are just supposed to be his takes on a 67 era circuit and a 68 era circuit
Man this amp has a built in variac Plus it has the specs that dave friedman leaked on the forum of metro amps. Moreover they purposedely took al estrada to demo the amp which is a guy which is known for his almost perfect evh playing. The demo is full of evh style playing. What do people want more ? xD

the only difference i can assume there is with the original might be the lack of the electrolytic cap along the 2x 2w 10k.

Pete thorn which is one of the hardcorest evh fan player got a sl68 and it is his fav amp...

Dave friedman repaired the amp. John Suhr also had the amp in his shop at some point... Those 2 guys know more about this amp than us...
 
Last edited:

playloud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,467
True about the .68 lacking on V2. However i believe what friedman and suhr say. I saw that on amp garage there was a discussion about this cap with suhr. Apparently what happened is that eddie was hunting for more gain at some point after the early records and he added it. Probably it had a .68 stock and at some point it was bypassed by an electrolytic cap then those were both replaced by a bigger eletrolytic cap. That's my assumption. Knowing that both friedman and suhr seem to say that on v2 there was a .68 bypassed by an electrolytic cap.

if you look suhr sl68 or sl67 guts it has a .68 brown drop bypassed by a sprague 250uf on v2. I believe sl68 and sl67 to be close replicas of eddies plexi. Moreover those amps have an integrated virtual variac on the stanby switch (on-on-on) with high and low voltages. If it wasn't to be a faithfull close copy it wouldn't have a variac in it with a dual bias system for high and low voltages. The exta amount of work for this is crazy. Suhr wouldn't do it if it wasn't supposed to be a close copy of the amp.

It's not a question of believing what they say. The problems are that:
a. Their accounts aren't exhaustive. They haven't shared a part by part rundown of what they saw inside the amp, nor detailed pictures (which would be better).
b. As the amp wasn't stock when they saw it, we don't know what changes (and when) occurred in the intervening years. As most of the tones people try to emulate are from the first few albums (several years prior to Suhr and/or Friedman getting inside the amp), this is less than perfect information.

Adding a 'variac' could be as simple as adding an extra tap (or two) to the PT. I suspect this is a feature he added as a nod towards VH (Metro has done the same), rather than evidence of a part-for-part clone of 12301. Suhr probably knows as well as anyone that a post-'68 Super Lead with a variac pretty much has you sorted as far as the amp side of VH's tone (small details are outweighed by other parts of the chain).

I don't have pics of an SL68's insides to reference but, as noted above, can tell from outside pics that the screen filtering is wrong (should be 2x32+32=16uf in series, but are instead 2x50+50). Suhr probably used the later spec here because he figured most customers would prefer the increased filtering (probably correct), but it is enough to suggest he wasn't going for a perfect copy.

about the picture of the 68-69 marshall, this one is priced at 12k so it might be completely stock and uses chiclet phillips .68 uf. I think they were probably already used in 68.

I can't rule out Marshall ever using the chiclets in '68. This would be a good question for the vintage section of the forum (where many users are far more knowledgeable than me).

However, there is ample evidence in the pics posted to suggest the chiclets in those particular amps are not original. Marshall applied red dye to the solder joints in '68 (and later), presumably as part of QC. It's easy to see on several joints in your second pic, but you can see that on the turrets connected to the chiclets, the dye is missing. This is fairly conclusive evidence of rework, i.e. that the parts were replacements.

On the first (alleged VH) amp, there is nary a trace of the red dye. This could be image resolution in some cases, but on most of the joints you can see that they have simply been reworked.

People list "players' condition" Marshalls at crazy prices all the time. (This is also discussed regularly over in the vintage section!) Even a clean '68 isn't worth 12k (I'm assuming USD?)
 

Jethro Rocker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
11,052
Reaction score
18,162
Location
Saskatoon, Canada
You should check this :) ! Scroll dowan and hear the audios not the videos. Yeah it is expensive... but it sounds like it : https://davidbrayamps.com/bray2022.html 6v6 plexis were made by a niche of amp builders on the hoffman forums and by mark huss it was such a discovery that those amp builders began to build 6v6 plexis some being extremely close to a 100watt plexi on steroids despite not having el34.

yeah the bray doesn't have a fx loop but metro amps use their own 0 loss fx loop and those don't suck you amp tone.

it is not because marshall doesn't care to try that the hobbyist amp builders stop. Marshall would make a huge leap forward if they went on forums like wattkins, el34, 18watt.com, hoffman and took some of their ideas...
And what market is there for it? How many would Marshall make? Very few? Price goes up dramatically. It's about marketing.
They already have a decent array of lower powered amps and more coming.
 

pat_rocks

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
50
And what market is there for it? How many would Marshall make? Very few? Price goes up dramatically. It's about marketing.
They already have a decent array of lower powered amps and more coming.
I hope you are telling the truth i just bought the sv20h and i regreted it when i saw the new prs jtm45 20watt with a master volume. the sv20h is a nice sounding amp but no master volume in 2022 it sucks a little bit...
 

Rokinroller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
950
Reaction score
1,076
Location
Quebec Canada
All the fuss and over hype . Back then it was simple . Ed knew . 100 watts great tone - too loud . Simple . Starve the beast with a simple light dimmer / switch . Yup , the old fashioned rotary ones . No " sh-variac " needed . Evereyone thought over-volt , nope . Undervolt it .." brown " it out . Hense the brown sound . Simple as that . $4.99 . Dont mod your amps . Stop over complicating .
 

pittbull

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,494
Reaction score
540
The people who looked at Eddie’s Marshall plexi,Suhr,Friedman,Bogner,Fryette,Soldano looked at the amp in the 90s,Jose Arrendondo was Eddie’s main amp guy in the mid 70s until Jose passed away. The famous Van Halen II studio photo shows Eddie’s marshall plexi on the floor with a pot/knob in n the back of Eddie’s amp the guys that looked at Eddie’s amp(listed above)in the 90s said that they didn’t see that pot/knob in the back of Eddie amp that should tell you something,I don’t believe Eddie played anything stock from his amps to his guitars Eddie wanted to get the most performance out of his gear.
 
Last edited:

pat_rocks

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
50
It's not a question of believing what they say. The problems are that:
a. Their accounts aren't exhaustive. They haven't shared a part by part rundown of what they saw inside the amp, nor detailed pictures (which would be better).
b. As the amp wasn't stock when they saw it, we don't know what changes (and when) occurred in the intervening years. As most of the tones people try to emulate are from the first few albums (several years prior to Suhr and/or Friedman getting inside the amp), this is less than perfect information.

Adding a 'variac' could be as simple as adding an extra tap (or two) to the PT. I suspect this is a feature he added as a nod towards VH (Metro has done the same), rather than evidence of a part-for-part clone of 12301. Suhr probably knows as well as anyone that a post-'68 Super Lead with a variac pretty much has you sorted as far as the amp side of VH's tone (small details are outweighed by other parts of the chain).

I don't have pics of an SL68's insides to reference but, as noted above, can tell from outside pics that the screen filtering is wrong (should be 2x32+32=16uf in series, but are instead 2x50+50). Suhr probably used the later spec here because he figured most customers would prefer the increased filtering (probably correct), but it is enough to suggest he wasn't going for a perfect copy.



I can't rule out Marshall ever using the chiclets in '68. This would be a good question for the vintage section of the forum (where many users are far more knowledgeable than me).

However, there is ample evidence in the pics posted to suggest the chiclets in those particular amps are not original. Marshall applied red dye to the solder joints in '68 (and later), presumably as part of QC. It's easy to see on several joints in your second pic, but you can see that on the turrets connected to the chiclets, the dye is missing. This is fairly conclusive evidence of rework, i.e. that the parts were replacements.

On the first (alleged VH) amp, there is nary a trace of the red dye. This could be image resolution in some cases, but on most of the joints you can see that they have simply been reworked.

People list "players' condition" Marshalls at crazy prices all the time. (This is also discussed regularly over in the vintage section!) Even a clean '68 isn't worth 12k (I'm assuming USD?)
Well i agree with many of your statements, but i still believe that the suhr sl68 is a close recreation (not exact) of what eddies plex was at the beginning when it went out of the marshalls factory. It is possible that eddy used the cerrem mod as he blew out many OT. Perhaps that the mxr 6 band eq had something to do with its tone too, you can get a much harsher sound. This mxr eq can greatly affect how a plexi sounds. I have myself an original one and it is crazy.

if the plexi was almost stock we must assume that many factors of his sound came from external devices that's why i'm refering to mxr 6 band eq as one of a possibility in a multidevice scheme.

here you have highres pics of the sl68:

 
Last edited:

FleshOnGear

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,569
Location
Virginia
I hope you are telling the truth i just bought the sv20h and i regreted it when i saw the new prs jtm45 20watt with a master volume. the sv20h is a nice sounding amp but no master volume in 2022 it sucks a little bit...
I don’t think PPIMVs are the ticket to Plexi paradise at bedroom levels, personally. They mess with the feedback loop around the power section, changing the feel and the EQ of the amp, and making the presence control useless. I think a good attenuator is a better solution.
 

Ned B

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2012
Messages
405
Reaction score
576
There was another account of Eddie's amp from Chris Merren who claimed to examine it in the 70's. I don't remember mention of the 50K mid pot, but I do remember these features:
Shared cathode, .022 channel 1 coupling cap, 5000pf vol 1 pot cap, 33K slope resistor, .250pf treble cap, 250mf electrolytic V2 cathode bypass cap, 47K NFB resistor and a 100pf smoothing cap instead of the 47pf. I recall he claimed they were original components. I replicated that set up on my 12376 which was originally the usual stock SL of the period being the same as the SB but with the volume 1 pot cap. I have the 50K mid pot, but I didn't add to the smoothing cap value. The purple NFB wire is connected to the 4ohm tap. I love the results of this configuration. I don't run it with reduced voltage or even try to replicate the EVH sound, but my ears tell me this is in the ballpark. The fat cap on V2 makes a big difference. I don't think the chances are high that a split cathode would have been stock on a 12XXX, though maybe a small percentage were.
 

Attachments

  • 041-12376-24 Marshall Model 1959 100W 1968.jpg
    041-12376-24 Marshall Model 1959 100W 1968.jpg
    535.8 KB · Views: 17


Top