JCM2000 DSL 100, new vs. older

[Lungo]

In my search for a high gain two channel amp I decided to look into the DSL 100. My local store just happens to have a 2004 model along with some of the new amps being sold only as a kit with an MC412 cabinet. I was curious what the differences are so I checked the amps over and played through each one. I was hoping they could work with me on the price of the older amp, especially since the new ones are sold in a kit for $1299. Just looking at the amps: the 2004 model has a different tolex. It seems to be thicker and better quality. It's also heavier in weight than the newer version. The controls were configured the same. Everything else looked the same.

Tone: the 2004 model kicked ass. It sounded exactly how I expected it to. I was able to dial in classic JCM 800 crunch and heavy metal tones that could cover just about any genre. The clean tones suprised me. Very organic and "acoustic" sounding. When I hooked up the new model being sold with the kit I immediately noticed a difference. It had the same tone, kind of, but didn't quite do what the 2004 model did. I can't describe it in words exactly but all I can say is it didn't have the same quality of tone. It wasn't terrible, but compared to the 2004 model it sounded a little lifeless. I'm wondering how the new amps are different? Are cheaper components being used to reduce cost to the costumer? Tolex and head enclosure can't be the only difference.

I didn't buy the 2004 amp. They couldn't work with me on the price because they couldn't lose money on it. I had a choice of $1400 on the 2004 amp or $1299 for the new one with MC412 and I didn't buy either one. I don't need another cabinet and don't want a new amp that doesn't sound as good as the older version. Has anyone else played these new amps or done any comparisons?

[Lordakamai]

Maybe the tubes of the newer one were biast colder? dunno just only thing i can think of.

[Lungo]

Maybe the tubes of the newer one were biast colder? dunno just only thing i can think of.

Could be right about that. I wasn't willing to take a chance on a new amp that I'd have to tinker with too much though. I'm a little tired of getting something that I'm willing to settle on and have to constently tweak to find a better tone.

[DeanM]

you said the older one was heavier in weight than the newer one. that could be the transformers cos they make up a good bit of the weight in an amp. so if the newer one weighed less then maybe its got less iron in it? thats the closest thing i can think of other than the bias as mentioned above.

[LivewireBlanco]

Were they plugged into the same cabinet? Even if they were the same type of cabinet one might have been more broken in than another. Or the speakers could have been different.

[Lungo]

Were they plugged into the same cabinet? Even if they were the same type of cabinet one might have been more broken in than another. Or the speakers could have been different.

Yep, same cab. I used the MC412 that comes in the kit. It's loaded with Rocker 50's.

[ClubAndCountry]

SteveD may be able to confirm exactly when, but the DSL series changed from Drake to Dagnall transformers at some point. I can't remember for certain but I do think the Drakes are slightly larger, which will make the amp heavier. I'm not aware of any very significant tone change, but I haven't directly compared the two versions at the same time. All the ones I've had with before-and-after swaps, the old transformer has been blown so I couldn't tell! It is possible that there's a difference, but power valve bias may be at least as important, and there's no telling where an older amp may be set (or have drifted, if the valves are old) to. In my opinion the factory bias them too hot as well, which doesn't help.

For techies: if you replace one type of output transformer with the other (if you order a replacement from Marshall you get a Dagnall now of course, regardless of the age of the amp) the primary winding direction is reversed, which means the amp will self-oscillate at full power unless you swap the plate connections.

Also, if you have an earlier DSL or TSL, make sure you check for a design flaw these amps had - the mask for the main PCB was incorrectly designed for the type of screen resistors used (or the type was changed afterwards), resulting in the resistor standoffs carrying 470+VDC coming within a few thousandths of an inch of the near-ground filament trace, in some cases - WAY too close. This can cause arcing and badly burn the board meaning major and difficult repair work. Luckily the fix is extremely simple - *if* you catch it before arcing occurs - you simply bend the tips of the standoffs up and out of the way with a pair of fine-nose pliers. Later, the boards were redesigned to remove this problem, but they still left it too close on one! (The one nearest the power transformer.) I haven't seen inside any very recent DSL/TSL for a while, so this too may have been sorted now.

I also haven't seen any Marshalls with blown transformers recently, so maybe the Dagnalls are a bit more reliable than the Drakes as well. (Not that the Drakes were very unreliable, but I did seem to come across a few too many dead ones.)


I should also say that in my personal opinion these amps are quite speaker-sensitive - I've never liked them through the stock G12T-75 1960 cabinets (I think they sound too hollow and buzzy), but they sound really pretty good through the Vintage 30 1960V cabs. And a MC412 with Rocker 50s is *not* the right cab for this amp :-).

[Lungo]

Thanks for the information! The different transformer could be the reason the weight was different with the two amps. When I noticed the difference in tolex I thought maybe it could have been contruction materials that made the difference. If Marshall has recognized a problem with the DSL-TSL line and made a change to prevent problems then it's a good thing. I seem to remember a member here that had a transformer go out on a DSL.

When I compared the two I was as picky as anyone could be without bringing a screwdriver and taking the amps apart. I used the cab loaded with Rocker 50's to test both amps because that's the cab that came with the new amp sold as a head/MC412 kit, and to get a true comparison of old vs. new. I wanted to try to find any differences and the ones I noted were minor. Finding the differences in tolex and weight could have made me biased towards the older model I tested. I spent quite a bit of time on that amp before switching to the new one as well. In the end I would have went home with the 2004 model if they would have made a killer deal for me but they couldn't, so I'll keep looking.

[DeanM]

here in ireland new marshalls are really expensive but used ones can be foun fairly cheap. there is currently a used dsl100 in pretty good condition sellin for €600 - $884

http://www.adverts.ie/showfull.php?prod ... C01118.JPG

http://www.adverts.ie/showfull.php?prod ... C01128.JPG

[Lungo]

I can find them used here in Alaska but they are never available when I want to buy. It's the same with 4x12 cabinets. When I was looking for one none was available so I bought a brand new 425A. I've seen numerous Vin30 loaded Marshall cabs in new condition for $400 since then.

[DeanM]

i know what ya mean!! ya'd see loads of something then when ya decide ya need it its tough to find! i wanted to get a shure sm57 or two during the summer and could not find one!!! all i found was adds marked as sold!!!

[ironlung40]

+1 on that! I seem to never find a good deal when I "need" something, or am ready to buy. But when I don't have the money, great deals abound! Don't get it, and quit trying to find the scientific reasoning behind it years ago.

[surfnorthwest]

Pm sent