NAD: Marshall DSL100HR

EOengineer said:
I also first crossed paths with the JCM2000. They weren’t perfect but I remember thinking at the time that it was leaps and bounds ahead of the 900 series. Def got me paying attention to Marshall again.
Click to expand...
That's a pretty low bar.

As a former JCM2000 DSL50 owner, I say this:
  • Mine had the bias drift issue.
  • The Tone Shift button means Tone Shit.
  • The Deep switch can be overbearing so it's not useful either.
  • It doesn't sound that great at low volume. I liked it better even with a resistive attenuator.
  • The channels were so poorly balanced that it's a one channel amp with switchable modes because the shared EQ makes either one channel tubby or the other thin.
  • The preamp board is a bouncy castle. It's not properly supported.
It can sound really good, I think it is best treated as kind of like a JCM800. Set it on Crunch, boost with a drive pedal.

I don't know if the modern versions are better in this regard but the JCM2000 series has a laundry list of issues. I'd rather aim for JVM.
 





Ive had a 2006 & currently have a 2009 2K DSL-100. The conductive boards were fixed after 2005.
They're easy to use, very responsive, easy to bias and sound fantastic.
Are they for everyone ? Maybe not. But if you're not savy enough to dial in basic tones with one maybe
guitar isnt your thing.
 
laxu said:
The Tone Shift button means Tone Shit.
Click to expand...
Shark-Sandwich.jpg


laxu said:
The channels were so poorly balanced that it's a one channel amp with switchable modes because the shared EQ makes either one channel tubby or the other thin.
Click to expand...
The shared EQ (on the DSL100HR) is the only thing I can foresee being disappointing (or maybe "challenging" is the better word) long term. The reverb has "utility value", I guess, but it's so basic that removing it and its pots in favor of a 2nd EQ stack would have been a good tradeoff - even if it increased the price a bit. There's certainly enough room inside the rawker-approved/ ridiculously enormous chassis. :D
 
laxu said:
That's a pretty low bar.

As a former JCM2000 DSL50 owner, I say this:
  • Mine had the bias drift issue.
  • The Tone Shift button means Tone Shit.
  • The Deep switch can be overbearing so it's not useful either.
  • It doesn't sound that great at low volume. I liked it better even with a resistive attenuator.
  • The channels were so poorly balanced that it's a one channel amp with switchable modes because the shared EQ makes either one channel tubby or the other thin.
  • The preamp board is a bouncy castle. It's not properly supported.
It can sound really good, I think it is best treated as kind of like a JCM800. Set it on Crunch, boost with a drive pedal.

I don't know if the modern versions are better in this regard but the JCM2000 series has a laundry list of issues. I'd rather aim for JVM.
Click to expand...

The second version, DSL 100H, fixed a lot of those issues, no bias drift, tone shift changed to a pot, etc. Also the 100H had the tube sockets mounted to the chassis vs the PCB. The newest version HR, has a 6 button FS that the earlier ones dont and it has a little more modern sound to it vs its predecessors.

IMO, they are good amps even if you dont factor in the cost. I picked mine up used for $250 US, did the C19 mod to tame the red channel and I can push mine into 2203-like JCM tones set up one way and Plexi-like tones another.

The only bad thing is they are heavy! Mine weighs around 56#

 
mbenigni said:
Shark-Sandwich.jpg



The shared EQ (on the DSL100HR) is the only thing I can foresee being disappointing (or maybe "challenging" is the better word) long term. The reverb has "utility value", I guess, but it's so basic that removing it and its pots in favor of a 2nd EQ stack would have been a good tradeoff - even if it increased the price a bit. There's certainly enough room inside the rawker-approved/ ridiculously enormous chassis. :D
Click to expand...
Sounds like a JVM is in your future :grin
 
mbenigni said:
Arguably above my paygrade, but dumber things have happened. :)

(There's a used one on Reverb for about $1K... plus about $600 "shipping" LOL.)
Click to expand...

I nabbed mine for $1,800 new when that looked like some sort of crazy close-out sale, but it was just ProAudioStar jumping the gun on the new Marshall price drops. :ROFLMAO: Still feels like a “bargain” in today’s overpriced amp market. It’s a monster amp.

That said, $700 for a DSL100 is ridiculous value if they can get you hooked up with a good one. Take it and run. 🏃
 
Speaking of DSL, I just got one of these guys for under my tech bench. Gots to have some tubes in a small space and this one fit the bill.

lg_1_1_0517173.jpg


The YAMAHA THR that I had went kaput and died....what a POS! (I should have taken Paisley W's advice on that one...my bad!)
I actually really like this little Marshall. First thing I am doing is changing out the POS speaker! What a buzzard it is!
 
Latest chapter in this FedEx saga/ shitshow: Tracking page says "DELIVERED". Amp is nowhere in sight.

:farley

(For comedic effect, they had delivered a package for my wife, right where I expected the amp to be and almost exactly the same dimensions as the Marshall box... except scaled down to about 1/5 scale. "Honey, I shrunk the amp!")
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

James Freeman
Clean Your Jacks
2
Replies
22
Views
679
megametal7
megametal7
M
Power Switch Replacement (Don't let me die)
2
Replies
26
Views
759
Eagle
Eagle
M
NAD, After 30 years I finally own a Marshall
Replies
17
Views
350
EOengineer
E
Byrdman
NAD - Marshall Origin 50H
Replies
6
Views
162
Pissedplexi
P
laxu
NAD: Mesa Mark V:90 1x12 combo
4 5 6
Replies
102
Views
2K
Whizzinby
Whizzinby
Back
Top