What’s going on with Marshall??

[Orvillain]

A 20w 3 channel JVM would not interest me in the slightest.

 

[James Freeman]

2204HW

 

[Tanax]

We'll all see next year what they're cooking up for their new amplifiers.

 

[Eagle]

A 20w 3 channel JVM would not interest me in the slightest.

But it would sell very well.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

what exactly is the problem with the 100W version? is it too big physically? It’s not like the MV isn’t effective. If you want something smaller or with less channels, get a DSL.

You strip things away from the JVM and it’s not a JVM any more.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Only JVM update we need is the "swap out the reverb for the noise gate they did for Satriani and make the amp the size of a small box Boogie MK series" update. OOOOOOOF

 

[laxu]

what exactly is the problem with the 100W version? is it too big physically? It’s not like the MV isn’t effective. If you want something smaller or with less channels, get a DSL.

You strip things away from the JVM and it’s not a JVM any more.

Size and weight for sure. It's so wide that it would look T shaped on top of my 4x10 cab. I think it could be crammed into a smaller chassis even as a 100W, but a lighter 50W model wouldn't hurt.

Noise gate built in would be nice, but IMO could be reduced to a 3 way switch. My BluGuitar (there it is again!) has a 3-way "soft/off/metal" switch for this and I can't imagine ever wanting anything more than that. It works well on any of my guitars, where I use soft most of the time and might flick it to metal for high gain rhythm playing. Super easy.

Reverb could probably be reduced to Reverb 1 and Reverb 2. How often do you want to perfectly tailor your reverb volume for every channel?

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Size and weight for sure. It's so wide that it would look T shaped on top of my 4x10 cab. I think it could be crammed into a smaller chassis even as a 100W, but a lighter 50W model wouldn't hurt.

Noise gate built in would be nice, but IMO could be reduced to a 3 way switch. My BluGuitar (there it is again!) has a 3-way "soft/off/metal" switch for this and I can't imagine ever wanting anything more than that. It works well on any of my guitars, where I use soft most of the time and might flick it to metal for high gain rhythm playing. Super easy.

Reverb could probably be reduced to Reverb 1 and Reverb 2. How often do you want to perfectly tailor your reverb volume for every channel?

JVM front panel would be hell on a narrower chassis. Personally I find the idea of a JVM with 4x10’s a bit odd too. I think it was designed to pair with 4x12’s, like a VH4 or 5150 or Rectifier etc. 4x10’s I associate more with older Fender style “caveman” type amps with less gain.

For something smaller and “Marshall” the studio series or DSL’s would cover most needs. JVM is all about having multiple styles of Marshall in one, once you compromise that you may as well just pick your preferred flavour of Marshall. If you strip things back and cram more in and you end up with Blackstar

 

[Whizzinby]

The JVM is badass as-is. If it ain’t for you, that’s fine.

 

[JiveTurkey]

The JVM is badass as-is. If it ain’t for you, that’s fine.

Everything must have the Beetlejuice shrunken head equivalent form factor option!

 

[laxu]

JVM front panel would be hell on a narrower chassis. Personally I find the idea of a JVM with 4x10’s a bit odd too. I think it was designed to pair with 4x12’s, like a VH4 or 5150 or Rectifier etc. 4x10’s I associate more with older Fender style “caveman” type amps with less gain.

Sure, it's designed to sit on top of a 4x12.

4x10s are just rare, but there's literally nothing wrong with them. Low end is easier to manage than on 4x12s, and weight is considerably less. Mine is a closed back with 10" Greenbacks. I just used it as an example of even a relatively big cab being dwarfed by the huge width of the JVM410.

The JVM has plenty of empty space on it so it's not like you need to cram it to something as small as say a Mark series amp.

For something smaller and “Marshall” the studio series or DSL’s would cover most needs. JVM is all about having multiple styles of Marshall in one, once you compromise that you may as well just pick your preferred flavour of Marshall. If you strip things back and cram more in and you end up with Blackstar

The Marshall Studio series is a stupid range IMO. All the old school inconvenience in amps that don't sound as beefy as their 50W brethren.

DSL's shared EQ is its biggest failing, while the 2 channel JVM is only 10 cm shorter than the 4 channel model.

 

[spawnofthesith]

Again. Being from America, they remind me of Taco Bell. I love them, but every time they come out with something, I can’t help but feel like I’ve seen it before.

Idk giant cheez-it crunchwrap was pretty revolutionary

 

[JiveTurkey]

The Marshall Studio series is a stupid range IMO. All the old school inconvenience in amps that don't sound as beefy as their 50W brethren.

So much this. No one buys a Marshall because they want some $1300 20 watt pipsqueak. Yuck.

 

[laxu]

So much this. No one buys a Marshall because they want some $1300 20 watt pipsqueak. Yuck.

To me the primary issue is that those Marshalls work like their old 50-100W big brothers. Too loud for many users, too impractical.

20W amps with modern circuit designs, power scaling etc are fine (even if I still prefer the higher power models). These Marshalls are not that.

 

[JiveTurkey]

To me the primary issue is that those Marshalls work like their old 50-100W big brothers. Too loud for many users, too impractical.

20W amps with modern circuit designs, power scaling etc are fine (even if I still prefer the higher power models). These Marshalls are not that.

Yeah I immediately go nope to the 20 because headroom. If it's still ear piercingly loud; that's dumb. I'd rather have the Marshall and a load box. Of course; I've somehow managed to keep talking myself out of a Marshall for a few years now so nothing new to see here

 

[metropolis_4]

Wattage is all about feel. Higher wattage feels stiffer with a firm immediate attack, lower wattage has some give you can sink into.

Both are good for different things.

20 watt may suck if you’re chugging fast metal riffs in drop G, but 100 watt can equally suck if you’re playing jangly roots stuff on a Tele.

It’s all about how much you want the power section to come into play in the tone of the amp.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

4x10s are just rare, but there's literally nothing wrong with them. Low end is easier to manage than on 4x12s, and weight is considerably less. Mine is a closed back with 10" Greenbacks. I just used it as an example of even a relatively big cab being dwarfed by the huge width of the JVM410.

Every single JVM tone I can think of on an album is a 4x12. In fact, I can't think of anyone mentioning using a 4x10 in any kind of professional capacity with a JVM. Not saying it sounds bad or is a bad idea, but I don't think its worth accommodating an amp to fit a 4x10, in the same way I wouldn't try and make it fit a 1x12 or 2x10 or anything else. There's nothing wrong with a 4x10 but that doesn't mean that the amp should be forced to work with it - its been designed with a 4x12 in mind, because thats the sound that most people are familiar with when it comes to Marshall amps. Full fat JVM+wider 2x12 is a way easier fix than reducing a JVM down to fit on a 4x10.

The JVM has plenty of empty space on it so it's not like you need to cram it to something as small as say a Mark series amp.

Plenty of extra space? Its already bunched in, the space that is there is quite useful to have. I can't think of many amps ever made that have more knobs on the front.

The Marshall Studio series is a stupid range IMO. All the old school inconvenience in amps that don't sound as beefy as their 50W brethren.

I agree, but I also think something has to give if things are going to be reduced down. If you want a Jubilee or 2203 tone in a small enclosure, its available. Does it sound as good as the real thing? no, but its probably in the same sort of ballpark as a JVM would be anyway.

DSL's shared EQ is its biggest failing

Again, yes, but out of all the compromises that are being asked for I don't think its that big of a deal. Marshall EQ is pretty broad strokes and generally you don't ever need to work them that hard. Except for certain cabs/speakers that the amp might not be well paired to.

So much this. No one buys a Marshall because they want some $1300 20 watt pipsqueak. Yuck.

Agree, but who really wants a scaled down 20W JVM? The 100W is fine as is, and if its too big just get one of the many other pipsqueak amps Marshall makes. The difference becomes more and more insignificant once the compromises stack up.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Every single JVM tone I can think of on an album is a 4x12. In fact, I can't think of anyone mentioning using a 4x10 in any kind of professional capacity with a JVM. Not saying it sounds bad or is a bad idea, but I don't think its worth accommodating an amp to fit a 4x10, in the same way I wouldn't try and make it fit a 1x12 or 2x10 or anything else. There's nothing wrong with a 4x10 but that doesn't mean that the amp should be forced to work with it - its been designed with a 4x12 in mind, because thats the sound that most people are familiar with when it comes to Marshall amps. Full fat JVM+wider 2x12 is a way easier fix than reducing a JVM down to fit on a 4x10.


Plenty of extra space? Its already bunched in, the space that is there is quite useful to have. I can't think of many amps ever made that have more knobs on the front.

View attachment 32798

View attachment 32797




I agree, but I also think something has to give if things are going to be reduced down. If you want a Jubilee or 2203 tone in a small enclosure, its available. Does it sound as good as the real thing? no, but its probably in the same sort of ballpark as a JVM would be anyway.


Again, yes, but out of all the compromises that are being asked for I don't think its that big of a deal. Marshall EQ is pretty broad strokes and generally you don't ever need to work them that hard. Except for certain cabs/speakers that the amp might not be well paired to.

Agree, but who really wants a scaled down 20W JVM? The 100W is fine as is, and if its too big just get one of the many other pipsqueak amps Marshall makes. The difference becomes more and more insignificant once the compromises stack up.

Agree with all of this. I just want a JVM that fits on my 112 cab

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Agree with all of this. I just want a JVM that fits on my 112 cab

Jim’s got your back:

 

[JiveTurkey]

Looking for 100 watt JVM 112 combo (that doesn't exist)so I can use my jigsaw skills. Width: 20", Height: 14"