Username: Password:

Author Topic: 1987X vs 2204  (Read 7856 times)

Dmoney

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 3577
1987X vs 2204
« on: August 26, 2010, 12:17:47 AM »
Hey
So I'm after some experienced opinions on the differences on these amps. I'll include the 1959SLP too.

I was watching a youtube vid of the 1987X and it sounded pretty good. to a point.
I've never played a plexi style head (that i can remember) and defo not with jumpered channels.
The clean tones in the vid where pretty good, and it did a good crunch tone, but when the normal and bright channels where maxed out while jumpered, the tone was a bit muddy (well, it was over youtube at least) but the sound was pretty saturated.

I'm pretty familiar with the JCM800, and its hotrodded variants. But, how does the higher gain input on a 800, compared to jumpered inputs on the 1959/1987?

which is more saturated, vintage, or modern sounding, or crunch. I'm kind of only really interested in the jumpered tones of the other amps compared to the 800's (2203/2204) since i'm trying to get an idea of differences in that specific configuration.

any help is appreciated as always

Twinfan

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 10528
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2010, 07:27:41 AM »
Jumpered JTM-style plexis are thicker than 800s in my experience, and I think the 1987/1959s are too.  As well as cascading the channels for more gain, there are circuit differences which make the JCM800 tone brighter and better suited to more gain....

gwEm

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 7456
    • http://www.preromanbritain.com/gwem
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2010, 08:39:02 AM »
I'm interested in this as well. I've always fancied a plexi with PPIMV, the tone on so many classic albums has been a plexi of course. I have a 2204 which I love, but sometimes the grass seems greener ;)
Quote from: AndyR
you wouldn't use the meat knife on crusty bread but, equally, the serrated knife and straight edge knife aren't going to go through raw meat as quickly

hunter

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 5262
    • http://www.myspace.com/christophjaeger
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2010, 08:55:21 AM »

JCM800 will stay tighter and has more gain to start with, so if you're after saturation/compression, with a Plexi it comes together with a loose low end. This however gives a 3D/spacial quality on clean-ish tones that is hard to achieve with an 800.
Plexis stay more intact on a 100W, but this will rip your head off if you come to a volume that creates overdrive.

The tones of 800s and 1987/1959 are quite different, but you could play either amp with a few pedals for many different styles and they would sound authentic. Both amps will only compress at ear crushing volumes.
Tweaker's Paradise - Player's nightmare.

Zaned

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 497
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #4 on: August 26, 2010, 09:32:00 AM »
A 1987 with a good quality treble booster..that's what I'd like to get to try  8)

-Zaned
Paths are for followers.

Dmoney

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 3577
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2010, 10:25:36 AM »
thanks guys.
that has helped me decide a few things.

the 1987X in the vid I saw sounded heavier than I expected. There are other 1959 vids around with dimed and linked channels sounded cool, but maybe not quite saturated enough even at the maximum for me. although I don't want 5150 style gain.


PPPMAT

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2010, 01:09:15 PM »
The JMP50 is the smoothest sounding, the 100w superlead has a bit more grind to it. I had a great plexi that Martin made me and that didn't need jumpering (is that a word?) it was as thick as you like on the bright input. This was however at pretty much full volume (with powerscaling).

The 800s have that upper mids sizzle that Marshalls are well known for and are a tighter sound. Not necessarily gainier but tighter.

Early Van Halen = plexi sound

Dmoney

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 3577
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2010, 01:11:26 PM »
that van halen plexi had a LOT going on though right?

im not that into van halen

HTH AMPS

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 5649
    • HTH AMPS
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2010, 03:06:09 PM »
The channel linking doesn't really give you any more gain, its just a tonal thing allowing you to balance the bass and treble channels.  I find that I can use a plexi set for crunch and add a nice OD pedal to get anything I need - it allows you to have nicer cleans too and I need that versatility playing in covers bands.

I don't agree that plexis have a loose low end either, thats never been my experience - JTM45s maybe, but not plexis (1987 and 1959).

I've recorded a clip one of my 100w heads that uses the hi/lo inputs to select between plexi/2203 circuits showing what kind of tone I'm getting from the plexi input with the gain on 8 and the master volume at bedroom level (not even on 1).  I've used my new toy to get some additional overdrive (bet nobody can guess what it is).  Follow the link on my signature if you want to check it out.


PPPMAT

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2010, 07:42:09 PM »
that van halen plexi had a LOT going on though right?

im not that into van halen

Well all I can tell you is that the one I had would get pretty close to VH levels of gain with a hot pickup going through it. Legend has it that Eddies mythical recording head is stock but where Eddie is concerned you never know. Variacs etc etc

I love plexis and also 800 tones but they are a different take on a similar theme and both need power amp distortion to sing

Dmoney

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 3577
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2010, 07:51:07 PM »
that van halen plexi had a LOT going on though right?

im not that into van halen

Well all I can tell you is that the one I had would get pretty close to VH levels of gain with a hot pickup going through it. Legend has it that Eddies mythical recording head is stock but where Eddie is concerned you never know. Variacs etc etc

I love plexis and also 800 tones but they are a different take on a similar theme and both need power amp distortion to sing

cheers man,
thats a big help.

yeah i saw some CRAZY mods that EVH used to do to some marshall, like... insane. i dunno!
i once found a crazy looking thing he did where he bridged the primaries on the output transformer with high power resistors.
i can't remember where...

i just found it...

http://www.twistyneck.net/cm.html

insane

PPPMAT

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: 1987X vs 2204
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2010, 08:15:39 PM »
that van halen plexi had a LOT going on though right?

im not that into van halen

Well all I can tell you is that the one I had would get pretty close to VH levels of gain with a hot pickup going through it. Legend has it that Eddies mythical recording head is stock but where Eddie is concerned you never know. Variacs etc etc

I love plexis and also 800 tones but they are a different take on a similar theme and both need power amp distortion to sing

cheers man,
thats a big help.

yeah i saw some CRAZY mods that EVH used to do to some marshall, like... insane. i dunno!
i once found a crazy looking thing he did where he bridged the primaries on the output transformer with high power resistors.
i can't remember where...

i just found it...

http://www.twistyneck.net/cm.html

insane

The thing is he has a cast iron reputation for lying about his gear and how he gets his sound to throw people off the scent. If you go onto Youtube and search for Metroupolis or metro amps (plexis) there are some great examples of plexi tone at its best