50 YEARS OF LOUD (2012)

In 2012 I was lucky enough to discuss with Marshall's senior engineers several times regarding the legendary company's 50th anniversary. I'm still grateful to Santiago Alvarez, Steve Dawson, and Jonathan Langstaff for the opportunity.

SANTIAGO ALVAREZ

In the last couple of years Marshall produced some significantly different amplifier series. The JVM is a true flagship amongst them, yet one of the most popular Marshall products these days. Initially what was your goal when you started to design this fantastic line?

When I was tasked with the project there was a project brief requesting a multichannel amplifier to follow the TSL series. By that time the JCM2000 TSL/DSL series were already aging but actually the JVMs aren’t based on the JCM2000s, they are based on the JCM800 2203. My main goal was to design a guitar amplifier with enough gain out of the box so the player wouldn’t need to use external boosters or performing circuit modifications.

Can we say that the JVM is the traditional answer to the challenge of the 21st century amplifier building? Some people say it's the logical consequence of the JCM 2000 TSL series... Do you agree with them?

Well, I think the JVM seen as an amplifier is quite a traditional circuit, as traditional or even more traditional than a JCM2000. There is nothing exotic or massively different to any typical amplifier. What made it different and much more flexible is the way of controlling the channel switching. Instead of a traditional logic circuit we implemented all the switching with a microcontroller. We needed a microcontroller anyway as we wanted to have MIDI capabilities so it was quite straightforward to use that micro as a complete amplifier control.

By doing this we were able to offer many more options which with traditional logic control would have been quite complicated. This is how we could implement all the 3 modes per channel plus the 1-wire footswitch and still keep the circuitry relatively simple. Should we have used traditional switching probably the JVM would have had just the 4 channels without modes and with a multipin footswitch connection.

A few years ago I was lucky enough to discuss with Joe Satriani about the JVM series. He was so delighted about it, and now he has his own signature JVM. What are the most significant differences between his brand new signature amp and the stock models? (His previous JVMs were initially modded if I'm right...)

The amplifier format is the same as a standard JVM410: 4 channels with three modes per channel, double master, FX loop, line output, etc but then all the channels and features have been “refurbished” to Joe’s request and the reverbs, which Joe doesn’t use have been replaced with a noise gate based on the Kerry King’s one.

The Clean green is now his loved Marshall 30^th Anniversary clean and the orange and red have been made cleaner than in the original JVM410.

In the Crunch channel we went closer to what the standard 2203 is and then we added some of the Slash AFD100 personality. I cannot say that it is the 100% same as the AFD circuit though as it would have been complicated to combine all the modes together. This channel has been a favourite of Joe since we implemented and he uses it quite often.

OD1 and OD2 are now identical and based on the original JVM410H OD1 but with a bit less gain. Joe wanted something less compressed than the original JVMs so we reduced the gains a little bit. There is plenty of gain still, Joe wants the gain too, but not as much as before and the gain controls are more responsive too.

We also added a Mid-Shift feature so both OD channels can sound like OD2 in the original JVMs. Joe doesn’t use those scooped sounds that much but he wanted to have those type of sounds available should any player want to use them.

We then modified the FX loop being now a much more simple series loop with return level. Feedback in the power amp is different as well, we added a choke in the power supply and reduced the filtering too. It has been a bit of all around little retouches.

Joe’s first JVMs were 100% standard ones and he was using JVM210H models. Later on, once we started to see if we could develop an amplifier together and decided what type of amplifier it would be is when we began to modify amps for him. I think the 1^st time using modified JVMs was when he recorded his last solo album but the first Chickenfoot tour was with standard 2 channel JVMs.

How was the developing process? Has your ideas matched with Joe's initial vision for the first time?

Working with Joe is a pleasure, he is extremely enthusiastic about what he does, he has very good ear and he is one hell of a guitar player. Furthermore he is very articulate explaining what he wants which is somehow the most complicated part when designing an amplifier for someone else, specially when there wasn’t a specific amplifier he wanted to base his requests on. He is really good explaining what he hears and feels and then is my job as a designer to translate and try to address his requests but he has made my job quite easy.

We met first by October 2009 summer in New York where we sat with a JVM410 and a guitar and started discussing how and why the JVM was designed as it was and what Joe’s view of it was. Since then we’ve been playing around with modified JVMs until we got to where Joe wanted to be. Sometimes he was proposing ideas, sometimes it was me who could be giving suggestions... It has been a collaborative project, not Joe dictating and me implementing. Was a very enjoyable project.

Critics usually mentioned that Marshall's signature products are produced in very limited numbers. Why is so important for the company? What about this particular Satriani model?

As far as I know the JVM410HJS won’t be limited like some other amps were. I honestly cannot give an answer on why production numbers are limited, that’s something that doesn’t depend on me… In any case and  from a design point of view the number of produced units doesn’t make any difference for these kind of products

You have also designed signature models for other guitar heroes, like Yngwie and Slash. As far as the YJM model, this one is already called by many the "new holy grail" - thanks to its unique features. It has an adjustable power attenuation, so the distinct Plexi characteristic cuts through even in low volume environment, effects loop, built in noise gate, mid boost and reverb. I don't think this one could have been better... What are your thoughts about it?

Well, like in most of the signature projects, the artist has very clear what he wanted. Yngwie had the features decided from the first meeting including “a master volume after the power amplifier” and this is the amp for which we designed our power attenuation circuitry. Incidentally the AFD100 reached the market first, but the first amp with that circuitry is the YJM.

Was it easy to work with Yngwie? Rumors can be heard he is a difficult guy due to his strong

personality. What was your impression about him?

Yngwie has been one of my favorites guitar players and working with him was quite easy and fun. I understand that people may have a prejudiced view of him but since the first day we met I realised it wasn’t the case. I actually was a bit weary before meeting him as I only knew him like everyone else and I didn’t know what to expect but he has been treating me like a friend all the time, invited me to his home and April (wife and manager) and himself were treating all of us and me personally extremely well.

I think he is being misunderstood many times, or he still carries his fame from the 80s or whatever… He is very passionate and says what he thinks, he has no problem speaking his opinions but I have had no problem whatsoever with him. I do hope I can work with him again.

Slash's latest signature model, the AFD100 wears your handprints as well. Was it difficult to re-create the tone of that particular Plexi he used during the recording of the classic Appetite For Destruction record? Have you got the chance to take a look at the schematics of that amp owned by S.I.R. Rental?

I’ve been following the AFD amplifier history since the late 90s when I started having access to the dejanews over the internet, those old text-only forums. When I was given the project I knew already where to start but no, I haven’t had a look at the SIR schematics, I don’t think they exist anyway and nobody knows where the amp is either.

What I had was access to the master recordings track by track of a couple of AFD songs (nighttrain and sweet child of mine) so I could compare my designs to the original sounds. I also had full access to his modified JCM800, the one called #34, and I drew the schematics from that one by myself and finally we included those tones in the AFD100 amplifier.

Then the final tuning was done with Slash recording the amp and playing some prototypes live until he was satisfied. I’d not say it was “difficult” but it was definitely challenging plus all the media coverage of the project added a bit of pressure as well.

The 2203KK is based on the good old JCM800 line. Kerry King is a long time Marshall guy, so how big is the difference between this signature model and those amps what he used throughout the years? How did you reach that huge gain level what is necessary for him making Slayer music - without sacrificing the tone?

The 2203KK is an standard JCM800 2203 with an added booster and gate fitted with KT88 output valves. Kerry’s 2203 are completely stock, no modifications at all, and the he was using a 15 bands EQ as booster and a noise gate.

Kerry sent us one of his equalisers with his settings dialed in and we extracted the frequency response of it to develop a booster with those characteristics. Instead of a complicated 15 bands circuitry we ended with a rather simple solid state circuitry that replicated the response of the original graphic EQ.

We also designed a noise gate that would be fast enough to mute the amps in the fastest Slayer songs without artifacts like pumping or breathing. We ended with a studio type expander with variable attack and release times. The gate was the trickiest part of the amp and we keep using the same basic timing specs (variable attack and release specifications) in the YJM and JVM-JS amps.

Contrarily to what most people may think, the 2203KKs are not mega high gain, a JVM has more gain for example. Too much gain would blur the pick attacks and remove part of the guitar dynamics. Then Kerry uses active pickups and a 20dB booster sometimes as well but the amount of gain the amp is designed with is the same as you could achieve with any overdrive pedal in front of a JCM800.

It has a unique feature as well, the AFD circuit. Could you please tell us what is it exactly? Since its introduction, the AFD circuit was used in other amps as well if I'm right...

In very short and somehow bluntly, the AFD circuit is to an extra gain stage to a JCM2203 type of amp. Whoever know those circuits, the AFD will be adding another 10k cathode stage after the existing one.

We haven’t used the AFD circuit as is in any production amp by now but parts of Satriani’s JVM are based on those circuits. The AFD amp is not too high gain as per current standards but has some interesting tone qualities that Joe liked.

In any case, a circuit like the high gain JVM channels is not too far from what an AFD could be… they are all based in JCM800s with an added gain stage. Several amps from other manufacturers are also based on this kind of circuitry.

Marshall celebrates it's 50th anniversary right now. Because of that every decade has been represented with a 1 watt mini amp. Have you been involved in the developing process?

I have designed the DSL-1 and the JVM-1. Both are basically the original model preamp with a 1watt push-pull power amplifier and and L-pad power attenuator for the 0.1W mode.

Finally, could you please tell us what could be the secret of Marshall's never ending success?

Hmmmm…. My opinion is that Marshall became an icon as the amplifier of rock’n roll specially during and after the 80s and that makes the brand very powerful as a brand and a reference Then the company has the difficult task and responsibility of putting amplifiers in the market worth of wearing that name.

STEVE DAWSON

As a design engineer, what's your main role at the company?

My role within the company is to turn new product proposals into reality by designing the electronic circuits that will be the foundation of the project. During development I will manipulate and refine the sound of the amplifier until I am happy and up-issue the circuit during debug of prototypes if there are any problems that come to light along the way.

Could you remember which was the first Marshall product development you were involved in?

Yes, my first project was the 40th anniversary JTM45/100. A very rare amplifier of which there were only about 10 or 12 made back in late 1965 for 'The Who'. Very difficult to track down these days but we did find one in Sweden. It differs from the more familiar JTM45/100 in that it used two 50W output stages to attain the 100W asked for. The extension cabinet was originally an 8 x 12" although we kindly made it into two 4 x 12" for the reissue and that is why only one cabinet bears the Marshall logo.

Let's talk about the Vintage Modern series. As I proudly use this particular amp, I think this one perfectly utilizes the beloved vintage Marshall tone with modern features. What was your initial goal when you started to design this line?

Congratulations! You are obviously a tone connoisseur ;¬) The proposal from Marshall at the time was for an amp that eventually became the JVM (Santiago's project). However, I suggested that such a comprehensive multi channel amplifier would not suit everybody, especially players my age, and we needed to add another range that catered for the 'old school' players.

I decided to make the JTM series from the 1960s the platform on which I would base the Vintage Modern Series because I had been working on the JTM45/100 and straight after the Super100JH, both JTMs. Also the JTMs had never been evolved any further than their original format! My aim was quite simple really. I wanted to make a vintage toned Marshall amp that had the largest dynamic range available, all accessible from the guitar's volume pot alone - clean to full on overdrive! No presets, just organic control from the player which would also reflect the player's identity of touch and tone and feel.

The FX loop was included as a useful 'modern' feature and a reverb was installed at the request of the company although to be honest I never believed it needed reverb.

The Vintage Modern is equipped with KT66 power tubes, rather than the more conventional EL34s. Why did you go this way?

As indicated above, the Vintage Modern was heavily based on the JTM period which used KT66 output valves. EL34s did not get used until around 1968 with the introduction of the JMP amp which was a different beast.

It's a single channel amp with two dynamic ranges. For me the low dynamic range sounds like a Plexi, while the high dynamic range could produce a chunkier, let's say, hot rodded JMP-1 sound. Do you agree? To be honest, I was quite surprised and impressed by the amount of gain on the high dynamic range. Plenty of gain there with amazing sustain, so I don't need to boost the amp with an overdrive pedal even when it's time for soloing!

The low dynamic range was added later in development because I found that very hot pickups would not clean up easily when in high dynamic range. So the low dynamic range equates to turning your guitar volume down to 2 or 3 when in the high range. I guess the gain level is similar to a Plexi and yes the high dynamic range gives a hot rodded Plexi but everything is based on the JTM tone.

The unique Body and Detail controls work really great. Where did this idea come from to adjust the amount of gain with two controls, divided to lower and higher frequency registers?

This is where I got a little creative actually. I never liked the JCM800 because it only sounded good with a Les Paul or other humbucker equipped guitar in my opinion. I play a Strat and could never dial in enough bottom and lower mid for the kind of sound I like. So, the Body, Detail and Mid Boost button are included to give far more tonal flexibility than is usually found on a Marshall amp's gain control. By judicious use of these three controls you can dial in a good sound with any type of guitar no matter what the pickups, then simply fine tune with the EQ section.

Marshall amps were always famous for their thick, "in-your-face" midrange growl. The Vintage Modern has tons of midrange, thanks to the incredibly effective mid boost function, though this one can't be controlled by footswitch. What's the reason behind that?

The Mid Boost button was intended purely for selecting the best setting to suit the guitar being played into the amp at the time depending what sound the player was after. At the time I never envisaged it as a performance function that would need to be controlled while playing. However, other people have since expressed their desire for the ability to have it switchable!

As far as the combo version of the Vintage Modern, its back is almost fully covered. Is it important tone-wise?

It wasn't intentional but it's easier to get through safety approvals if there is no access to the valves for young children etc. If we have an open back design then we must add a special cage that covers the valves adding to the expense. I guess some players remove the metal grille section to make it open back if they prefer the sound that way. 

Some of the world's premier lead guitarists, such as Doug Aldrich, Paul Gilbert and Slash use the Vintage Modern. Does they play stock models or would rather use custom "modded" versions? What kind of feedback did you recieved from them regarding the sound, playability, etc.?

They all use stock models. Nobody so far has asked for any modifications. The feedback is usually about the fact that the Vintage Modern lets them sound like themselves and allows them to control everything from their hands rather than their feet! The better a player is the less likely he will want to play an amp that 'homogenizes' the tone and makes him/her sound like a million other players regardless of ability or instrument used. The Vintage Modern will highlight the unique identity of a player and every guitar will retain its tonal character. Ben Mathews from 'Thunder' told me he started using guitars he'd more or less stopped using because they didn't sound so good with most other amps. When he plugged them into his Vintage Modern they "came alive and sounded great".

Could you share some useful settings with us? I'm sure most people would be curious for example Paul Gilbert's certain settings.

I can never remember player's settings although they do tell me. Only a few weeks ago Robin Trower told me his settings and I can't remember. This is where the Vintage Modern Forum comes in handy because I usually post the settings in there when I get them as I know people are interested, especially if they are fans of that artist. There is a whole thread dedicated to settings in the Vintage Modern Forum. 

Let's move on to the lovely Class 5 series. I was lucky enough to test one of them and it's really cool! What was the basic concept behind that?

The Class 5 is a means of getting cranked Plexi tones without deafening people. It is also kinder to their backs when carrying it around!

Is the combo modeled right after the Bluesbreaker?

Certainly in cosmetic appearance, but the circuit is not a copy of anything and is quite unique. The power amp is pure Class A which helps to get all that harmonic richness in the sound.

The Class 5 is a non-master volume model. Is the sound harder to handle because of that in your opinion?

In order to get the Class 5 to react like a Plexi there had to be no master volume in the signal path. So in some situations, the amp may be too loud when turned up, but on the other hand it is a lot more manageable than a 50W or 100W.

What kind of players do you recommend this little baby?

Players who want a small recording amp with great Marshall tone. Those who play small intimate gigs in pubs etc. Those guys who used to play years ago then sold their full stacks and only need a smaller amp now. Anyone who loves good tone really. Everyone!

The more affordable MA series also wear your handprints. What should we know about this simple 2 channel tube amp?

The MA series is our way of introducing younger players who don't have a substantial budget to purchase all valve amps. Obviously our flagship pro amps are quite expensive and to some people they are way off the radar for their budget or situation. We just wanted to extend our arm down to give those guys a helping hand who can't justify spending that kind of money for what they do. For the price point the MA does an admirable job and offers clean and crunch channels with a lead boost. Reverb and FX loop are also included. What more could you want!

A few years ago Marshall made this hybrid amp, the JMD-1. I personally know that even Doug Aldrich loves this particular model. How is the modeling preamp section, what kind of presets does it contain?

The JMD preamp was developed in partnership with a company called 'Softube' in Sweden. They have a unique way of capturing not just the sound but the dynamic reaction of analogue valve amps. We were suitably impressed when they demoed a JCM800 digital preamp they had prototyped and we drew up a product brief for the JMD. Because the power amp was to be EL34 based, it made sense to emulate products from our catalogue that also used EL34s in order to keep the sound as close as possible to the analogue counterpart. Thus we have JCM800s, DSLs, JVMs, some crossbreeding of models (which is quite easy to do in the digital domain) and some stand alone preamps like the Guvnor pedal and of course the rack mounted JMP1. All Marshall sounds though, no other brands. For this reason it is truly a Marshall amplifier with a digital preamp and a valve power amp.

It has a real EL34 power section. Sonically could this construction match with the all tube models?

Yes. There is also a resonance circuit with three different settings which are automatically selected by the digital processor depending on which preamp is called up.

Basically what do you think about the modeling technology when it comes to amplifier construction? A lot of players say modeling amps will never sound as good as the good old tube amps...

Most players simply repeat what they read on forums and will condemn the amp without even trying it. It's a shame how people are ready to judge an amp from a Youtube clip where the sound could have been doctored, badly recorded or even not be the product itself making the audio! There is a lot of bigotry out there against progressing technology in this industry and it's silly really. We have plugged players who always play valve amps into the JMD1 and not told them it is digital. They never know the difference and are shocked afterwards when we tell them.

So far your other projects, in 2006 you got the chance to recreate Jimi Hendrix's famous 10 watt full stack. Is this very limited Super 100JH a faithful replica of the original one? Could you please introduce it with details?

The original amp belonged to Rich Dickinson who had bought it in 1971 in Nottingham in England. He brought it into the Marshall factory for verification and it sounded lovely. At the time, we could not confirm 100% that the amp did indeed belong to Jimi but we also could not confirm it didn't. It has since come to light that amps of similar serial numbers are also touted as Jimi's amps so it looks like it was genuine. I investigated and researched Rich's JTM Super100 and faithfully recreated it as our Super100JH even to the point of using the original transformer supplier 'Drake' who still have the original specification docs. The only substantial difference between a stock Super 100 and the Jimi amp was the tone stack was the same as the later JMP amps which is probably why that change was introduced by Marshall. We always listen to artist feedback and if we did any mods on their equipment we felt imnproved it or suited the progressing musical fashion better, it would be implemented on future ranges.

As you already mentioned, you were involved in the reissue process of the JTM45/100. Is it a challenge to recreate such a legendary amp like this?

This was certainly the most difficult to research as there are only a very small amount of genuine ones in the world. I had to consult with Ken Bran, the original engineer back in the 60s, about how to spot fake ones because there are some very clever forgeries. Armed with this info we found a genuine one in Sweden and that is the one I used to reproduce our reissue, again using Drake for the transformers, although the originals would have been RS components.

Marshall celebrates it's 50th anniversary right now. Because of that every decade has been represented with a 1 watt mini amp. You've been involved in the developing process of the 1 watt JMP-1. Could you tell us something about the birth of this little amp?

The 70s is my favourite decade for music and I grew up during this time (I'm now 52 years old). I started playing guitar in 1969 and own a 100W '1959' from 1972 and a 50W '1987' from 1973. I bought them in 1976. Hence I am very familiar with 70s Marshall tone so it was logical that I did the JMP 1W. I based the sound on my 50W 1987 and it worked out very well.

Finally, could you please tell us what could be the secret of Marshall's never ending success?

Well, I can tell you that for me, the iconic look is timeless and commands any stage it stands upon. The sound has so much character and soul that when you play it, it feels like an old friend. It's articulate and never gets in the way of other instruments in terms of sonic territory. Yet it always cuts through and stamps its authority in the mix. Many Marshall players have flirted with other brands and then forget how a good Marshall sounds. Until one day they plug into a Marshall once again and they remember what it's all about!

MARSHALL DSL - JONATHAN LANGSTAFF

When the original DSL was launched way back in 1997, most people said it might be the ultimate Marshall amp. In spite of that, it was retired in 2007. What was the reason behind the resurrection of that particular twin channel monster?

Twin Channel Monster, love that description. We took the opportunity to bring back the DSL when the MA series was due for replacement. The DSL has always been popular, and is found in many backlines and on many stages. We saw we could bring it back and move it into the more affordable price range. Way back when Jim had the shop, he always wanted to make his amps accessible to musicians. Reissuing the DSL is a logical extension of Jim's principles.

Is the new line based on the original DSL?

The new line is based very much on the original DSL. The control side (foot switching, channel changing etc.) is new, on the sonic side it IS the DSL. The 100W head is based on the original 100W head, the 40W combo is based on the DSL 50W combo 1923 (Jim's 85th birthday amp).

What was your main role during the designing process?

My role on the product was the Design Engineer. We start a product with a document, the brief, which states what we want to end up with. My job is to turn that into an amp. Most of the work is electronics. What is most important is the excellent team we have here, their hard work and dedication is what makes my role possible. The extensive testing, re-testing and their tireless chasing for the best result is what makes this an amplifier to be proud of.

Compared to the old DSLs, was it challenging to improve the features?

This was a project with a very clear purpose. We all know the DSL well, so what it should sound and feel like was straight forward. The reverb was the main thing we changed sonically, we felt that was somewhere we could make an improvement. On the control side, I'd worked previously on the DSL and TSL in 2004 when we overhauled the control side due to a change in regulations, so I already knew what I wanted to do. What we learned from the MA helped us to.

Could you please introduce the most important technical details and features of each models?

All the amplifiers share the same preamp, the original DSL100 pre amp, so I shall concentrate on the power amp side. On all the power amps the Deep switch is now a pot, to allow for finer control. There is also a Pentode/Triode switch to change the output stage configuration. This is from the 25th Anniversary model 2555. The question was asked could we add power reduction to the amp with increasing the cost too much, I'd recently found in a store room the prototype for Slash's 2555 STD (our first signature amp), and restored it to working order. Those amps had the Pentode/Triode switch, and that where the idea to use it came from.

The 100W is the same 4xEL34 power amp as the original DSL. The 40W combo power amp is the power amp from the original DSL50W. The DSL15C and DSL15H have a totally new power amp, designed to feel and play like the larger models.

What was the reason you guys decided to use 6V6 power tubes in the 15W models instead of the more conventional EL84s?

It's really about the tone. The original JCM2000 DSL series had two amps, DSL401 and DSL201, which used the EL84 power valve. I do love the sound of this valve in our 1974 and 1974X in a mode we call cathode bias (and with no global feedback) but I couldn't get the EL84 in any mode to sound right for, as you describe it, a "Twin channel Monster". From the 6V6 I could get the sound and feel of the larger units, at a lower wattage.

I just tested thew 40W combo and was totally floored... The clean channel is so full and sweet, one of the best clean tone I've ever heard from Marshall! Was it modeled after some vintage Marshalls?

The clean channel pre amp is the clean channel pre amp from the original DSL100. The clean channel uses almost all of the pre-amp valve stages to create a harmonically rich clean sound, which is the signature of that channel. What makes the complete sound is of course the cabinet and speaker as well, all must work together. This is where the great team we have here allows us the change dimensions of cabinets and components of speakers repeatedly until we reach the sound we are after.

The distorted channel is incredibly flexible - it could provide almost everything from AC/DC-like crunch to smooth high gain saturation. What was you goal with that?

I believe the success of the original DSL and the reason it is so wide spread is its flexibility. A working musician can really benefit from being able to produce a range of tones with just one amp. The goal with that was to keep it the same, whilst improving other vital factors such as reliability, longevity etc.

There are two different dynamic ranges on both channels, similar to the Vintage Modern series (I'm a proud VM player, it's a killer amp too, credit has to go to Steve Dawson!), and also there is the Tone Shift option for various mid-range settings. Could you tell me something about these features as well?

Tone Shift - this alters the "slope resistor" and the bass frequency capacitor at the same time. It can be used for a "post scoop" sound, where the EQ is scooped after pre-amp gain has been applied. Again, it adds to the flexibility that is so key to the DSL.
The DSL preamp responds well to the volume control of the guitar, this prevents the user having to tap dance on pedals all night to change the range of sounds available. This is something all Marshalls do well, the typical "Marshall sound" circuits alter their distortion characteristics significantly under different input signal levels. This means there are transition points that you can "play through" or "play under" all from the volume control of the guitar. The DSL blends some of these points from early Marshalls (pre 1980's) with some of the later ones (JCM800 onwards).

This line is out for a few months now. What kind of feedback did you guys receive either from the industry and from the players?

There is a growing sense of pride among us all here about what we did on this project. The numbers are great, and the response is great to. Last year was both a year of celebration for our 50th year, and a year of sadness for the passing of a legendary man, I feel the hard work and dedication we put into this range is a fitting way to honour him.

Who do you recommend the new DSLs?

Short answer, everyone! Try the gain pots at all positions, try the EQ in all positions, crank it up loud. If you are going to have just one or two amps, the flexibility will help. If you are blessed enough to have lots of amps, then this will cover a range of Marshall sounds for you.

MARSHALL SL5 – SANTIAGO ALVAREZ

Who's got the idea to develop this 5 watt combo amplifier and what was the reason behind the construction?

 
The idea came from our previous new product manager, Luke Green, while we were developing the AFD100. Luke presented to me the idea of making a small practice combo based on the AFD100 and then him and myself ironed out the final features. Once a prototype was ready we presented it to Slash who immediately wanted it for practicing in his home.

What was your main goal when you started the designing process?

 
The main goal was to have a small combo amp for practicing or warming up and relatively affordable.

Since the SL5 is so fresh, could you please introduce it to us with all the technical details?
 
The SL5 was actually designed together with the AFD100 but just saw the light this year due to market and 50th anniversary reasons. The SL5 is a two channel 5W class A combo with reverb and a 12” celestion V30 speaker. The power valve is an EL34. Both the V30 and the EL34 are unusual for this kind of power where people may expect an EL84 and a 10” speaker in a smaller package. We have implemented a 1W low power mode.

What kind of characteristics could the SL5 deliver?

Basically it is an AFD100 with low power with a clean channel added.

Was it difficult to reach that sound at this low wattage?

Actually everything came out quite easily and the final amplifier is 99% the same as the first prototype, seems we hit the right spot from the beginning. We need to bear in mind that at that stage we already had the AFD100 sound ready so it was a matter of minor adjustments only. Adding the clean channel was quite painless as well.

As I heard, the SL5 has some kind of power attenuator... Does it make sense to reduce the output power from 5W to 1W to 0.5W?

The SL5 has a pentode/triode mode which with an EL34 operating in class A pentode mode to deliver 5W will go down to 1W when in triode mode.

Which was the trickiest part of the development?

I have to say that this was one of those projects where everything came out OK from the very beginning. I can’t think of any special tricky parts.

 
How do you consider the SL5? A practice amp, or a small recording amp, or what?

Slash uses it in his living room for practicing and also for recording. I’d consider it as a practice/warm up combo. The power should not be enough to play in a band.

 
Is it a limited edition line just like almost all the signature products from Marshall?

It is regular production, not limited.

Who do you recommend the SL5?

Everybody ! Haha. Well, I’d recommend it to whoever needs a small combo amplifier with relatively high gain and a nice clean channel, plug and play type of player. I would recommend everybody to try it despite of not being an Slash fan.

www.marshallamps.com