The Marshall SL-5. Or, 'How Marshall Are Missing A Guaranteed Seller'

HT986M2

I've had a couple of Marshalls in the past.  I had a DSL40C for a couple of years, but it never sounded great at lower volumes.  The clean channel was great, but the drive channels had the ever-present Marshall Fizz™ when the master was low.

I then borrowed a DSL20H for a month while a friend was away.  Much better sound for low volumes, but still not perfect.  Plus it had a very prominent pop-type noise when switching channels.  I then tried a DSL5C in a shop, but the 10" speaker made it sound pretty 'meh'.

So in my continued hunt for the home Marshall, I picked up an SL-5 a couple of months ago.  I missed it when it was released, but something popped up in my feed that reminded me about it.  Once I'd found a seller actually willing to ship one it was on the way.   Having now spent a couple of months with it, I must say it's really fucking great.  The 1-watt mode is killer and you can get that full Marshall sound at a volume which isn't annoying the neighbours.  It's essentially a Jubilee at non-gig volumes.

It's still loud, mind you.  You won't be cranking it while other people are watching TV in the other room.  Some may be annoyed at the lack of effects loop, but the built-in reverb actually makes it a really good 'pick up and go' amp.

It's made me realise that Marshall are really missing a trick by not having a high quality, switchable 1w/5w, 12" combo with a good speaker in their standard line-up.  If you added an effect loop it'd sell bucket loads to home players.  

I guess my question is, why isn't Marshall putting out good quality, low wattage combos?  

ecc83

Perhaps they feel it has already been done by Blackstar with their HT-5?

I know not everyone is keen on the Five's sound but I think it continues to sell well. Then, many people do not like the sound of a cathode biased, single ended EL84/6V6. The HT-5 is a fixed biased, push pull 'class B' triode OP stage and so Marshall would almost be forced to copy that?

Dave.

ICBM

Marshall are missing a trick by not putting good speakers in the vast majority of their amps… ie not even using decent 12”s, as well as 10”s in a lot of combos which need 12”s.

I know full well that the speaker is usually the most expensive single component in a combo - especially a low-powered one - but penny-pinching on it does no-one much good.

stickyfiddle

HT986M2 said:

 
I guess my question is, why isn't Marshall putting out good quality, low wattage combos?  

Tbh there are loads of things Marshall could have done yonks ago and haven't cottoned on to. 

- Switchable JTM/SLP in a single box
- Tonemaster-style anything. Make it look like a Bluesbreaker but not weigh a house.
- Desktop thing that works like a THR but looks like a Marshall 
- updated versions of the pedals they reissued recently with sensible switchable mods (noting that those reissues were also 5-10 years behind the curve)
- full-stack sized fridge/freezer (not joking!) 

Kalimna

stickyfiddle said:

HT986M2 said:

 
I guess my question is, why isn't Marshall putting out good quality, low wattage combos?  

Tbh there are loads of things Marshall could have done yonks ago and haven't cottoned on to. 

- Switchable JTM/SLP in a single box
- Tonemaster-style anything. Make it look like a Bluesbreaker but not weigh a house.
- Desktop thing that works like a THR but looks like a Marshall 
- updated versions of the pedals they reissued recently with sensible switchable mods (noting that those reissues were also 5-10 years behind the curve)
- full-stack sized fridge/freezer (not joking!) 

I would buy that fridge in a heartbeat. 

noisepolluter

ICBM said:

Marshall are missing a trick by not putting good speakers in the vast majority of their amps… ie not even using decent 12”s, as well as 10”s in a lot of combos which need 12”s.

I know full well that the speaker is usually the most expensive single component in a combo - especially a low-powered one - but penny-pinching on it does no-one much good.

Once the current DSL40 has a Creamback H in it, I think it actually sounds better for classic rock stuff than the JVM 2xx does. 

ecc83

I don't know what the current 12 is in the HT-5 IC, if you know does it meet your exacting standards?

We have been here before of course. Low power, sub 10W say amps, tend to be simple 'starter' amps and so the newb punter is not likely to pay for a £100 speaker. Your average teen will be over the moon with a Rocket 50 until he hears better!

The HT-5 is of course neither simple nor cheap so it deserves a decent speaker. I always thought the original ten was not too foul?

Meant to say, they could produce a 5W ish amp with two 84s or 6V6s strapped as triodes but that would be a bit of daft, inefficient and expensive engineering IMHO?

Dave.

HT986M2

I do appreciate the Blackstar HT-5 is a thing, but I do think the £520 RRP is high for what you get there.  Which is essentially a PCB amp with dubious repairability and a non-branded speaker.  

I think if Marshall released a two-channel, 5-watt combo with an effects loop (with maybe two different 12" Celestion speaker choices) around the £700-£800 mark I think they'd sell loads and potentially take a chunk of Blackstar's market share.

The Origin 20 retails at about £599.  Lower the wattage, add a bit more gain, a branded 12" speaker.  So I don't think with those changes that pricing would be that far out.

Yorkie

The DSL40c is a good example of what @ICBM has mentioned. The stock Seventy/80 makes the Presence control practically unusable, as it needs to be on zero all the time to avoid the worst side of the speaker; you can get a usable sound out of it, but a Creamback basically completes the amp, allowing you to use the full range of the Presence control with no nasties, and focusing the 'bumblebee bass' the stock speaker and cab combination produces. Add the C19 mod to it and you get an utterly mindblowing amp for the money. 

Jon

HT986M2

Yorkie said:

The DSL40c is a good example of what @ICBM has mentioned. The stock Seventy/80 makes the Presence control practically unusable, as it needs to on zero to avoid the worst side of the speaker; you can get a usable sound out of it, but a Creamback basically completes the amp, allowing you to use the full range of the Presence control with no nasties, and focusing the 'bumblebee bass' the stock speaker and cab combination produces. Add the C19 mod to it and you get an utterly mindblowing amp for the money. 

Jon

What's the C19 mod?

Sporky

I wonder if an FRFR ministack would be popular with the modeller crowd? Like the MG15CFXMS looks-wise. 

Yorkie

HT986M2 said:

Yorkie said:

The DSL40c is a good example of what @ICBM has mentioned. The stock Seventy/80 makes the Presence control practically unusable, as it needs to on zero to avoid the worst side of the speaker; you can get a usable sound out of it, but a Creamback basically completes the amp, allowing you to use the full range of the Presence control with no nasties, and focusing the 'bumblebee bass' the stock speaker and cab combination produces. Add the C19 mod to it and you get an utterly mindblowing amp for the money. 

Jon

What's the C19 mod?

It involves getting rid of the C19 treble-bleed cap on the DSL40C. C19 allows high frequencies to bypass the gain pot on the 'ultra gain' channel, causing i) a volume jump when you switch between channels and ii) a harshness in the sound, made worse by the stock Seventy/80. There are some videos you can check out on Ytb, particularly one where they compare different caps and no cap in that position; to me, the best sound is by far with no cap, probably because it gives the overdrive a familiar vintage-y feel. Other people will of course disagree and that's fine.

Jon

FelineGuitars

Good thread.

I think amp companies need to accept that most of their fans are not destined to be playing a big venue but maybe have money for a well featured /great sounding  low volume device that is properly authentic and versatile tone wise.

I always thought that Bad Cat's "the Paw" looked promising but it too seemed to disappear - was that a reliability issue?

It seemed to have it all going on including IR loading etc

What about a master volume control that has a WIDE scope of really lower volumes and only gets properly loud around 7 or 8 rather than being too loud at 2

ICBM

Yorkie said:

The DSL40c is a good example of what @ICBM has mentioned. The stock Seventy/80 makes the Presence control practically unusable, as it needs to on zero to avoid the worst side of the speaker; you can get a usable sound out of it, but a Creamback basically completes the amp, allowing you to use the full range of the Presence control with no nasties, and focusing the 'bumblebee bass' the stock speaker and cab combination produces.

I've often thought that amps like this may be prototyped with a decent speaker, then the company accountants get involved at the manufacturing stage and decide they can't afford that, so in goes something cheaper and tone be damned.

A classic example was the old DSL201 combo - with the stock speaker, in order to get anything even halfway decent out of it the EQ needed to be set to extremes, the two channels completely differently from each other, and they still couldn't be made to match properly. But replace the G12E-50 'tin frisbee' with a Greenback, set all the knobs to 12 o'clock and it immediately sounded not only great on both channels, but the two channels sounded just like a clean and dirty version of the same sound. This can't be a coincidence I don't think.

Yorkie

ICBM said:

This can't be a coincidence I don't think.

This of course can't be taken as evidence, but back in the day Sweetwater in the US sold the 'DSL40CST', which was a DSL40C with... a Creamback. 

ecc83

"I've often thought that amps like this may be prototyped with a decent speaker, then the company accountants get involved at the manufacturing stage and decide they can't afford that, so in goes something cheaper and tone be damned."

Sometimes, at least once to my knowledge, it is the speaker that is specified first and yes, for cost reasons.

Then the amp designer has to perform the magic " Silk purse.Sow's ear" trick or at least try to 'voice' some of the ***t out of the cone!

End of day of course, if amps don't make profits you quickly have no amps.

Dave.

ICBM

ecc83 said:

Sometimes, at least once to my knowledge, it is the speaker that is specified first and yes, for cost reasons.

Then the amp designer has to perform the magic " Silk purse.Sow's ear" trick or at least try to 'voice' some of the ***t out of the cone!

At least that's likely to produce better results .

ecc83 said:

End of day of course, if amps don't make profits you quickly have no amps.

Of course, but I think it can be counterproductive to try to make the amp cheap at the expense of crippling it. Put it up against a worse amp with a better speaker in the shop, and the buyer will probably leave with the worse amp, even if it costs slightly more.

Companies like Marshall also know that the name on the front is halfway to selling the amp before you even start, so they can get away with penny-pinching on the speaker...

Yorkie

Also traditionally not helped by its main competitor in that ballpark (HRD) shipping with Seventy/80 too... now they're doing A-type (HRD IV) and V-type (DSL40CR), which some people think are better – as always, depends who you ask. 

noisepolluter

Yorkie said:

ICBM said:

This can't be a coincidence I don't think.

This of course can't be taken as evidence, but back in the day Sweetwater in the US sold the 'DSL40CST', which was a DSL40C with... a Creamback. 

I suppose if you raise the spec of the DSL beyond a certain point you start to encroach on JVM territory. Shame, as I think a DSL40 with a ply cab and side handles, Creamback speaker and tweaked reverb with 6 button footswitch included would be an absolute smasher. 

 (And a head version, obvs…)

ICBM

Yorkie said:

Also traditionally not helped by its main competitor in that ballpark (HRD) shipping with Seventy/80 too... now they're doing A-type (HRD IV) and V-type (DSL40CR), which some people think are better – as always, depends who you ask. 

I think they are better, although I'm not a fan of the V-Type. The A-type is good, and far better in the HRD. Still not as good as a Jensen or most of the Eminence US-voiced models though... why Fender seem to be constantly trying to make their amps less 'Fendery' I don't know. Even the old brown-label Eminence-made Fender Special Design in the Mk I and II was better than the Seventy/80.

Yorkie

noisepolluter said:

Shame, as I think a DSL40 with a ply cab and side handles, Creamback speaker and tweaked reverb with 6 button footswitch included would be an absolute smasher. 

What would plywood improve upon the current DSL cab? More durability? 

Personally I don’t have anything against these MDF cabs, at least in terms of sound. In fact, my Bandit (plywood cab) sounded fuller through the DSL40C’s speaker and cab (both cabs had a Seventy/80 at the time). 

Jon