Members Mesa/Kramer Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Looks like Marshall has reissued and revised the DSL Series (100 watt) Scroll down to Pg 18 http://marshallamps.com/downloads/files/2012-Catalogue-web.pdf They did many upgrades to it that all have been asking for. DSL100H: 100 Watt head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ShaneV2 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 And a 15w version too. Neat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Markdude Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Damnit, all you had to do was have separate EQ for each channel and I would have been all over this. The other stuff is neat but I don't really care. fak u marsal And it already had a mid shift button. I think it was called "tone shift", but it scooped the mids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mesa/Kramer Posted July 15, 2012 Author Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Damnit, all you had to do was have separate EQ for each channel and I would have been all over this. The other stuff is neat but I don't really care.fak u marsalAnd it already had a mid shift button. I think it was called "tone shift", but it scooped the mids. Yes, All they needed was better eq separation for each channel and foot switchable Modes per channel and this would be perfect. Still, cool that they did what they did and didn't just simply re-release the same ole thing again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Markdude Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Yes, All they needed was better eq separation for each channel and foot switchable Modes per channel and this would be perfect.Still, cool that they did what they did and didn't just simply re-release the same ole thing again. Agreed. I'd buy that in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the_gunslinger Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 The 15 watter could be cool. Don't know if I'd buy a 100w head new when there are still plenty of used DSL's out there for cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members satannica Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Who needs a 15w amp? And used DAL100/TSL100s are cheap gems! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members teemuk Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Does it come with one of these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y0UNGBL00D Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Wonder how the reverb sounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Neilrocks25 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 I wish they made the clean and crunch (classic) channel foot switchable But if they have improved lead 1 and 2 this might be on my shopping list. Damnit, all you had to do was have separate EQ for each channel and I would have been all over this. The other stuff is neat but I don't really care. fak u marsal And it already had a mid shift button. I think it was called "tone shift", but it scooped the mids. That's a tsl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Neilrocks25 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Who needs a 15w amp?And used DAL100/TSL100s are cheap gems! Some one who plays classic rock at pub gigs, or for rehearsals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LaXu Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 I bet it still doesn't sound great unless you crank it. That's my #1 beef with most Marshalls. As a former DSL owner, I agree that it would need either separate EQ for both channels or a better balance between the two. From what I can remember the biggest issue was bass. If you had the green channel dialed just right, then the red channel had way too little bottom end. So basically they revised everything that didn't really need revising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NaturalBornBoy Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 What the DSL really needs is separate EQ and switchable modes. In fact, those are the only 'upgrades' it needs IMHO. Everything that Marshall have so called 'upgraded', are just fluff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Riffraff12571 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 So basically they revised everything that didn't really need revising. Definitely in the case of the reverb but if it's bypassable it's fine. The amp was a big seller for Marshall so I'm not surprised they are releasing them again. It was a little lame when they did this a few years ago and only changed the color of the piping. At least they changed a few things this time. The adjustable resonance control instead of the deep switch sounds like an improvement to me. As long as I could dial in a nice rhythm tone and have a hot lead tone a stomp away I would be happy. Wanting more from a Marshall is asking for too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members teemuk Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 ? I never once had a problem with my DSL I have no idea what you are talking about. I see so many touring bands with them and they never have a problem. No sense of humour I see. Not all Bugeras fail either but the fire extinguisher jokes are WAAAAYYY more fitting to these Marshall amps than to those German wonders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Markdude Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 That's a tsl The TSLs sound way different than DSLs. They aren't the same thing with independent EQ/more channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mbarn3065 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Like {censored} I'm sure. The digital reverb in my Vintage Modern sucks. The amp's designer didn't want it but management forced it on him. The digital reverb in my JVM sounds great! The "Vintage Modern's" have a digital plate reverb. It sounds fine for what it is, but if you want a lush reverb you will be disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Neilrocks25 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 No sense of humour I see. Not all Bugeras fail either but the fire extinguisher jokes are WAAAAYYY more fitting to these Marshall amps than to those German wonders. I think you mean the early combo's the heads are fine. I completely trust most Marshall products out of a hundred + gigs I never had 1 fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mbarn3065 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Everything can fail. Marshall has a fine track record, and has and always will be, used by countless touring pros and weekend bar bands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LaXu Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 Yeah it was the DSL combos that had issues (overheating) but the heads were fine, though they're not exactly the epitome of build quality but good enough. I really don't know why Marshall keeps making so many models. You'd think the two channel JVMs would've replaced the DSL by now as they're pretty much what people really wanted when it comes to features. Don't know how they sound tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Neilrocks25 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 The TSLs sound way different than DSLs. They aren't the same thing with independent EQ/more channels. They are not so different, but thats the option for dual tone controls in the JCM2000 range. I am not worried about the dual controls more the switching between clean and classic modes Also I like the look of the joe satriani JVM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mbarn3065 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 .... I like the look of the joe satriani JVM This! I already have a JVM 410H, but the "Joe Satriani JVM" looks very cool! Marshall JVM410H Joe Satriani Edition $2600.00 Joe Satriani Edition Amplifier Head Features: * Modified version of the classic JVM410 amp, voiced to Joe Satriani's tonal specifications * Four noise gates help you dial in a defined tone on every channel * Clean channel is the same design found in the Marshall LM6100 * Orange crunch channel is the same design found in the Marshall JCM800 (2203) * Red crunch channel is similar to the Marshall AFD100 in AFD mode * Overdrive channels sound more dynamic and open, thanks to a re-designed power supply * "Mid Shift" control on OD1 and OD2 shifts the midrange focus for extra tonal versatility * 12AX7 preamp tubes, EL34 power tubes * Footswitch included * MIDI input for configurable switching and control Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members magh8 Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 seperate EQ would have been great but I do like the addition of the resonance.an actually mid shift knob would have also been cool...{censored} the reverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members satannica Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 The TSLs sound way different than DSLs. They aren't the same thing with independent EQ/more channels. No they don't, I've owned the TSL100 and DSL100 multiple times and side by side. The differences are negligible and indistinguishable when EQd more or less the same. If anything, the TSL sounds tighter with the lead channel engaged! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members drewl Posted July 15, 2012 Members Share Posted July 15, 2012 ?I never once had a problem with my DSL I have no idea what you are talking about. I see so many touring bands with them and they never have a problem.Some one who plays classic rock at pub gigs, or for rehearsals. Initially they had a pc board that would break down and become conductive causing the failures pictured, they would burn up!The board was replaced by a better version. Also, they really need to make the modes for each channel footswitchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.