Anyone compared a Marshall dsl to a tsl for tone?

[guittarzzan]

Hi, I'm curious if anyone out there has first hand knowledge of the two amps. Does the Tsl have the same tone as a dsl, but just with another channel or is it a different beast entirely?

 

thanks,

 

Steve

[Blue Strat]

I seem to remember trying a TSL once, but I don't particularly like them. They're harder to dial in, IMO. That's because there are too many knobs on them. You only need 5 to 6 knobs on a high gain amp:

 

1) gain

2) bass

3) mids

4) treble

5) master volume

6) presence (optional)

 

The DSL has all of that and more. There's a boost on the crunch channel, so you already have a three channel amp in the DSL. The TSL is overkill, IMO.

 

Try them both out if you get the chance. I'm a JCM 800 2204 (the 50W head) guy myself, though the DSL has a little more gain.

[strat0124]

I second what Bluestrat said, especially about the 800 series. Far superior in tone in my humble opinion. I don't see much difference in the two amps of the JCM2000 series. The tone is sooooo similar. And I agree, way too many knobs. Give me a 50 watter or a JTM45 anyday.....these George Jetson amps don't do it for me.

[Tedster]

I've got a TSL. I like it just fine. Got a heckuva deal on it.

[Blue Strat]

Originally posted by Geenard Skeenard:

I second what Bluestrat said, especially about the 800 series. Far superior in tone in my humble opinion. I don't see much difference in the two amps of the JCM2000 series. The tone is sooooo similar. And I agree, way too many knobs. Give me a 50 watter or a JTM45 anyday.....these George Jetson amps don't do it for me.

DOn't get me wrong, the DSL-50 is an awesome amp! I really like the fact that you can get a little more gain and also that you can simply hit a switch to change channels (something the JCM 800 needed). The DSL-50's are awesome! If I had the money, I would own a DSL-50 along with my home-brew JCM-800's.

[michael saulnier]

I've found the DSL's to have a more "classic" Marshall sound than the TSL's do.

 

My brother has a TSL 100 and it's cool, but can be a bit buzzy on the highest gain channel. To me, "buzz" isn't the sound I want.

 

As always, these amps tend to sound different/better at louder volumes. The last times I saw Jeff Beck, he was using DSL 50's I believe... and with his playing, sounded as good as you could possible want.

 

But he clearly had them turned up LOUD.

 

guitplayer

[doc taz]

Originally posted by guitplayer:

As always, these amps tend to sound different/better at louder volumes. The last times I saw Jeff Beck, he was using DSL 50's I believe... and with his playing, sounded as good as you could possible want.

 

But he clearly had them turned up LOUD.

 

guitplayer

Jeff Beck probably uses as little preamp gain as possible, so he can get his tone cooking when things hit the power stage. Perhape this is sort of the same technique he used when he played with Les Pauls, the original RAT pedal (or whatever distortion pedal), and SLP 50's.

[revolead]

I was actually curious on this topic myself. From observation, I agree the TSL does seem like overkill. I'd assume save the money and get a pedal or something. (You smell GAS?)

The DSL combo I tried does seem to give a more natural tone at 40 watts. The only thing I wish it had was a little more clean headroom, but the clean channel on that little DSL401 is far superior to any of the heads I've screwed around with.

[Blue Strat]

Originally posted by guitplayer:

I've found the DSL's to have a more "classic" Marshall sound than the TSL's do.

 

My brother has a TSL 100 and it's cool, but can be a bit buzzy on the highest gain channel. To me, "buzz" isn't the sound I want.

 

guitplayer

Exactly. I like chunk a little better than a buzzy sound, like the Mesa's are famous for. The TSL gets into Mesa Dual Rectifier territory. So, the DSL just does more of what I want a Marshall to do. The new AVT series (newer Valvestate amps) are excellent amps too.