All user reviews of 4/5 for the Marshall TSL122

I'm going to court!

UTILIZATION

For those who criticize the tsl 122.
adpends also the guitarist and guitar sound!

SOUNDS

I'm not super good since made only 3 years I learn!
but I have a friend who plays extremely well!
I say that with him adcoiffe! I come out yet has the same sounds on the amp.

OVERALL OPINION

So you learn a challenge in your decision! and be objective!
is the basis of the jcm 900 on channel crunch, and lead to the most modern
So with this amp you play all styles!
I'm glad mine even if I can not operate a 100% by my lack of level!
except that I say!

- All Tube Amp
- 120 W RMS
- 2 HP 12 ", Line Out XLR, 2 FX loops, a 5-way footswitch (clean, crunch, lead, reverb, fx)
- The settings in all directions: a and a gain equalizer (bass, middle, treble) per channel, a reverb, fx mix and presence in the clean and the same thing for the crunch + lead. Besides the "mix boost", "tone shift" and other "deep"
- No headphone jack: '(

UTILIZATION

- Not to widen the meninges of hours: one branch and it works. The config is instinctive. I just looked at the manual to understand both a 2-loop effects (there are subtleties) and HP connections.
- As long as the lamps are a little hot, the sound is excellent!
- The manual is clear but the lack of photos to support the text.

SOUNDS

- This amp suits my music style, very pop-rock.
- The sounds are accurate, even with the lead gain in depth.
- I have a pti gap when I go to crunch or lead to clean with the footswitch.
- The possibilities of different sounds are almost endless!

OVERALL OPINION

Assets:

- The sound Marshall
- The 2 HP
- The "Virtual Power Reduction", which reduces the output level to 25 watts while using all the lights.
- The separate EQ for each channel (that's what made me decide to buy it)
- The 2 effects loops

Cons:

- No headphone jack (I think my neighbor hates me now ...)
- The gap on the footswitch
- The gain on the clean channel (if you want to play hard, well it is necessary at some point to mount the gain: ca saturates)
- The weight)

The t have enough CHARACTERISTICS mentioned below ... right?
It's all light ...

UTILIZATION

For my part, I bought it in perfect state (like new), but used all the same. So I did not notice. Ingnieur not need to be, is a branch and sounds! Sounds Marshall anyway ... The two effects loops mritent we dig a little deeper to the head, but no problemo ...
For cons, I keep some restraint with the settings "contour" for now ... I think inconclusive To be frank, I do not prs no diffrence in the game ... By comparison, I had an old two bodies Marshall Valvestate 100 W 8100, and it felt ... But I have not had the opportunity to "open the floodgates" in terms of volume for now, I reckon it's li ... So in any Reserved.
Other than that: 3 volumes, 3 EQ etc ... is really excellent. all configurations are possible, and we get what some people say a true versatility.
The Big BMOL just a fragile potentiomtres it seems! Mine is in customer service. The OD1 and OD2 2 volumes lach me. It seems that the quality of the components is questionable. I remain convinced that Marshall would not be the case if c'tait ... Assent consumer would fall ... And ever as clean t mine when I bought it I do not know how the Previous Owner 'was used.

SOUNDS

I play a Gibson Les Paul, and frankly sounds a really strong ... I play the Rock together, and really does!
I heard everything on this amp and this brand gnral! Like "not for its clear," "worst all-tube Marshall SERIES" I was even told that the production had nothing do with an old JCM 800 ... etc. Ben I say: Connect, Play, Listen ... and we shall adopt the "one says." Everyone will make his ide but MRIT that it costs the clear sound. It's bright, and slammed both round, it's Ok with a Les Paul, but I assure you that the sound is really l. ..
CRUNCH for the Canal, it's Marshall, and we will dj far enough in overdrive, from blues to rock.
LEAD for the Canal, the slap ben ... C no mesa, the Correct ... but it is not only one bought it eh?
For my part, I play a lot with my CRY BABY, and I find myself really.
In a résumé and growth rings, the harmonics emerge and precision is the same with the background gain is still prcis!

OVERALL OPINION

In rsum I do not regret my purchase really not, it sounds really my taste. But I like the sound Marshall have always been.
The BMOL potentiomtre rviser I am not my decision, my Valvestate is 13 and it still works perfectly! I would never not yet the mark in question.
Even if some "was no longer the era of the JCM 800 ... etc ..."
We knew dj ... thank you! Besides, it is not called such!

See below ...

UTILIZATION

The setup is simple if we integrate out the fact that it has almost three preamps on hand. The settings are simple, the EQ is moderately effective. The increase in noise level is easy to dose, it is usable in full for the occasion (it is far from amps on which we will never exceed the 2).
The effects loop is pretty complex, but it must be said that the complexity is related to a wealth of connectivity options and setting.
It's even what I dislike about this type of amp will do everything in one amp can lead to the design of a "gas factory". On paper we pay for: 100 w/30w, good 2 HP, 3 channels, a pedal very useful and robust, a recording output, the boost, effects loop, 2 reverbs, etc..

SOUNDS

That's my problem, the sound! Those who say it sounds bad times are bad, it's a good amp. With humbuckers channel 2 and 3 dépotent. However, it is a particular sound. I find it in clean dry enough: too low, a veil over the medium and treble booster must be at the risk of having a not very musical brilliance. In short, I have a Fender Rhodes for my Performer 1000 (ok but not upsetting amp), well, it surpasses the Marshall clean sound.

The best channel for me is the 2, it is perfectly in line Marshall, I had a two-body JCM 800, and I find the same grain with the big advantage of better control the volume.
Channel 3 for large distortion is not very useful for me (matter of taste, I do not play metal), I prefer to boost the crunch of 2 with a pedal for solos and big chords. But for large saturations it is very efficient.

This is certainly a matter of taste, but I think for the price, a Fender 2x12 HotRod is much higher (again I do not metal). on the other hand when you can have both, channel 2 with a Les Paul is really terrible.

Finally I find the reverb rather fuzzy, I do not like it at all!

OVERALL OPINION

One week of use, the amp the guitarist in my group.

The -: all in an impossible, the reverb is poor, the clean channel (too low, medium pasty, etc..), The EQ, the pots

The +: 3 channels under the feet, the pedals tough, the connectivity, the VPR, channel 2 (awesome), it makes me want to buy a HotRod 30 or AC

I had on hand for quite some time: Fender Blues Junior, Fender The Twin, Marshall JCM800, JCM 900, Valvestate 2 corps, VOX AC 30, 30 Matchless, H & K Attax, Fender Deluxe 85, Performer 1000, Peavey Classic 50 ...
I think the normal price for a 3-channel two good lamps with HP.
This is the choice of the guitarist in my group, it has a good Les Paul, so it sounds.

Amp 100Watts lamp with 2HP and all three channels (clean and overdrive distortion). All parameters are separated, including the level of loop and reverb between clean and distortion.
I do not metals, there's the site of Marshall and other comments.

UTILIZATION

The config is simple, the panel is well done and quite clear.
Is obtained very quickly all kinds of sounds can the amp ... Namely three or four, in fact ... What Marshall, different EQ knob are not hyper extended, the switch of the bright clean is almost obligatory, the scoop of the crunch is a bit redundant, as that of the distortion because it does not radically change the sound ...
Independent reverb level is a good idea to have on clean and not saturation without having to switch ...

SOUNDS

The clean channel is very nice. It is often said that one of the best clean Marshall and I want to believe. It has "finally" a sense of dynamics and depth of lamps giving this relief so special and that the transistors do not ... JCM900 but that does not have much either. It is even slightly depending slamming guitars and microphones.
The crunch channel is really great, it's Marshall that his research often. The big overdrive that spot, ideal for the Hendrix and AC / DC for example. One pert pronfondeur dynamics and we had to clean in a much more bold.
The distortion channel is very vintage distortion, do not play metal on it is not made for that. So it's a fairly fat distortion aussin there, and very very Péchu medium. One switch lowers mediums but it is not conclusive and frankly, it's certainly a bit type sound, making it a little less runny / medium, but remains in the vintage and not in the "modern hi-gain" . It is an ideal channel to play the old and heavy har 70/80, but no more.
The reverb is not very pretty.

OVERALL OPINION

I tested it in the store long enough, I did not take.
I found this great Marshall in his style ... but it's not mine at all, I need my things colder snapping and modern, certainly offers a Marshall HiGain marked channel but do not s 'to deceive and to confuse HiGain = metal, it's just a Marshall distortion well with large medium that spot well as it should, in addition to a channel that lacks the CJM before. No sound revolution, then we play the AC / DC, Hendrix, Kravitz's, the Led Zep ... The rest will be just for fun quickly, but the grain have not.
I do not like it, but I put a note because it does very well what it is made.