I recently bought a 1984 JCM 800 50w 2x12 open-back combo. The previous owner had installed Reaper 55hz's as an upgrade to the original G12M-70's. The Reapers sound OK, but they're just not me. I was wondering which speakers you'd suggest to give more clean headroom, deeper/tighter bass, less upper-midrange and to tone down the highs a bit. From the clips I've listened to, I like the HM75's, the ET65's and the Reaper HP's. The HP's may be too close to the Reaper 55hz's tone in this amp, though I may be wrong. I have an older Marshall 1936 bottom with G12T-75's that I like the tone of in its closed-back design. I played the JCM800 amp thru it with the back removed to emulate an open-back combo and it's a little closer to what I'm looking for, but still desire something warmer with a little more bass and less harshness. Thanks for your help!
Speakers for a JCM800 Combo
07/04/2011 9:17am
The ET65's will provide exactly what you just described you are looking for!
Thanks Vaughn! I enjoy your You Tube sessions! You remind me of the guy who owned the music store I used to work at when I was a teenager.
My question: Will the ET65's produce as much bass in a tight enough manner as the HM75's though? I know you wrote in a previous Q&A that you don't care for the HM75's (or BL's) in an open-back cab. I'm curious as to why that is.
In the testing and listening I've done, the ET65's have the warmest, tightest bottom of any gal in the WGS lineup - especially in an open-back combo. The HM75's have a fairly high Fs and a lot more aggressive bite in the upper midrange and high frequencies than the ET65 does; too me that all works out very well in a big-box 4x12 ... where the cab volume really augments and defines the bottom end. My only caveat: the ET65's are in fact very warm, and they have less of an upper midrange spike than most guitar speakers do. Too me, they work great in a 1x12 or 2x12 open back combo ... which are often just not "big" enough sounding when playing with a loud band ... because they just ain't pushing a lot of air. Oh, but here is a thought: I will be doing my first comparison listening tests with the new Liberator next week ... that may also be a good option ... I just can't say yet. If you can wait, I should post results on my blog in a week or two ... or I'll post back here in a few days.
Hello there!
Any updates on the Liberator vs ET65 for an open back JCM800 4010 50w 1x12?
I gave a look to the comparison videos on your blog but my concern is about the wattage of the ET65 (even if I loved his sound!). Would it be safer to use the Liberator (or some other speaker) instead of the ET65?
Thanks!
Enrico
You should be safe w/the ET65 - all WGS speakers are rated the old-fashioned way ... true tube watts. The Liberator would afford you a small extra margin of safety ... especially if you play with everything on 11! The Liberator should also give you just a tad more clean headroom and more sparkle than the ET65 - however, the trade-off is that you won't get the ultra-smooth top end and warmth of the ET65. So, in the end, it's up to your desired tone, and style!
""Would you describe the ET65's as more "modern-sounding" and the HP's as more "vintage-sounding"?"" - depends on your idea of vintage! A vintage Celestion blue is very bright and chimey ... while a vintage Fane is warm and smooth. The ET 65 is warm and smooth, the Reaper HP is more aggressive.
To me "modern-sounding" = deeper'tighter bass and a more aggressive midrange with not so much a sparkle in the high-end, but more so a ringing clarity.
Let me be a bit more specific. Between the ET65 and the Reaper HP, which would you say has a deeper/tighter bass? By what you've said, I'm assuming the Reaper HP has a more aggressive midrange, correct? Then between the Reaper 55hz's that I currently have and the Reaper HP's, which would have a deeper/tighter bass?
The reason I asked about resonant frequency is that you steered me away from the HM75's for my application stating that the resonant frequency is lower in the ET65's. The resonent frequency is even lower in the Reaper HP's. That's what has me wondering!
The Bottom end on the Reaper HP is a bit LOWER than the ET65, but yes, it does have a considerably more aggressive upper midrange. Both are tight on the bottom and slow to fart-out or otherwise get loose. Overall, the ET65 sounds a good bit warmer ... and yes, you could say more "vintage", while the Reaper HP sounds more powerful and urgent with more upper midrange bite and less of a smooth and airy top end.
So I ordered a pair of the ET65 speakers, received them yesterday and installed them today. After a couple hours of playing...all I can say is that they are EXACTLY what I was looking for! For my application, compared to the Reaper 55's that I had, the ET65's gave me a more usable tighter/deeper-sounding bass, they got rid of the upper-midrange hump and they smoothed out the highs. There's still a nice sparkle too! Now my 50 watt open-back combo sounds like a scaled-down version of my 100 watt Superlead thru a 4x12 closed-back bottom. I am extremely happy!
Thanks to Vaughn and Daniel at WGS!
We LIKE what we do :)
Hi benjaminbore,
I strongly recommend the ET65's. JCM800's are notorious for having an abundance of upper mids and presence...especially in combo-form. In my opinion, the Liberator might emphasize these frequencies too much. The ET65's are working out great for me. I get a big, tight bottom end, a warm midrange and still have a nice amount of sparkle. Listen to WGS's ET65 demo thru decent headphones...I get just about that tone. Just my 2 cents! ????