EHX Sovtek Mig-50 head

[øøøøøøø]

Depends on the MIG. The Sovtek MIG 50 that EHX reissued last decade is straight tweed Bassman. The Midget MIG 50 is more Marshall. It has a master volume. The full size MIG 50 does not.

That is misleading and not fully correct. Terms like "more Marshall" are very ambiguous because what model of Marshall does it connote? A 1959 is wildly different from a 1974. Here's a breakdown:

5F6A Tweed Bassman. For the level of granularity in this discussion this is the same (close enough) amp as several Marshall models. Namely the JTM45, the 1987 Lead, the 1986 Bass, etc. The 1959 Super Lead and 1992 Super Bass are in the same camp, just 100 watts instead of 50. Most of those amps are commonly called "JMPs" though that is wildly misleading because most of them were also made in "JCM 800" versions. Its best to call them by their model numbers as presented here. All Sovtek Mig 50s and Electro Harmonix Mig 50s are in this category.

Marshall 2204/2203. These represent an evolved Marshall circuit featuring a cascaded front end and master volume controls. They sound very different from the Marshall models listed above, namely they're the birth of "high gain" in amps. Most of these are called "JCM 800s" but shouldnt be for the reasons listed above. All Sovtek Mig 60s, Mig 100s, and "Midget"s are in this category.

Fender Brown, Blonde, Black, and Silver Faced Bassmans (Bassmen!) are all totally different from the 5F6A tweed bassman and so its helpful to note which bassman one is speaking of.

Here’s what I know from having owned a MIG 50 (both sovtek and EHX [which I still own]), a jtm 45, a JCM 800, a midget MiG, a 59 Bassman Ltd (still have), and a silverface Bassman 50. MIG 50 sounds to me like a generic Bassman. Not generic in a bad way, but meaning generally Bassman. Not a straight tweed, not blackface. It has that topography. Schematics suggest the same. It did not sound like a JMP because it does not have the tighter, less present bottom of the JMP or the JCM. You can high pass both my Bassmans (Bassmen?) and the ehx and could make them sound pretty similar to the jtm and JCM clean. Turned up the differences were very apparent. The midget 800 sounds more like the Marshall low end than the bassman low end, I’m guessing on purpose. The mig 100 I’ve played sounded a lot like the 2203 JCM I had.

I’ve heard this often on forums that tweed bassmans and jtm 45’s can use each other for shaving mirrors they are so alike and maybe under the hood they have a lot in common but in practice that is not exactly the case in my experience. Just my opinion from owning and playing them. Maybe not fully correct but for general purposes it can be a useful shorthand.

FWIW I never kept any marshall I’ve owned. It’s not my bag. Others can make them sound great but everyone I play always seems like it’s missing bottom. I have a friend that is OBSESSIVE about Marshalls and has collected nearly 20 different heads, combos, and cabs. His comment to me was that no one was the same and they all sounded and felt different. Whichever amp he brought he always sounded impeccable.

The elephant in the room is the fact that Marshalls use EL34 pentodes for the outputs, which are very different tubes from the beam-forming tetrode 5881s used in the 5F6A bassman.

Obviously the transformers are different as well.

That’s a pretty big difference between the two… but yes, the preamps are topologically very similar between the JTM45 and 5F6A.

The JMP50 is a bit different in that the cathode resistor of the first stage is only partially decoupled (.68uF instead of something like 22uF), which will have the net effect of a treble boost (half-boost frequency is somewhere in the neighborhood of 300Hz). Above about 1kHz (squarely in the midrange) you’ll be seeing about 7-8dB of boost relative to the amplitude of an 82Hz low “E” fundamental

[Dr Tony Balls]

That is misleading and not fully correct. Terms like "more Marshall" are very ambiguous because what model of Marshall does it connote? A 1959 is wildly different from a 1974. Here's a breakdown:

5F6A Tweed Bassman. For the level of granularity in this discussion this is the same (close enough) amp as several Marshall models. Namely the JTM45, the 1987 Lead, the 1986 Bass, etc. The 1959 Super Lead and 1992 Super Bass are in the same camp, just 100 watts instead of 50. Most of those amps are commonly called "JMPs" though that is wildly misleading because most of them were also made in "JCM 800" versions. Its best to call them by their model numbers as presented here. All Sovtek Mig 50s and Electro Harmonix Mig 50s are in this category.

Marshall 2204/2203. These represent an evolved Marshall circuit featuring a cascaded front end and master volume controls. They sound very different from the Marshall models listed above, namely they're the birth of "high gain" in amps. Most of these are called "JCM 800s" but shouldnt be for the reasons listed above. All Sovtek Mig 60s, Mig 100s, and "Midget"s are in this category.

Fender Brown, Blonde, Black, and Silver Faced Bassmans (Bassmen!) are all totally different from the 5F6A tweed bassman and so its helpful to note which bassman one is speaking of.

Here’s what I know from having owned a MIG 50 (both sovtek and EHX [which I still own]), a jtm 45, a JCM 800, a midget MiG, a 59 Bassman Ltd (still have), and a silverface Bassman 50. MIG 50 sounds to me like a generic Bassman. Not generic in a bad way, but meaning generally Bassman. Not a straight tweed, not blackface. It has that topography. Schematics suggest the same. It did not sound like a JMP because it does not have the tighter, less present bottom of the JMP or the JCM. You can high pass both my Bassmans (Bassmen?) and the ehx and could make them sound pretty similar to the jtm and JCM clean. Turned up the differences were very apparent. The midget 800 sounds more like the Marshall low end than the bassman low end, I’m guessing on purpose. The mig 100 I’ve played sounded a lot like the 2203 JCM I had.

I’ve heard this often on forums that tweed bassmans and jtm 45’s can use each other for shaving mirrors they are so alike and maybe under the hood they have a lot in common but in practice that is not exactly the case in my experience. Just my opinion from owning and playing them. Maybe not fully correct but for general purposes it can be a useful shorthand.

FWIW I never kept any marshall I’ve owned. It’s not my bag. Others can make them sound great but everyone I play always seems like it’s missing bottom. I have a friend that is OBSESSIVE about Marshalls and has collected nearly 20 different heads, combos, and cabs. His comment to me was that no one was the same and they all sounded and felt different. Whichever amp he brought he always sounded impeccable.

The elephant in the room is the fact that Marshalls use EL34 pentodes for the outputs, which are very different tubes from the beam-forming tetrode 5881s used in the 5F6A bassman.

Obviously the transformers are different as well.

That’s a pretty big difference between the two… but yes, the preamps are topologically very similar between the JTM45 and 5F6A.

The JMP50 is a bit different in that the cathode resistor of the first stage is only partially decoupled (.68uF instead of something like 22uF), which will have the net effect of a treble boost (half-boost frequency is somewhere in the neighborhood of 300Hz). Above about 1kHz (squarely in the midrange) you’ll be seeing about 7-8dB of boost relative to the amplitude of an 82Hz low “E” fundamental

Disambiguation: *Some* Marshalls use EL34s. Even most. But not all...JTM45s used KT66, some later models in the 1970s used 6550s, depending on import.

Opinion: Far too much emphasis is placed on output tube choice. Will EL34s and 6L6s sound different? Of course. Bu not as much as one might think. Things like coupling caps, bypass caps, speaker choice, etc have far more impact.

Disambiguation: There is no "JMP50" amp. There are 50 watt amps that say JMP on them, but that's not specific. A Marshall 1987 is 50 watts and may say JMP or JCM 800 on it. Same with a Marshall 2204. But they are very different amps.

Disambiguation: In a Marshall 1987, 1986, and many others there are two parallel first stages, each with an effective cathode resistor value and bypass cap value. On a Marshall 1987 one of those stages is partially bypassed as you say, however the other is not. On a Marshall 1986, both sides are fully bypassed. On a Marshall 2204 these stages are in series, not parallel, and one is partially bypassed and the other is not bypassed.

Opinion: Again I think we really need to specify what we're talking about. Marshall amps have a large variety to them.

[øøøøøøø]

All points well taken!

The frustrating thing about using the proper model numbers for Marshalls is that they sound too much like years in many cases.

Like... my only Marshall amp is a 1971 1961.

[Dr Tony Balls]

All points well taken!

The frustrating thing about using the proper model numbers for Marshalls is that they sound too much like years in many cases.

Like... my only Marshall amp is a 1971 1961.

TRUE its very dumb. Its not even in much order. Like why is a Lead 1987, a Bass 1986, a Super Lead a 1959 and a Super Bass 1992?

I think Fender nailed it in the 50s with with the Decade-Revision-Model. Easy to read and disambiguate.

[øøøøøøø]

In their defense, they probably never could have anticipated that 3/4 of a century later large numbers of people would be wanting to use these model numbers to discuss fine distinctions.

For all they may have assumed, by the year 1987 nobody would’ve cared about the *model* 1987

But yeah, Fender’s system was way clearer

[hulakatt]

Same model I had for years but mine could never be described as "clean" or "reliable". I remember the OT punked out on me and my tech put in a slightly oversized one in it's place. That amp had a solid low end. As it sputtered through life, I got tired of waiting for it to die and sold it and when that itch for soviet amplification bit me later, I picked up a RedBear instead.

[ohm-men]

My very first tube amp was a Sovtek MiG 100.
I got it when I was 19 or so. It was $250 brand new from the shop on sale (half price) as no one wanted it. (was mid 90's)
I still remember my dad saying, it's ok, you can buy that amp and reached for his cheque book...
A happy memory, since dad wasn't in for Rock'n Roll and uneducated music playing at all...
My mom could'nt believe he bought me the amp... I just passed high school, So a bit a gift from his side...

Played it for years sold it for about 3 times what dad paid for it. I was super, super loud....
Got a Bassman instead...

A few years ago a got a bit nostalgic about the MiG 100 and bought an old London City DEA 130 (again a Marshall Plexi/Bassman clone)
Sounds different then the Mig, but kind of the same ballpark, though I think the MiG was a 6L6 tube amp (or simelar), where the LC is an EL 34 amp These days my main amp for giggin with Bass/Bass VI

Back then, I was always told my MiG 100 was a JCM 800 clone... Never asked questions... didn't really care, still don't care.
Still remember my then band mate with his Marshall JCM 900 got always a bit pissed that the MiG 100 was louder

Nowadays these Old MiG 50, 60 and 100 became really expensive....

[Zooey]

I haven't tried the EHX MIG 50, but my Sovtek MIG 50 breaks up faster than any other non-master volume amp I own. It breaks up much faster than a silverface Bassman, for example. Yes, it is loud, but it's not totally clean at normal 2-guitar rehearsal levels. Of course, mine is 30 years old, but it has always been that way. It starts breaking up around 4 on the bright channel--with single coils.