Did Robert Smith ever actually use a JC-120? (Or...JC-160 vs. 120 vs. 77)

[Gswearengin]

Hey y’all,

I posted this on TGP and got no response. I should have known to post it here instead. Perhaps @eggwheat can share what he knows?

I’ve wanted a Roland jazz chorus amp for ages, and since my amp collection is getting out of control anyway, I’m starting to think that maybe it’s time. I love early cure stuff, and that sound is one of my main JC reference points.

So, common knowledge is that Robert Smith was a JC-120 user...there are plenty of mentions of him using one, some of them first hand. But beyond that, I’ve never seen any real evidence of it (aside from the reflections shows, where he was definitely using them). All of the old footage I’ve seen is actually a JC-160 with 4x10’s. Was the 120 a studio only thing? Or have the 120 and 160 more likely just become confused with time?

So...where am I going with this? Well, I definitely want an older one, and I’m wondering if maybe a 2x10 JC-77 may be better for that particular sound than a 120. That they are smaller, lighter, less loud, etc. is a bonus. I’m a basement player, so definitely don’t need the extra wattage or volume. Unfortunately, the 77’s are pretty rare. I missed one a week or two ago, which is where this whole thing started...

Bonus question: can a JC also do a decent rendition of the Peavey stuff he started using afterward?

Thanks,

Gary

[Trout]

First google hit:

https://goo.gl/images/xNnaK8

Ok, saw that you wrote "early" Cure..

So this then:

https://youtu.be/-CtgAgTqx0w?t=74

[Gswearengin]

First google hit:

https://goo.gl/images/xNnaK8

Ok, saw that you wrote "early" Cure..

“aside from the reflections shows, where he was definitely using them”



Gary

[Trout]

Anyway, I have a JC-50 and that is loud as fuck for me, a bedroom warrior

[Gswearengin]

Anyway, I have a JC-50 and that is loud as fuck for me, a bedroom warrior

I do worry about that...another thing in favor of the 77 over the 120. But it’s solid state, so it still sounds pretty good at lower volumes, right?

A couple things I noticed about the picture linked above: There’s another one behind the first row of amps, bringing the total to at least four! For the keyboards maybe, for period authenticity? I guess he must have also been using one for the Bass VI. I was lucky enough to be at the RAH show, and I remember wondering why he needed almost as many amplifiers as guitars.

But yeah, I’m interested in the early stuff.

Thanks,

Gary

[Trout]

It does sound good. Crystal clear and no hiss in mine, a 78 I think.

[eggwheat]

Robert Smith is known for using a JC-160 for recording and live, not a 120.

New 120's were used on that reflections tour a few years ago.

Personally I've always preferred the 160 and the 77 over the 120...something about the 10 inch speakers..sort of more defined and crystalline.

[Gswearengin]

Robert Smith is known for using a JC-160 for recording and live, not a 120.

New 120's were used on that reflections tour a few years ago.

Personally I've always preferred the 160 and the 77 over the 120...something about the 10 inch speakers..sort of more defined and crystalline.

Thanks, eggwheat! That’s what I expected, but the JC-120 thing is just so prevalent that I wanted to verify.

Any quick thoughts on the 77 vs the 160? I can’t find/afford/use a 160 anyway, but I hope the 77 is pretty similar...at least for a no talent hack at basement levels!

Gary

[cestlamort]

I'll second that a JC-77 is a slightly more friendly version than a JC-120, and not just for your back. I also tend to prefer 10" speakers for whatever reason.

You might also want to keep an eye out for the new JC-40. Yes, the effects are digital, but it is light (ow, my back) and is full stereo throughout, which would be really fun if you use stereo effects.

There were a couple JC-160s for sale locally (Seattle) in the last year, after not seeing any for years. I'm not sure what macroeconomic stage sound forces were at work (if any).

Whatever the case, they're all good amps. Some, however, are pretty great.

On a budget, friends of mine swear by Fender Princeton Chorus amps.

[Gswearengin]

I'll second that a JC-77 is a slightly more friendly version than a JC-120, and not just for your back. I also tend to prefer 10" speakers for whatever reason.

You might also want to keep an eye out for the new JC-40. Yes, the effects are digital, but it is light (ow, my back) and is full stereo throughout, which would be really fun if you use stereo effects.

There were a couple JC-160s for sale locally (Seattle) in the last year, after not seeing any for years. I'm not sure what macroeconomic stage sound forces were at work (if any).

Whatever the case, they're all good amps. Some, however, are pretty great.

On a budget, friends of mine swear by Fender Princeton Chorus amps.

Nope nope nope...no syrupy analog chorus, no deal!

I actually used to live in Seattle. But I’m in Europe these days, so the selection seems a little thinner.

I also used to have a Princeton Chorus, but that was a loooooong time ago. I remember it being nice. Sold it the first time I heard a super reverb!

I’ve decided that if a JC-120 pops up locally I’ll check it out, and if I find a JC-77 for sale at a reasonable price, I’m jumping on it!

Thanks,

Gary

[eggwheat]

My opinion is the JC40 sucks. It’s way off the original JC sound.. JC-77 is way better. Possibly the JC-85 or JC-90 too though I’ve never owned one..but on paper they look very similar to the 77.

[cestlamort]

Good to know about the jc40 - I’ve only heard from an audience perspective but it sounded good. Glad to scratch that off my list in that case.

[eggwheat]

Well I found it definitely didn't sound like a traditional JC..the chorus sounds like a later digital Roland chorus..and it's only half the wattage of the 77..so not as much headroom. I mean it didn't have to sound like an old JC to be worthy to me...I'm all for trying new things..but even judged on it's own merits..I still couldn't get on with it.

[Con-Tiki!]

i bought a beautiful '75 (i think) JC-120 this year from a recording studio.
It sounds unbelievable, but on 1 it makes my eyes bleed.
Still, it's the sound of the 80's. I bought mine because of Andy Summers and Johnny Marr, and it's exactly what i had hoped.

If you can find an early US Princeton Chorus, that's not a terrible low-volume substitute. I had one for ages, and loved it.

[panoramic]

i've come close to buying a JC (insert whatever number) so many times it's hard to comprehend it
I am not sure why I have always balked in the end. At my crispy old age though soild state amps are more valuable than they were before as i am lazy so i've picked up a few fender ones. maybe next will be a jazz chorus