With the exception of #5, I’ve installed switches and tested for all the other points.
01.jpg
02.jpg
Although some of these serve overlapping functions, each offers a slightly different nuance, which makes me want to keep them all.
I could satisfy this desire by installing a few push-pull pots, but then I have to ask myself: is it really worth making the wiring that messy?
Since I haven’t even tested these for 30 minutes yet, I think I’ll need another week or two of testing before making a final decision.
To be fair, a proper assessment might require swapping the power amp coupling capacitor to 22n, but based on my experience so far, here are my thoughts:
1. If I had to choose one, I’d go with the 2.7K option. But the 820R setting is also great—it adds a punchy low-mid presence and, naturally, increases the gain. Above all, it provides a warm, smooth overall character. The 2.7K setting, by contrast, has a more "metallic" quality, which aligns more closely with my mental image of an SLP-style amp.
2. Again, if I had to pick, I’d choose the 2.2n. Actually, if I were using the bright channel on its own, I’d prefer the 22n. My DIY Bogner Ecstasy build also has a toggle to switch between 4.7n and 22n, and I almost always leave it on 22n. However, since the SLP also has a normal channel, I think the 2.2n is the better choice here. It also feels somewhat redundant with item #1, though the nuances are distinct.
3. If I had to choose only one, it would definitely be the 4.7n—no question about it. The way its signature mid-high frequencies push forward with such boldness is exactly the Marshall reference sound I’ve always had in mind. That said, the no bright cap option offers a huge advantage; by removing the bright cap, you can finally achieve a clean tone even on the SLP’s bright channel. With the 4.7n, you have to keep the volume pot turned down extremely low to get anything resembling a clean tone, but that results in an unpleasant, grating sound—and if you try to compensate by turning up the normal channel, it immediately kicks into crunch. (Though, to be fair, that might just be because I only use one input.)
If I had to pick just one option from everything I’m currently testing—one that I’d consider an absolute must-have—this would definitely be it.
4. I’m also quite fond of this feature. The none, 680n, and 250uF settings each serve a distinct purpose.
The none mode offers the most composed and transparent sound. The 680n setting boosts the mid-highs, giving the amp a much more aggressive character, while the 250uF setting adds thickness across the entire frequency spectrum. The 680n setting alone is certainly useful, but since I also like the none mode, I’ll definitely be installing a switch. And since I’m adding a switch anyway, there’s no reason not to include the 250uF mode as well.
I’ll continue testing and replace the 100n coupling cap to 22n. If this were an amp used exclusively as an SLP, I would have built it with a 22n capacitor from the start without a second thought; in fact, I suspect I might actually prefer the 22n value even when using the JTM/Bassman mode.
Fischerman wrote: ↑Tue Oct 13, 2026 10:51 am
Marshall's are my wheelhouse. In my experience, the optimal combination varies from amp to amp. Some amps sound great with an 820R on the split cathode Bright channel while other get too loose/boomy in the lows. It also of course depends on your target tone. Is it at the dirty end of the spectrum like EVH or the clean end of the cranked Marshall spectrum like Jimi Hendrix.
That said, here's my preferences. I tend to prefer 100W, that makes a difference in some of these values.
1. If it's split I tend to like 2k7.
2. I prefer 2n2. But I do run my EVH Marshall with Bass on 10.
3. Big ass 4n7/5n OR no cap. 500pF might be the worst option ever. IMO. EDIT: I have 47pF on my Jimi head.
4. I prefer larger values than 680n. I tend to use 25uF (never 680n anymore), 25uF sounds like a boost. It's just 'more of everything'. I also REALLY like no cap here. My Jimi head has no cap, my EVH head has a switchable 330uF. 330uF doesn't sound much; if any, different than 25uF. I usually leave it OFF tho.
5. I like 100n for the older circuits (for the Jimi Hendrix tones) and 22n for post '68 SLP circuits (for the EVH tones).
I think you'll find it's more a combination of things that get the best clean-ish tones and then a different combination for the best dirty tones. Those early amps are supposed to be quite bassy, that's part of the sound. The NFB plays a big part in how clean or dirty the amp wants to be. A lot of NFB (27k, 16ohm tap) for the early amps and for EVH levels of distortion, the NFB needs to come way down (100k, 4ohm tap) and bass tamed a bit (2k7 and 2n2 pre, 22n output).
As you mentioned, having a clear goal would make choosing easier; since I lack a specific objective, the decision-making process has been a bit difficult.
I primarily use guitars equipped with humbuckers, and I’ll likely use the "SLP mode" mostly for hard rock or metal—though I also quite enjoy that distinct, crisp, mid-high-focused crunch.
Most of your observations align with my own experience. I especially agree that the 500pF value is the worst; it lets only the high frequencies through, resulting in a thin, piercing tone that’s painful to the ears—it sounded bad regardless of whether I was using low or high gain.
Regarding point #4, I personally preferred the 680n over the 250uF (though "none" is also a good option). Since they serve such distinct purposes, I’ll probably end up keeping all three as choices.
Roe wrote: ↑Tue Oct 13, 2026 1:39 pm
1 1k
2 2n2
3 5nf
4 680n switchable
5 18nf
It seems our perspectives are quite similar. Thanks for suggesting the 1K option for point #1—I’m definitely curious to test that out. I’ve found that the 820R tends to sound overly bloated with high gain (though it does sound great when a boost is engaged).
As for the 18n value in point #5, that’s a new one for me. I’ve been using Mallory 150 in this amp, but I don’t recall ever seeing an 18n version in that line. Is there a noticeable difference compared to a 22n?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.