H
Holy-diver
Well-known member
the 5150 ii is a lot more compressed than the 5150 imo. that is the main difference in tone and feel i hearTawlks":1io3pl86 said:AngryGoldfish":1io3pl86 said:That's my opinion, too. The leads sounded and felt mushy when I played them. It's not that there was too much bass - in fact it can be a really bright amp - it's more the fact that I felt wedged in this one sound, this one liquid sound that had no real punch or sensitivity.Tawlks":1io3pl86 said:Well, sorry I phrased that badly.
When I say best I mean favourite, in your opinion what is the bet ENGL amp?
Having only experience with a Powerball I can't compare models, it sounded really compressed to me, too much so for classic/hard rock, lead tones were liquid, overall I liked it but if spending that much money I'd look elsewhere.
But from what I've heard, and what style and tone I like, the Savage would be my favourite... ?I currently play a 5150 II and long for nicer cleans, wouldn't mind it being slightly smoother and tighter.
I'm just bitchin', really. ENGL's just aren't my cup o' tea.![]()
Yeah, I agree with that, I get the similar thing when I tried my CS-3 through my 5150 II, it's just so compressed it all comes out kinda the same, very mushy with no dynamics, some guys like it though.