Engl 570 vs the CAE3 SEe+ Preamp...

[Moshaholic]

I have owned teh 570 by Engl... I want to possibly get a CAE SE+ preamp but I dont know what the overall diff in the high gain tones are???

Any body have the change to ever play BOTH of these???

I tried the OD100 heads and thought they were NOT my thing... But the Preamp might be diff due to the "Mustaine Factor"...

anybody???

thanks!

xgx

 

[guitarslinger]

I'm not sure what tones you're after, but I don't miss my CAE at all. Seriously.

Seriously, for the higher gain stuff, I like the Mesa Quad more. (I'll tell you how my Eggy M4 works out)

For everything else, I think the Egnater IE-4 pwns all.

I've had lots of preamps, but never an Engl.

 

[lordriffenstein]

I got a CAE 3+SE in December after playing one several times and I knew that someday I had to get one. It is extremely versatile I think and for me one of the best, if not THE best preamp out there (yes I have played an IE4 )

I also played the 570 a couple of times and really love that preamp as well. I think the 570 has more gain but the CAE has plenty. I run the gain on ch3 around 12:00 and that's already heavy rocking. The 570 has a lot more options obviously but the CAE has a lot of tones inside, the EQs of each channel give you a lot of options.

Oh yeah, I also played about 6 different OD100s and never cared for their gain channel, the CAE sounds totally different to my ears. So far I have done about 15 rehearsals and 5 gigs with the CAE and I love it. I have it paired with an EL34-loaded power amp, great combi.

 

[guitarslinger]

My problems with the CAE.

1. mid gains sucked. ch 2 had enough gain to be a ch3 for me.
2. voicing was just too modern overall and seem fizzy.
3. Ch 3 had too much gain, and didn't sound solo-ey enough to contrast with ch 2.
4. lack of midi
5. unit is fairly large and heavy (especially with tranny mod )
6. Active EQ dropped the volume significantly compared to EQ off.



Seriously, I had like $1800 and a year of experimentation in my CAE. It sounded like Mustaine's Rhythm tone, and that's it.

The Egnater cost me $900. It does all the in-between tones better. It's smaller and lighter. It takes Midi Program Change info. It is smoother. It's more forgiving. It sounds more balanced. It blends with other instruments better, and oh yeah, it has 4 channels instead of 3.

 

[JohnRageOn]

I got a CAE 3+SE in December after playing one several times and I knew that someday I had to get one. It is extremely versatile I think and for me one of the best, if not THE best preamp out there (yes I have played an IE4 )

I have it paired with an EL34-loaded power amp, great combi.

I completely agree with you Yoeri! I prefer it a bit more than IE4 and the new modular preamps.
With which poweramp have you paired it?

 

[lordriffenstein]

My problems with the CAE.

1. mid gains sucked. ch 2 had enough gain to be a ch3 for me.
2. voicing was just too modern overall and seem fizzy.
3. Ch 3 had too much gain, and didn't sound solo-ey enough to contrast with ch 2.
4. lack of midi
5. unit is fairly large and heavy (especially with tranny mod )
6. Active EQ dropped the volume significantly compared to EQ off.

Seriously, I had like $1800 and a year of experimentation in my CAE. It sounded like Mustaine's Rhythm tone, and that's it.

The Egnater cost me $900. It does all the in-between tones better. It's smaller and lighter. It takes Midi Program Change info. It is smoother. It's more forgiving. It sounds more balanced. It blends with other instruments better, and oh yeah, it has 4 channels instead of 3.

From your comments, I assume that you had the 3+ and not the 3+se. I recently played a 3+ and ch2 has WAY more gain than mine, I did not like ch3 that much and indeed the EQ dropped the volume a LOT.

To give you an idea, I run gain on ch2 around 1:00 which was the same as 10:30 or so on the 3+. The EQ, I have the volume at 2:00 which boosts my overall volume (channel volumes around 1:00). On the 3+, anything below 3:30 dropped the volume.

I think I'll have to make some clips because imho, you should have this preamp just for ch2 and it's ability do to low gain SRV tones up to hardrock tones and you can get them just from rolling back the volume. I can understand your comment about ch2 being fizzy, the 3+ has more of that than the 3+se though but it is still there. However, that slight fizzy tone makes it work SO well in a band mix.

 

[lordriffenstein]

I completely agree with you Yoeri! I prefer it a bit more than IE4 and the new modular preamps.
With which poweramp have you paired it?

John,

I'm using an Advance Tube Tech TA70 power amp, loaded with JJ E34Ls.

http://www.advancetubetech.com/eng/index.php

The build is killer, friend of mine owned one and we had it checked by a famous rigbuilder from Holland and he was amazed by the build quality. Compared it to a VHT 2/50/2 afterwards and this one sounded better. To top it off, they are cheap compared to VHT, you can find them for less than 800 new in Italy, I paid about half of that for a near mint 2nd hand.

 

[Moshaholic]

I got a CAE 3+SE in December after playing one several times and I knew that someday I had to get one. It is extremely versatile I think and for me one of the best, if not THE best preamp out there (yes I have played an IE4 )

I also played the 570 a couple of times and really love that preamp as well. I think the 570 has more gain but the CAE has plenty. I run the gain on ch3 around 12:00 and that's already heavy rocking. The 570 has a lot more options obviously but the CAE has a lot of tones inside, the EQs of each channel give you a lot of options.

Oh yeah, I also played about 6 different OD100s and never cared for their gain channel, the CAE sounds totally different to my ears. So far I have done about 15 rehearsals and 5 gigs with the CAE and I love it. I have it paired with an EL34-loaded power amp, great combi.

hmmmmmmm...... I thought the CAE had a shizzz load of gain... more than anyone could ever want???

If the 570 has more gain than the CAE3 SE+ then I need a 570 (yet again haha)...

I have 2 ENGL EL34 SE heads and have had a 2 or3 570 preamps in the past and totasly feel the ENGL SE heads (which the 570 preamp is supposed to be based off of) have more gain than the 570 preamp does...

Seriously. I had to have the preamp gain dimed on the 570's lead 2 channel just to get what I B needing gainwise (I a real gainfreak...!)...

I keep the gain MUCH lower on my SE heads than on the 570 I used to have...

I was hoping the over all sound of the CAE would be bigger and more "head like" compared to the 570...

The 570 is a killer preamp but it is more boxy and compressed to my ears (even with a killer power amp like a mesa 2:90 or VHt 2:90) than the ENGL SE head is... Which again is what the 570 preamp is supposed to be based off of...

xgx

 

[guitarslinger]

From your comments, I assume that you had the 3+ and not the 3+se. I recently played a 3+ and ch2 has WAY more gain than mine, I did not like ch3 that much and indeed the EQ dropped the volume a LOT.

To give you an idea, I run gain on ch2 around 1:00 which was the same as 10:30 or so on the 3+. The EQ, I have the volume at 2:00 which boosts my overall volume (channel volumes around 1:00). On the 3+, anything below 3:30 dropped the volume.

I think I'll have to make some clips because imho, you should have this preamp just for ch2 and it's ability do to low gain SRV tones up to hardrock tones and you can get them just from rolling back the volume. I can understand your comment about ch2 being fizzy, the 3+ has more of that than the 3+se though but it is still there. However, that slight fizzy tone makes it work SO well in a band mix.

Actually, I had a 3+ with SE channels 2 and 3, without the SE EQ mod.

John Suhr told me himself exactly what was in it while he was installing the transformer and voltage mods.

I guess it just wasn't smooth or marshally enough for me. I'm a hair metal guy and I like smooth sounding leads, like in the egnater stuff.

Also, the lack of Midi on the 3+ really sealed the deal for me after I got the IE4. (BTW, I have a silver-face, Egnater-built IE-4. just to clarify)

 

[Moshaholic]

From your comments, I assume that you had the 3+ and not the 3+se. I recently played a 3+ and ch2 has WAY more gain than mine, I did not like ch3 that much and indeed the EQ dropped the volume a LOT.

To give you an idea, I run gain on ch2 around 1:00 which was the same as 10:30 or so on the 3+. The EQ, I have the volume at 2:00 which boosts my overall volume (channel volumes around 1:00). On the 3+, anything below 3:30 dropped the volume.

I think I'll have to make some clips because imho, you should have this preamp just for ch2 and it's ability do to low gain SRV tones up to hardrock tones and you can get them just from rolling back the volume. I can understand your comment about ch2 being fizzy, the 3+ has more of that than the 3+se though but it is still there. However, that slight fizzy tone makes it work SO well in a band mix.

Actually, I had a 3+ with SE channels 2 and 3, without the SE EQ mod.

John Suhr told me himself exactly what was in it while he was installing the transformer and voltage mods.

I guess it just wasn't smooth or marshally enough for me. I'm a hair metal guy and I like smooth sounding leads, like in the egnater stuff.

Also, the lack of Midi on the 3+ really sealed the deal for me after I got the IE4. (BTW, I have a silver-face, Egnater-built IE-4. just to clarify)

Is teh IE4 the "T.esticle O.f L.ife" preamp ????

xgx

 

[NaturalBornBoy]

My problems with the CAE.

1. mid gains sucked. ch 2 had enough gain to be a ch3 for me.
2. voicing was just too modern overall and seem fizzy.
3. Ch 3 had too much gain, and didn't sound solo-ey enough to contrast with ch 2.
4. lack of midi
5. unit is fairly large and heavy (especially with tranny mod )
6. Active EQ dropped the volume significantly compared to EQ off.



Seriously, I had like $1800 and a year of experimentation in my CAE. It sounded like Mustaine's Rhythm tone, and that's it.

The Egnater cost me $900. It does all the in-between tones better. It's smaller and lighter. It takes Midi Program Change info. It is smoother. It's more forgiving. It sounds more balanced. It blends with other instruments better, and oh yeah, it has 4 channels instead of 3.

When I had my 3+SE, I ran it into a VHT 2150 and I don't get the fizzyness that you're talking about but yes, the lack of midi pissed me off

 

[Moshaholic]

My problems with the CAE.

1. mid gains sucked. ch 2 had enough gain to be a ch3 for me.
2. voicing was just too modern overall and seem fizzy.
3. Ch 3 had too much gain, and didn't sound solo-ey enough to contrast with ch 2.
4. lack of midi
5. unit is fairly large and heavy (especially with tranny mod )
6. Active EQ dropped the volume significantly compared to EQ off.



Seriously, I had like $1800 and a year of experimentation in my CAE. It sounded like Mustaine's Rhythm tone, and that's it.

The Egnater cost me $900. It does all the in-between tones better. It's smaller and lighter. It takes Midi Program Change info. It is smoother. It's more forgiving. It sounds more balanced. It blends with other instruments better, and oh yeah, it has 4 channels instead of 3.

When I had my 3+SE, I ran it into a VHT 2150 and I don't get the fizzyness that you're talking about but yes, the lack of midi pissed me off

I'm not worried about MIDI...

Just TONE