Trade Mark V for Engl Savage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter braintheory
  • Start date Start date
B

braintheory

Well-known member
I currently have a Mesa Mark V combo that I'm considering trading for an Engl Savage (which I believe is a post-2012 version). I'm pretty sure I wanna do it, but I'm just worried if it will sound too artificial like most other Engls. What do you guys think? I played several pre-2012 versions and they sounded very processed (they were from 2011 and 2010). Is the 2012 version really that different?
 
I'm surprised everyone so far is telling not to do the trade. I heard the new savages sound really great. Brad King said so as well. Also, the Engl Powerball II is one of my favorite amps, and I know the savage sounds different, but I heard the new savage has bigger transformers than the PBII and is now similarly tight and aggressive.

Also, I figured if I don't like the savage I'd sell it and buy a mark iv and have some money left over, since I use the mark iv mode 90% of the time I play my mark v.

Again my main concern is if the new savage still sounds processed or overly compressed. The Powerball II is one of the few Engls that did not sound processed to me. So I ask once again if the new savage really sounds that much different than the pre-2012 versions and if it still sounds processed?
 
I should say, I like Engl's for what they are and that generally s versatility. I've owned the Powerball, Fireball 60 and E530 preamp. The E530 had the best tone of the lot IMHO. I think the Invader 100 or Blackmore are the only 2 that jazz me. If you liked the PB2 then the Savage might be right up your alley.

The Mark V seems like a lot more amp for the money.

EDIT:
After reevaluating your sig, looks like you have your Mark tone well covered. Give the Engl a shot. I'm guessing it'll be a chore to move if you don't g with it but I may be wrong.
 
my 2 cents -

I completely agree that the blackmore and invader are the only two engl amps that I totally loved when trying out. The PBII I tried and the savage 120 (KT88) my friend uses are (don't take me too seriously pls) more like your average bedroom amp for playing without a band although they are too powerful for that..

I mean, I loved playing both alone, but once I hit the full mix, I could not hear a thing even with mids maxed up full. The bass got consumed by bass guitar and high end was killed by drums and everything I remained with was nothing. Engls pump so much compressed bass and trebles that it does not sound like a guitar tone to me, more like a modeling amp.

The only amp I'm gassing for at this moment is EVH 5150 III (100w) which makes me consider selling my mk5, it's not a boutique amp but I don't care, it just sounds good and is a lot fun to play.
 
If it was a trade for an Engl Blackmore, I would say yes, I think that is the Jewel of the line. I will have to seek out some clips of the new Savage.
 
I would do the trade. The Savage, IMO, is THE Engl to own. Plus, I like Engls more than Mesas, but thats just me.
 
HELL NO!
I have owned both and the MKV kicks any engls ass I have played or owned
 
I would say no. I went through my Engl phase and ended up back to the Mark
 
I happened to play these two amps side-by-side when I was on my quest for a new head several years back. I'm not a fan of most ENGL amps, but the Savage (and Blackmore, which is based off of the Savage) is one of the best sounding amps that I've ever played. It does the "hot-rodded" Marshall tone very well plus a whole lot more. For classic and modern hard rock/metal tones, I felt the Savage walked all over the Mark V. I give the Mark V the nod on clean tones, but the Savage's cleans are still very usable, especially if you like to add effects like chorus to your sound. None of that is to say that the Mark V isn't a cool amp...I simply preferred the Savage by a wide margin for what I want to hear.

Value-wise they're about the same...go with the one the fits your needs and tastes the most.
 
I've also owned the Savage and still own the MKV
They're very different amps
That being said, I wasn't a fan of the Savage. I also wasn't a fan of the 7 other Engl models I've owned, except for the Blackmore and Morse (which is still way overpriced). They all sound like hifi synthetic distortion pedals to me. I still own the E530, it can do the Engl tones for an affordable price.

You want best of both world? Get a Mark IV and run a E530 preamp through its power section.
 
NO!

IMNSHO the build quality alone (as compared to the Mesa) doesn't justify the trade, but then the tonal difference too? Don't do it.

If you were keeping the Mrak V and were given the Engl for free, but only then.

Derek
 
Depends on what style of music you are going to use it for. I've owned both amps, several times, and for clean-classic-some classic metal = MKV... for heavier, more modern, power-prog metal = Engl Savage 120. The MKV is way more versatile, but for more modern, heavier styles, the Savage will work better.
 
I have a feeling most of you guys are referring to the pre-2012 savages, which I have already played many times and don't need any more info/descriptions about. What I really wanna know is if the post-2012 savages still have that "hi-fi synthetic distortion". Like I said the PBII and Blackmore didn't have that problem, but the Blackmore was too congested/boxy. So, again I don't wanna hear anymore about the pre-2012 savages I've played 'em several times and know they sound very processed.
 
LOL HEYAL NAH!!! I don't know why you're even considering it. Keep the V!!!!
 
Since I owned both back to back I will add my two cents.

I personally would do the trade. I agree that the Savage 120 does sound a bit processed but I don't agree that it doesn't sit well in the mix. I used mine in a band setting with my brother who has a 6505+ and the Savage cut right through. There are a ton of tone options and it's not that hard to dial in. Clean channel is nice and the crunch channel is underrated in my opinion. I wish I had that amp back to be honest. I didn't realize how something worked and got frustrated and dumped it. :doh:

I should mention that I have owned four Engl's (E530, Powerball, Fireball 100, and Savage) and I owned four Mesa's (Dual, Triple, Mark IV and Mark V) and out of those amps I would take any of the Engl's over the Mesa's EXCEPT MAYBE an older two channel Dual Rectifier because I literally played one last night and it tracked very well.
 
Business":1sysejnj said:
braintheory":1sysejnj said:
So, again I don't wanna hear anymore about the pre-2012 savages
Click to expand...

Geez SORRY






:lol: :LOL:
Click to expand...

Sorry for sounding harsh, but I don't need to hear more about an amp I've already played several times.

rp108":1sysejnj said:
Since I owned both back to back I will add my two cents.

I personally would do the trade. I agree that the Savage 120 does sound a bit processed but I don't agree that it doesn't sit well in the mix. I used mine in a band setting with my brother who has a 6505+ and the Savage cut right through. There are a ton of tone options and it's not that hard to dial in. Clean channel is nice and the crunch channel is underrated in my opinion. I wish I had that amp back to be honest. I didn't realize how something worked and got frustrated and dumped it. :doh:

I should mention that I have owned four Engl's (E530, Powerball, Fireball 100, and Savage) and I owned four Mesa's (Dual, Triple, Mark IV and Mark V) and out of those amps I would take any of the Engl's over the Mesa's EXCEPT MAYBE an older two channel Dual Rectifier because I literally played one last night and it tracked very well.
Click to expand...

Was your savage post-2012? Again, what I'm mainly trying to figure out is if the new savages sound that much different and if they still sound processed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top