What Engl amp should I get?

[the4thlast1]

While they sound good I’d say none of the due to the poor quality construction. Sorry to be negative, I just want you to waste your money!

I agree,.... The only brand I have had trouble with has been ENGL . Out of the 8 or so amps from them I owned 2 had to be sent to a tech for repair. One had to be sent out of state to a guy that specializes in ENGL.

I'm sure some will argue they are fine but I wouldn't take the chance on them anymore. My biggest issue with them is they are not fuse protected properly. IMO if there is an overcurrent occurrence from a bad powertube then a fuse should blow before a large section of the main board goes up in smoke. But hey what do I know.

As a counter-point, I've owned three ENGLs over the past few years, two of them being my main gigging amps. Outside a power tube failing in my Savage 60, I've never had a single issue with any of them. My Engl Thunder was a reliable workhorse for several years.

Yeah so guess it's just a matter of taking a chance , most people probably won't have any issues.. They definitely make some good sounding amps with a lot of models to choose from. Some of there newer designs like the Artist , Fireball 100 and Retro deserve a thumbs up,

 

[Beyond Black]

While they sound good I’d say none of the due to the poor quality construction. Sorry to be negative, I just want you to waste your money!

I agree,.... The only brand I have had trouble with has been ENGL . Out of the 8 or so amps from them I owned 2 had to be sent to a tech for repair. One had to be sent out of state to a guy that specializes in ENGL.

I'm sure some will argue they are fine but I wouldn't take the chance on them anymore. My biggest issue with them is they are not fuse protected properly. IMO if there is an overcurrent occurrence from a bad powertube then a fuse should blow before a large section of the main board goes up in smoke. But hey what do I know.

As a counter-point, I've owned three ENGLs over the past few years, two of them being my main gigging amps. Outside a power tube failing in my Savage 60, I've never had a single issue with any of them. My Engl Thunder was a reliable workhorse for several years.

Yeah so guess it's just a matter of taking a chance , most people probably won't have any issues.. They definitely make some good sounding amps with a lot of models to choose from. Some of there newer designs like the Artist , Fireball 100 and Retro deserve a thumbs up,

The Retro Tube is awesome. It sent my Fireball packing. It's a little fatter, looser, and more organic sounding, with EL-34 mids. At least organic for an Engl.

 

[Beyond Black]

I got an original Power Ball I would sell ya.
I’ve owned several Engls. And really dig this Powerball. Just got too many amps.
Hit me up pm if interested.

Dan, how does the PB compare to the Fireball 100?

 

[Mailman1971]

I got an original Power Ball I would sell ya.
I’ve owned several Engls. And really dig this Powerball. Just got too many amps.
Hit me up pm if interested.

Dan, how does the PB compare to the Fireball 100?

The powerball to me sounds the best on the crunch channel.
Really tight and chugging machine.
Dial the gain back and it’s like a super hot rod Marshall.
But better. Little thicker in the mid voice.
Really a great amp.
The fireball 60. Meh. I didn’t like it.
The fireball 100 was great. More modern sounding. Really loud.
Had great modern voice and that mid switch made the Amp.
But I had my last one when I got diezels and the Archon so I sold it off.
Both great. But I like the Powerball better.
Makes me wanna check out the powerball II.

 

[Beyond Black]

I got an original Power Ball I would sell ya.
I’ve owned several Engls. And really dig this Powerball. Just got too many amps.
Hit me up pm if interested.

Dan, how does the PB compare to the Fireball 100?

The powerball to me sounds the best on the crunch channel.
Really tight and chugging machine.
Dial the gain back and it’s like a super hot rod Marshall.
But better. Little thicker in the mid voice.
Really a great amp.
The fireball 60. Meh. I didn’t like it.
The fireball 100 was great. More modern sounding. Really loud.
Had great modern voice and that mid switch made the Amp.
But I had my last one when I got diezels and the Archon so I sold it off.
Both great. But I like the Powerball better.
Makes me wanna check out the powerball II.

Thanks bro. Definitely gonna check one out sometime.

 

[D-Rock]

I'm waiting on delivery of this $180 "Savage 120" so I'll let you know later! Lol!

Let me know how that sounds. I've been curious about it, though I guess it's a bit irrelevant since I have a real-deal Savage now. The only demo I've heard of that thing is the one Hotone made themselves, and they aren't very good at making demos.

Yeah sure, I'm not sure how it'll be. I listened to the same demo. I just wanted something small for late at night or when I didn't have much time to play and didn't want to fire up the tubes. From what I could tell it didn't sound like a Mesa, and it didn't sound like a Marshall, which is kind of what I wanted because I wanted something that has it's own thing going on, so we'll see.

 

[lowmantotempole]

Invader 2... Four channels all voiced differently. Tons of tones. Loved the first version.

 

[shred-o-holic]

Savage 120.........it has the cutting mids and is still brutal as fuck.......

 

[abbath78]

Go for a Fireball 100. Has the tone you're looking for and it's considerably cheaper than the 4 you listed. Can pick up a used minty Fireball 100 for $900, all day long.

 

[MetalHeadMike]

Go for a Fireball 100. Has the tone you're looking for and it's considerably cheaper than the 4 you listed. Can pick up a used minty Fireball 100 for $900, all day long.

This is very true The FB100 is one hell of an amp and after re-reading your requirements it would probably do ya right!

 

[shred-o-holic]

900? I did score one for that a couple years ago on evilbay.........haven't seen them that cheap lately..........I would just opt for moooooorrrrre though and pick up a Powerball 2 if it were me

 

[squank]

900? I did score one for that a couple years ago on evilbay.........haven't seen them that cheap lately..........I would just opt for moooooorrrrre though and pick up a Powerball 2 if it were me

This.

The Powerball II has the great crunch of the original PB and the aggressiveness of the Fireball. If I wasn't a Kemper guy, it would be my #1 gigging amp.

 

[shred-o-holic]

900? I did score one for that a couple years ago on evilbay.........haven't seen them that cheap lately..........I would just opt for moooooorrrrre though and pick up a Powerball 2 if it were me

This.

The Powerball II has the great crunch of the original PB and the aggressiveness of the Fireball. If I wasn't a Kemper guy, it would be my #1 gigging amp.

Channel 3 to me is the beez kneez...........aggressive yet warmer than the more raw channel 4...

 

[Speeddemon]

I have owned and gigged 5 Engls and played through just about everything they make. I found the Invaders gain was too harsh, and I love a good modern high gain tone.

I found the complete opposite and there are 4 Engls sitting in my studio...
3 words to summarize the gain channels on the Invader to me would be: smooth, organic* and thick.

*=within the Engl range. Because there are far more organic sounding amps than the Invader out there.

Having compared the Savage 60, SE EL34 and Invader 100 head to head, the Invader has THE best cleans on an Engl. When it comes to high gainers with great clean tones, so far IMHO, only Mesa Marks (maybe a Lonestar too, never played one) and a Diezel D-Moll are in that elusive group.
The SE EL34 is close, but in order to make the clean tone great, the Crunch tone suffers, because of the partially shared EQ. With the Invader the 4 channels are independent.

While the SE EL34 can get more crushing in its lead channels, it NEEDS the high gain mode enabled and the channels sound kinda limp without it, unless you bring the gain knob above 2 o' clock or so, but then the gain WITH high gain mode on is just too much.
This is better balanced in the Invader's 3rd channel, which still does the great, scooped, tight Engl tone.
The Invader's 4th channel is very lacklustre though... too smooth, saturated, almost fuzzy. Only suited for some leads.

The Savage tone gets way more raw than the Invader, but its clean tones aren't stellar and it's quite a middy amp, so harder to get a scooped tone from it.
I'm probably with braintheory on this one; a Mesa Mark might be a better choice when stellar cleans and crushing metal tones are the only two main requirements.
At this point I'd probably trade my SE EL34 for a full-sized Mark V (or a fully loaded IIC+ ), if someone (in Europe) was willing to.
Placement of Engl's FX-Loop is more pedal friendly though than those of Mesa's.

 

[braintheory]

I have owned and gigged 5 Engls and played through just about everything they make. I found the Invaders gain was too harsh, and I love a good modern high gain tone.

I found the complete opposite and there are 4 Engls sitting in my studio...
3 words to summarize the gain channels on the Invader to me would be: smooth, organic* and thick.

*=within the Engl range. Because there are far more organic sounding amps than the Invader out there.

Having compared the Savage 60, SE EL34 and Invader 100 head to head, the Invader has THE best cleans on an Engl. When it comes to high gainers with great clean tones, so far IMHO, only Mesa Marks (maybe a Lonestar too, never played one) and a Diezel D-Moll are in that elusive group.
The SE EL34 is close, but in order to make the clean tone great, the Crunch tone suffers, because of the partially shared EQ. With the Invader the 4 channels are independent.

While the SE EL34 can get more crushing in its lead channels, it NEEDS the high gain mode enabled and the channels sound kinda limp without it, unless you bring the gain knob above 2 o' clock or so, but then the gain WITH high gain mode on is just too much.
This is better balanced in the Invader's 3rd channel, which still does the great, scooped, tight Engl tone.
The Invader's 4th channel is very lacklustre though... too smooth, saturated, almost fuzzy. Only suited for some leads.

The Savage tone gets way more raw than the Invader, but its clean tones aren't stellar and it's quite a middy amp, so harder to get a scooped tone from it.
I'm probably with braintheory on this one; a Mesa Mark might be a better choice when stellar cleans and crushing metal tones are the only two main requirements.
At this point I'd probably trade my SE EL34 for a full-sized Mark V (or a fully loaded IIC+ ), if someone (in Europe) was willing to.
Placement of Engl's FX-Loop is more pedal friendly though than those of Mesa's.

I agree the Invader shouldn’t be harsh sounding, but I’d say the Inferno (Marty Friedman model) has the best cleans of the Engls IMO. Still not on the same level as the Mesa/Boogie Mark series amps, but very solid for a high gain amp. The Invader may be my 2nd favorite Engl for cleans though

If more people actually tried the Inferno, it for sure would get way more votes

 

[KrunKGringoeZ]

I have owned and gigged 5 Engls and played through just about everything they make. I found the Invaders gain was too harsh, and I love a good modern high gain tone.

I found the complete opposite and there are 4 Engls sitting in my studio...
3 words to summarize the gain channels on the Invader to me would be: smooth, organic* and thick.

*=within the Engl range. Because there are far more organic sounding amps than the Invader out there.

Having compared the Savage 60, SE EL34 and Invader 100 head to head, the Invader has THE best cleans on an Engl. When it comes to high gainers with great clean tones, so far IMHO, only Mesa Marks (maybe a Lonestar too, never played one) and a Diezel D-Moll are in that elusive group.
The SE EL34 is close, but in order to make the clean tone great, the Crunch tone suffers, because of the partially shared EQ. With the Invader the 4 channels are independent.

While the SE EL34 can get more crushing in its lead channels, it NEEDS the high gain mode enabled and the channels sound kinda limp without it, unless you bring the gain knob above 2 o' clock or so, but then the gain WITH high gain mode on is just too much.
This is better balanced in the Invader's 3rd channel, which still does the great, scooped, tight Engl tone.
The Invader's 4th channel is very lacklustre though... too smooth, saturated, almost fuzzy. Only suited for some leads.

The Savage tone gets way more raw than the Invader, but its clean tones aren't stellar and it's quite a middy amp, so harder to get a scooped tone from it.
I'm probably with braintheory on this one; a Mesa Mark might be a better choice when stellar cleans and crushing metal tones are the only two main requirements.
At this point I'd probably trade my SE EL34 for a full-sized Mark V (or a fully loaded IIC+ ), if someone (in Europe) was willing to.
Placement of Engl's FX-Loop is more pedal friendly though than those of Mesa's.

I agree the Invader shouldn’t be harsh sounding, but I’d say the Inferno (Marty Friedman model) has the best cleans of the Engls IMO. Still not on the same level as the Mesa/Boogie Mark series amps, but very solid for a high gain amp. The Invader may be my 2nd favorite Engl for cleans though

If more people actually tried the Inferno, it for sure would get way more votes

The infernos are hard to find. I been dying to try one out, but unfortunately, there are no engl dealers in the nyc tri state area that carries them

 

[thrashinbatman]

The Savage tone gets way more raw than the Invader, but its clean tones aren't stellar and it's quite a middy amp, so harder to get a scooped tone from it.
I'm probably with braintheory on this one; a Mesa Mark might be a better choice when stellar cleans and crushing metal tones are the only two main requirements.
At this point I'd probably trade my SE EL34 for a full-sized Mark V (or a fully loaded IIC+ ), if someone (in Europe) was willing to.
Placement of Engl's FX-Loop is more pedal friendly though than those of Mesa's.

I'm glad someone else feels this way about the Savage. I've had people disagree with me there and I felt like I was going crazy. On the 120 I have the mid's dialed back to 9 o'clock with the Contour switch on and it still isn't especially scooped sounding. It is, but it's still faaar from summoning the spectre of Dimebag.

The 60, despite ostensibly being the little brother to the 120, is much different amp IMO. I was never able to get any satisfactory low end out of the 60 (perhaps user error, I know I had issues with the power tubes that I'm too inexperienced to solve on my own), while the low end on the 120 is like getting kicked in the chest. Coming back to the Contour switch, I find the amp really needs a setting like that in order to really come into it's own; the rawness inherent to the Savage's high-gain really benefits from pulling mids out of it, which the 60 can't really do with just the Mid knob.

 

[MetalHeadMike]

The Savage tone gets way more raw than the Invader, but its clean tones aren't stellar and it's quite a middy amp, so harder to get a scooped tone from it.
I'm probably with braintheory on this one; a Mesa Mark might be a better choice when stellar cleans and crushing metal tones are the only two main requirements.
At this point I'd probably trade my SE EL34 for a full-sized Mark V (or a fully loaded IIC+ ), if someone (in Europe) was willing to.
Placement of Engl's FX-Loop is more pedal friendly though than those of Mesa's.

I'm glad someone else feels this way about the Savage. I've had people disagree with me there and I felt like I was going crazy. On the 120 I have the mid's dialed back to 9 o'clock with the Contour switch on and it still isn't especially scooped sounding. It is, but it's still faaar from summoning the spectre of Dimebag.

The 60, despite ostensibly being the little brother to the 120, is much different amp IMO. I was never able to get any satisfactory low end out of the 60 (perhaps user error, I know I had issues with the power tubes that I'm too inexperienced to solve on my own), while the low end on the 120 is like getting kicked in the chest. Coming back to the Contour switch, I find the amp really needs a setting like that in order to really come into it's own; the rawness inherent to the Savage's high-gain really benefits from pulling mids out of it, which the 60 can't really do with just the Mid knob.

The Savage 120 I had could get get super scooped when playing with the contour and rough/smooth. I MUCH preferred playing it with super middy settings. Had 6550s in mine FWIW.

Like you said, the low end in the one I had would kick like a mule; thumped ya hard. It was a fucking BEAST! Only thing that allowed me to finally let it go was the ultra stiff response under the fingers. It was catch 22 really for me because I LOVED the tightness of that amp (tightest fucking amp I've owned to date) but it was just so fast and accurate that I found myself fighting it and not able to keep up most the time.

 

[Speeddemon]

The 60, despite ostensibly being the little brother to the 120, is much different amp IMO. I was never able to get any satisfactory low end out of the 60 (perhaps user error, I know I had issues with the power tubes that I'm too inexperienced to solve on my own), while the low end on the 120 is like getting kicked in the chest. Coming back to the Contour switch, I find the amp really needs a setting like that in order to really come into it's own; the rawness inherent to the Savage's high-gain really benefits from pulling mids out of it, which the 60 can't really do with just the Mid knob.

Hmmmm....yes and a very small no. When I owned the Savage 60 the first time around (from about 2004 to 2007), together with the Engl 2x12 Pro Vertical cab (V30's) I found the low-end lacking too, even with running the bass knob always at 3 o' clock, mids at 9 or 10 'o clock and Depth Boost switch engaged. My solution was to tape an old blue MXR 6 band EQ to the back panel in the fx-loop, with 100Hz boosted, 400Hz cut a tad. This helped with the thump.
I sold it eventually to fund the Invader, which has all the low-end you'd need (I never run the Depth knob over 1 o' clock), but perhaps not a fair comparison.
Nowadays, after getting a Savage 60 again early last year, I feel a tad less inclined to add the graphic EQ. And sometimes I run the bass knob a bit lower now... especially when going for hair metal tones, or old Anthrax/Megadeth tones. Using it in my studio on a Marshall 1966B 2x12, that has a vintage T75 and a Mesa V30 (with beamblocker) in it.

But I'm sure that the Savage 120 will have a shit ton more low-end push... Looking at the other bigger Engls, for instance with the SE EL34, I find it too much with the Depth Boost button engaged, when running 'normal' channel EQ settings. That's where I like the fact that the Depth Boost on the Invader is a pot instead of a fixed setting.

 

[MetalHeadMike]

^^^
FWIW, the post 2012 Savage 120 had larger OT than previous models, so maybe this accounts for the huge low end I experienced with the one I owned. It was just right with the depth switch engaged and bass at around noon if I remember right. Enough to give you a solid thump in the chest but not overwhelming by any stretch. Now I was using an MXR 10 band in the loop and boosting a few of the low frequencies, so their's that then.