Members The4thlast1 Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 Ok probably has been done before but..................I've owned the Savage and enjoyed it..I also owned the Powerball, Fireball and Blackmore. For me the Savage was the winner because it had a nice open sound to it. It sounded great at low volumes as well as in a band setting.How does the Invader compare to the Savage. Is it more like a Powerball or does it have that open tube amp sound. The PB sounds solid state to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PurityS.L.G. Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 You're going to get very little Invader love here. Lots of people (including myself) dig the Savage quite a bit. IMO, I've played both the Invader 150 and 100 and it wasn't that great. It's certainly not a bad amp but when I was in the market for my first ENGL amp, I put these 2 up against a blackmore and it was a no brainer for me taking the blackmore home. Plus it was helluva lot cheaper than the Invader. Having seperate EQ's is always nice but that's about the only feature on that amp that I liked. I didn't even like the built in noise gate it had. Anyways, the Savage is a lot better, and if anything, it compares to the Blackmore more than any of it's other brothers in the ENGL line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members smith10210 Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 From what i hear its some what opposite sounding than your typical Engl Ive heard more open not as SS sounding Its one of the few Engls i haven't owned. People say the 100 is better than the 150.. There are a few posts kicking around with some comparison and comments.. DerekB had a good one when he first got them in stock.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The4thlast1 Posted October 15, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 Cool thanks for the help. Anyone else? I do like open sounding amps. I didn't like the high compression the PB and FB had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PurityS.L.G. Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 If you can, try out the Steve Morse sig. I heard it sounds awesome like a pissed off Marshall. It's got a similar layout like the Invader as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sonofabias Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 You really should try the Invader 150/100 and hear for yourself. I've used one for more than a year and get nothing but compliments from soundmen and guitarists alike for my amps ability to cut trough the mix, and deliver tone for days, this happens everywhere we play ! So I guess I'm doing something wrong ? The Savage is compressed as is the Powerball, both great amps but they don't have the flexibility or the "openess" of the Invader. Cheers:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members saxxamafone Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 You're going to get very little Invader love here. Lots of people (including myself) dig the Savage quite a bit. IMO, I've played both the Invader 150 and 100 and it wasn't that great. It's certainly not a bad amp but when I was in the market for my first ENGL amp, I put these 2 up against a blackmore and it was a no brainer for me taking the blackmore home. Plus it was helluva lot cheaper than the Invader. Having seperate EQ's is always nice but that's about the only feature on that amp that I liked. I didn't even like the built in noise gate it had. Anyways, the Savage is a lot better, and if anything, it compares to the Blackmore more than any of it's other brothers in the ENGL line. i love my blackmore but i'd love to try a savage one day!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarman967 Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Never tried the Invader but everyone says "don't bother". Savage was the only ENGL that I really liked alot honestly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Convalescence Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 The Invader 100 is my favorite amp in the ENGL line, with the Steve Morse in 2nd and Savage in 3rd. That said, I'd probably like the SE if I could ever imagine being able to afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members freehandarson Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 From clips/videos/hearing in person, the Invader sounds the most warm/open/tube-y out of all the ENGL's. I'd go with that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members freehandarson Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 ...The Invader (and nitro) are the only other amps i'd like to even try now. Check out these videos: It surely does the br00tz[YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] More br00tz[YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The4thlast1 Posted October 16, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Well cool I wanted to know if it has a open cutting sound and from what you guys say I guess it does. Is the lowend tight ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Demonofthefall Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 I have owned an Invader 150 for about one year. I have not fiddled with it extensively as I realized rather quickly the Engl sound was not for me ... but here are my thoughts anyway! Channel 3 was too dark and compressed. Maybe I was doing something wrong but it didn't cut too well in band mix. Invader 100 is supposed to be voiced slightly differently, with more brightness to it ... Channel 4 was very good for soloing : very articulate and could cut through way better. I loved it. I didn't care much for channels 1 & 2 ... The cleans were usable but weren't too impressive really (at least they could match the other channels' volume without breaking up)... Channel 2 seems to be getting a lot of love from many people. However, I'm not one of them ... I think it's because I hated the bright and hi-gain modes on this amp ... way too sterile to my taste. I cannot compare it with other Engl's but I believe most tend to agree that the Invader is more natural and open sounding than the Powerball / Fireball / SE ... I sold it to get a Mark IV and don't regret it ... I guess I'm a Mesa guy ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CenturyStanding Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 I think the Invader 100 and Savage 120 are easily the best two amps in the Engl line. Neither of them have the common polished sounding (for lack of a better word), compressed high end you find in a lot of German amps (Powerball, SE, Herbert, Einstein, to name a few). The Savage 120, as I'm sure you know from being a previous owner, even with it's four channel design, really only has two channels. It has a clean and a dirty (channels 1 & 3) and boosted versions of those channels (2 & 4). It goes from very very clean w/ minimal breakup to very very heavy/saturated very quickly and can be hard to hit the in between notes. The Invader definately has four distinctly different channels with completely unique feels for each. The Invader has a much softer attack than the Savage (lacks some of the percussiveness that I love in my Savage). A mistake some people make is sitting down at the Invader, instantly going to the highest gain channel (channel 4), going chugga chugga chugga and deciding they don't dig the amp and move on. Channel 4 is primarily designed for leads. It is very soft, smooth, melodic, and isn't particularly suitable for rhythm (IMO). Channel 2 and 3 are much tighter and more rhythmically aggressive. That being said, overall, I find the Savage is the most suitable for metal rhythm. The tight, sharp, cutting, percussive articulation of channel 4, in my opinion, is unparalleled by any other high gain amp I've played, Engl or other. However, I think the Invader excels for everything else. I find the cleans more versatile and usable. I find the crunch sounds great. I think the lead channel is to die for. But it just lacks what I look for in metal rhythm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The4thlast1 Posted October 16, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Hey CenturyStanding Thanks for that..... This is kinda what I was wondering. If the Invader can do the tight crushing Metal rythms. I'm starting to think that Channel 3 on the Invader would be really good for rythms though. Would you say the Inavder sounds bigger than the Savage? The Savage channel 4 was one of the best rythm sounds I've heard. I've heard some killer clips of the Invader though and 7 string players seem to love it. With a boost it must be damn tight cause Ive never heard a loose ENGL. I do like amps that have seperate usable channels for rythm and lead.The Savage for me had 1 usuable channel. I rarely play clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members smith10210 Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Hey CenturyStanding Thanks for that..... This is kinda what I was wondering. If the Invader can do the tight crushing Metal rythms. I'm starting to think that Channel 3 on the Invader would be really good for rythms though. Would you say the Inavder sounds bigger than the Savage?The Savage channel 4 was one of the best rythm sounds I've heard. I've heard some killer clips of the Invader though and 7 string players seem to love it. With a boost it must be damn tight cause Ive never heard a loose ENGL. I do like amps that have seperate usable channels for rythm and lead.The Savage for me had 1 usuable channel. I rarely play clean. I wish Engl would release a two channel savage with a usable noise gate/contour switch and lead boost switch. I only used channel 4 and the clean which was good but the other channels where thin and had no use for all the other {censored} on there thats why i like the fireball and blackmore. I think the blackmores does mid gain tones better .Would lower the cost also there amps are overpriced..:poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CenturyStanding Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Hey CenturyStanding Thanks for that..... This is kinda what I was wondering. If the Invader can do the tight crushing Metal rythms. I'm starting to think that Channel 3 on the Invader would be really good for rythms though. Would you say the Inavder sounds bigger than the Savage?The Savage channel 4 was one of the best rythm sounds I've heard. I've heard some killer clips of the Invader though and 7 string players seem to love it. With a boost it must be damn tight cause Ive never heard a loose ENGL. I do like amps that have seperate usable channels for rythm and lead.The Savage for me had 1 usuable channel. I rarely play clean. Don't get me wrong, the Invader could DEFINATELY do metal rhythm. It is very tight, but softer, darker and more modern sounding than the Savage. And when I say softer, I don't mean less br00talz, I just mean it doesn't have that really sharp, metallic string attack that the Savage does. For some, that might be a plus. Channel 2 in high-gain mode can also get pretty aggressive on the Invader, in a MUCH different way than Channel 3. It has a sort of hot rodded JCM800 thing going on. Great for old school thrash type metal tones, versus the uber-modern tone of Channel 3. In my opinion, all in all, if you need versatility, the Invader is the better option. I've heard people do Vai-esque stuff on Channel 4, do jazzy stuff on Channel 1, do bluesy stuff on Channel 2, etc. If you are the type of player who plays all metal and never really needs to delve into the other genres, the Savage is probably the better option. It has a very articulate, cutting sound that you won't find elsewhere. Channel 3 and 4 in smooth mode make a pretty kickass lead tone too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members smith10210 Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Don't get me wrong, the Invader could DEFINATELY do metal rhythm. It is very tight, but softer, darker and more modern sounding than the Savage. And when I say softer, I don't mean less br00talz, I just mean it doesn't have that really sharp, metallic string attack that the Savage does. For some, that might be a plus.Channel 2 in high-gain mode can also get pretty aggressive on the Invader, in a MUCH different way than Channel 3. It has a sort of hot rodded JCM800 thing going on. Great for old school thrash type metal tones, versus the uber-modern tone of Channel 3.In my opinion, all in all, if you need versatility, the Invader is the better option. I've heard people do Vai-esque stuff on Channel 4, do jazzy stuff on Channel 1, do bluesy stuff on Channel 2, etc.If you are the type of player who plays all metal and never really needs to delve into the other genres, the Savage is probably the better option. It has a very articulate, cutting sound that you won't find elsewhere. Channel 3 and 4 in smooth mode make a pretty kickass lead tone too. Not to hijack but i have two sets of Stock Engl 6550's if interested ill sell them cheap.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Nacher Posted October 17, 2008 Members Share Posted October 17, 2008 I had Invader 150 for over an year, and I can almost 100% agree with CenturyStanding. Savage has uber-tight and percussive metal rhythm tone that can't be matched by Invader. However, Invader really excels in that more tubey, open and soft hi-gain tone. Channel 2 was great imo. It doesn't havve that typical ENGL solid state-feel at all. In lower gain modes it does crunch stuff nicely and hi-gain mode is stoner/oldschool thrash heaven. This channel has tons of mids and cut as well, and works very nicely for leads. I didn't really like Channel 3 though. It's the tightest of the bunch and most modern, but it's lack of mids and a bit fizzy top end made it less than stellar for metal rhytms. It did the job ok, but it couldn't match the modern punchy hi-gain rhythm sound that Savage and SE have. Maybe with an eq and slight boosting it could dominate in the mix, but I didn't even have a chance to try that out. Channel 4 is the {censored} for liquid and singing leads with lots of harmonics. Absolutely the best and most singing hi-gain lead sound on any ENGL. However, this channel is next to useless for rhythm and that's why people trying to chug on this channel are instantly dissapointed with the amp. Channel 4 has a very, very loose response, tons of sag and a very mid-range oriented sound. The lowest notes sound almost like you would have a fuzz pedal on. Invader has enough gain on all channels 2-4 for the most br00talz metal. I really wonder why people call channel 2 a mid-gain Marshally channel. It can be that, but if you play it loud and with high gain settings, it's heavy enough for any style really. Without any need for a boost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members skarhead Posted October 17, 2008 Members Share Posted October 17, 2008 That being said, overall, I find the Savage is the most suitable for metal rhythm. The tight, sharp, cutting, percussive articulation of channel 4, in my opinion, is unparalleled by any other high gain amp I've played, Engl or other. However, I think the Invader excels for everything else. I find the cleans more versatile and usable. I find the crunch sounds great. I think the lead channel is to die for. But it just lacks what I look for in metal rhythm. I agree to some extent. At first I used channel 4 with lead boost exclusively. Now I'm using Ch.3 for rythm and ch4 in smooth mode for leads. There bad thing is that you can't (I can't ) set up ch4 to do both rythm and lead (I use v. little gain in my rythms) and the Boost switch iirc isn't controllable by midi/footswitch. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The4thlast1 Posted October 18, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 18, 2008 Do you guys find channel 3 a bit too scooped to cut through a mix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rhoadkiller Posted October 18, 2008 Members Share Posted October 18, 2008 The invader is such a dreamy amp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The4thlast1 Posted October 19, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 19, 2008 Bump, cutting through the mix channel 3 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.