Engl Fireball 100 is easily their best amp - Change My Mind

Guys I think the "perceived" volume primarily dependent on the frequency response inherently designed into the sound / tone of the amp. Marshalls and 5150s seem louder and tend to "cut through" because they are generally bright sounding amplifiers, that also have those all important upper mid frequencies. This why they both can burry a 180 watt Diezel Herbert (huge transformers) in the room. The Herbert is a naturally scooped sounding amp. The ear "reads" certain frequencies as volume, even though the amp may not be actually "louder".
 
Where’s Larry when we need him? I’d like to hear his opinion on the high quality/small transformer thing.
 
angelspade said:
Guys I think the "perceived" volume primarily dependent on the frequency response inherently designed into the sound / tone of the amp. Marshalls and 5150s seem louder and tend to "cut through" because they are generally bright sounding amplifiers, that also have those all important upper mid frequencies. This why they both can burry a 180 watt Diezel Herbert (huge transformers) in the room. The Herbert is a naturally scooped sounding amp. The ear "reads" certain frequencies as volume, even though the amp may not be actually "louder".
Click to expand...
A Recto is pretty scooped, yet it doesn't strive to cut in a band mix. Nor does it lack any volume.
 
angelspade said:
Guys I think the "perceived" volume primarily dependent on the frequency response inherently designed into the sound / tone of the amp. Marshalls and 5150s seem louder and tend to "cut through" because they are generally bright sounding amplifiers, that also have those all important upper mid frequencies. This why they both can burry a 180 watt Diezel Herbert (huge transformers) in the room. The Herbert is a naturally scooped sounding amp. The ear "reads" certain frequencies as volume, even though the amp may not be actually "louder".
Click to expand...



And what are engls? Dark? Not even close. They are extremely bright amps. The 5150 is full of low midrange, not high midrange like the engls. The Diezel gets stomped because of its eq curve. That’s not the problem with Engl amps, as stated before they have a shitonnnn of midrange in most of their amps. And as stated just above me, the recto absolutely smokes any Engl I’ve ever heard in a mix, by a mile: it’s a pretty bass heavy and scooped amp.
 
Rex Rocker said:
I meant the 100 watters.

The Singles have REALLY like REALLY undersized transformers. But they also only have 8 ohm outs, so they don't need as many winds. Even so, many people complain Singles aren't really loud enough without farting out.

But the 100W rectos do have 16 ohm outs, don't they? And they have trannies that are about half the size of a 5150. That being said though, they're not really known for sounding small or not being loud enough, so I don't really know how that translates.

Also, my XXX had about the same size trannies as a 5150, yet it wasn't nearly as loud.
Click to expand...
The 100w Dual Rec trannys look to be about the same size, maybe bigger.
https://legacy.mesaboogie.com/ampli...s/dual-rectifier/head.html#amplifier-features
I was just trying to point out that it appeared to my research that smaller transformers were used for a more saturated tone and larger transformers were used for a more raw tone that had better higher and lower frequencies as well. And that that had nothing to do with the quality of the iron or components that went into them as a leader at Engl suggested. That is absolute BS.
 
Bad.Seed said:
Yes, I posted my video of that one last week. I actually really dug it. It was just missing a Depth control on the power amp for me. Lacked low end when compared to my other favorite amps. Voicing wise, I really liked it
Click to expand...

I just watched your Inferno video. I can see where you would want a Depth control. My main cab is a 212/115. The 15" speaker gives me extended bass frequencies and a deeper sounding low end. I'll typically back the bass knob down and be fairly conservative with the depth using that cab compared to using a 412. So I don't miss having a depth knob on my Inferno.
 
Regarding the Powerball 2. I have a bit different experience than others. IMHO, the Powerball 2 is perfectly fine in the context of the band. I actually already mentioned that in this thread.

My buddy used the 6505. I used the Powerball 2. He sounded louder and more massive than me, but he couldn't hear what he was playing well. Gradually he always increased the volume until we were all deaf. I could be heard perfectly, even at a lower volume on my amp. When he played alone with the drums, everything was fine. Maybe 6505 was covered by a combination of Powerball and drums. Or maybe environment of the rehearsal room, IDK. Situation was different with the Savage 120, I really had to crank it to cut through.

Solved, now he also plays Powerball 2. We have the amps' volumes set just hight enough to be able to hear each other over the drums.
 
I'm considering the purchase of a Fireball 100 and stumbled upon this thread via Google... I've been wondering how similar the Powerball really is as I'd like to be able to run a decent crunch that cleans up with the volume knob and the Powerball seems as though it'd be better at that since it has more range on its Crunch gain than the Fireball does on the Clean. I found schematics for each of them (Fireball here and Powerball II here) and might take a look at them later to see if there are any obvious differences. I know that everybody says that the Fireball sounds "rawer", "more open", etc. but an quantitative evaluation of the two circuits might help to close the gap for those of us that don't have both next to each other for comparison.

I say all this to say that if anybody who isn't a total hack (e.g. me) when it comes to electronics wants to take a look in the meantime and report back on the circuits' differences I think it'd be super helpful to the conversation.
 
Last edited:
alexjplant said:
I'm considering the purchase of a Fireball 100 and stumbled upon this thread via Google... I've been wondering how similar the Powerball really is as I'd like to be able to run a decent crunch that cleans up with the volume knob and the Powerball seems as though it'd be better at that since it has more range on its Crunch gain than the Fireball does on the Clean. I found schematics for each of them (Fireball here and Powerball II here) and might take a look at them later to see if there are any obvious differences. I know that everybody says that the Fireball sounds "rawer", "more open", etc. but an quantitative evaluation of the two circuits might help to close the gap for those of us that don't have both next to each other for comparison.

I say all this to say that if anybody who isn't a total hack (e.g. me) when it comes to electronics wants to take a look in the meantime and report back on the circuits' differences I think it'd be super helpful to the conversation.
Click to expand...
Welcome to Rig-Talk :yes:
 
VESmedic said:
And what are engls? Dark? Not even close. They are extremely bright amps. The 5150 is full of low midrange, not high midrange like the engls. The Diezel gets stomped because of its eq curve. That’s not the problem with Engl amps, as stated before they have a shitonnnn of midrange in most of their amps. And as stated just above me, the recto absolutely smokes any Engl I’ve ever heard in a mix, by a mile: it’s a pretty bass heavy and scooped amp.
Click to expand...
Exactly...ENGL amps struggle in the same regard, for the same reason: EQ curve.
 
I don't know about the whole "doesn't cut" it with a band argument. Quite a few artists using Engls on stage.

Karl Sanders, Chris Broderick, Glen Tipton and Richie Faulkner, Terrance Hobbs of Suffocation, apparently Cannibal Corpse use them...

Obscura too, and I really like that band.

Could it just be that both guitarists in these bands are using Engls and therefore they sound pretty killer?
 
It's not the EQ curve. It's not just "perceived" loudness. It's either the taper of their volume knob or how much actual output they put out. Maybe it has to do with the "quantity" or "quality" of the iron in the transformers. Maybe not. Like I said, I had a Peavey XXX that had pretty close to the same if not the same transformers as a 5150 that didn't sound as loud when the master volume was set to the same level. Like not even close.

I'd bet a Recto or an Uber (set to actually sound good) are actually more scooped than most ENGLs, yet neither has a problem being loud enough or cutting through.
 
Last edited:
alexjplant said:
I'm considering the purchase of a Fireball 100 and stumbled upon this thread via Google... I've been wondering how similar the Powerball really is as I'd like to be able to run a decent crunch that cleans up with the volume knob and the Powerball seems as though it'd be better at that since it has more range on its Crunch gain than the Fireball does on the Clean. I found schematics for each of them (Fireball here and Powerball II here) and might take a look at them later to see if there are any obvious differences. I know that everybody says that the Fireball sounds "rawer", "more open", etc. but an quantitative evaluation of the two circuits might help to close the gap for those of us that don't have both next to each other for comparison.

I say all this to say that if anybody who isn't a total hack (e.g. me) when it comes to electronics wants to take a look in the meantime and report back on the circuits' differences I think it'd be super helpful to the conversation.
Click to expand...
I believe the schematic is of Powerball I. First stages of the circuit are (almost?) identical. Most of Engls share very similar topology.
 
Rex Rocker said:
It's not the EQ curve. It's not just "perceived" loudness. It's either the taper of their volume knob or how much actual output they put out. Maybe it has to do with the "quantity" or "quality" of the iron in the transformers. Maybe not. Like I said, I had a Peavey XXX that had pretty close to the same if not the same transformers as a 5150 that didn't sound as loud when the master volume was set to the same level. Like not even close.

I'd bet a Recto or an Uber (set to actually sound good) are actually more scooped than most ENGLs, yet neither has a problem being loud enough or cutting through.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "when the master volume was set to the same level"? Both were set to i.e. 10 o'clock? If yes, that means nothing.

"Quality" of the iron in transformers makes a difference. Tranny made of "higher quality iron" can be roughly 30% smaller, if they are both designed for the same low end cut off frequency. The difference in the transformer size, even if they are made of the same iron, can be also caused by designed low frequency cutoff. Tranny designed i.e. for 30 Hz is smaller than the one designed for 20Hz.
 
I just got a pv Windsor on a trade and it has the tiniest fucking transformers I’ve ever seen. I’m slaving it to my tremoverb and it sounds awesome. Have not tried it on its own yet, or even cranked it up.
 
mcstinger said:
What do you mean by "when the master volume was set to the same level"? Both were set to i.e. 10 o'clock? If yes, that means nothing.

"Quality" of the iron in transformers makes a difference. Tranny made of "higher quality iron" can be roughly 30% smaller, if they are both designed for the same low end cut off frequency. The difference in the transformer size, even if they are made of the same iron, can be also caused by designed low frequency cutoff. Tranny designed i.e. for 30 Hz is smaller than the one designed for 20Hz.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand.

What I'm saying is the transformers are not the only thing that makes ENGLs sound the way they do. Yes, I'm sure they have an influence, but maybe the whole amps' design is quiet overall.

My example was comparing the XXX to the 5150. It didn't sound quieter because of the transformers, but because the master volume taper was different. The whole amp's design is different.
 
angelspade said:
Exactly...ENGL amps struggle in the same regard, for the same reason: EQ curve.
Click to expand...
Their Eq curve is completely fine, they are midrange city, that’s what I’m trying to say. They don’t suffer becsuse of their EQ curve, they have plenty of midrange, more than most. A recto is much more scooped and completely stomps it, for reference… so why is that?
 
Rex Rocker said:
It's not the EQ curve. It's not just "perceived" loudness. It's either the taper of their volume knob or how much actual output they put out. Maybe it has to do with the "quantity" or "quality" of the iron in the transformers. Maybe not. Like I said, I had a Peavey XXX that had pretty close to the same if not the same transformers as a 5150 that didn't sound as loud when the master volume was set to the same level. Like not even close.

I'd bet a Recto or an Uber (set to actually sound good) are actually more scooped than most ENGLs, yet neither has a problem being loud enough or cutting through.
Click to expand...



The triple x is plenty loud in loose mode. Do you remember trying it in that mode? It’s much, much louder than medium and tight mode, and the only way to use it in my opinion.
 
nightlight said:
I don't know about the whole "doesn't cut" it with a band argument. Quite a few artists using Engls on stage.

Karl Sanders, Chris Broderick, Glen Tipton and Richie Faulkner, Terrance Hobbs of Suffocation, apparently Cannibal Corpse use them...

Obscura too, and I really like that band.

Could it just be that both guitarists in these bands are using Engls and therefore they sound pretty killer?
Click to expand...


Dimmu borgir was another one, and arguably has more resources than any of those bands. Both guitarists were completely fucking unreal buried, everytime I’ve seen them.

Cannibal ain’t using Engl, I can assure you of that. Neither is Karl sanders. Nor is deicide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top