Henriksen vs Mambo

[jzucker]

To me , the henriksen has no color to it and is by far the dryer of the two. It's just straight amplification whereas the mambo seems to impart a polytone character to the tone.

The cab is an integral part of the mambo too. I had a mambo head and I like the combo way more than the head with a "random" cabinet. (I used it with an open back 1x12 with a tonker as well as an RE T8T) It was designed to be used with the combo/cab that he designed and IMO, that's where it sounds best.

I'm probably one of the very few people who have both heads - Mambo and Henriksen in their stock configuration. My Henriksen is an older model without reverb (but refurbished just last year) which I bought used from Soundisland Music. Also, my Henriksen does not have adjustable "Gain" since that only came out with the newest models.

I like the adjustable Gain on the Mambo but if I already had a Henriksen with gain - or if I didn't need that feature because, say, I pretty much only play one guitar - I would not have bought the Mambo. But, alas, I needed something that works for both big band and combo stuff and for that I find the Mambo a bit more versatile. The Gain knob and the switches for harmonic/clean and bright/normal/dark help me quickly dial in a different tone which is useful in big band. The fact I bought my Henriksen as a used model which I could sell for about what I paid for it was relevant too.

But, you know, the choice of cabinet probably makes as much if not greater difference as the head you are using...unless you are looking at a combo? The beauty of a head is that you can just add a cabinet later if you need a bigger sound.

Ok, so the more I think about it, I think the main difference between the Mambo sound and the Henriksen sound is that the Mambo is a bit "woodier", perhaps that means it's a bit more "dry", in a woody sense...especially on the treble strings. Maybe the Henriksen sound is slightly more "electric". Maybe that means nothing now that the Henriksen has a gain knob though...

[coolvinny]

Does anyone here have direct experience with Mambo and the Bud/Blu? I have a Mambo 8 but it lives in my practice room and I'm thinking of grabbing another small combo so that I am not schlepping my Alfresco 12 to small jams/rehearsals, and am mainly interested in hearing how "big" the Bud/Blu sound compared to a Mambo 8 (I would get the Blu over the Bud, unless I decide to get the JazzAmp 10 or a Mambo 10).

I once had a RE6 cabinet which I powered with a Henriksen Jazzamp head (both now sold), and I remember that package sounded "bigger" than my Mambo 8. Of course the RE6 was bigger than the Mambo and weighed nearly 18 lbs. on its own without the head, and the Mambo 8 only weighs around 14 lbs, so not exactly a fair fight...but it was interesting to hear how big a 6" speaker could sound.

Not remotely interested in hearing about the Little Jazz, Lunchbox, PRRI, Quilter, etc.

[Franz 1997]

Until someone who has actually played both amps ( I haven't, just the Mambo) comes in, a bit of speculation....bearing in mind that the Blu and the M8 are approximately the same size, both are ported ( the Blu underneath, I understand, the M8 with 2 in front), and they can push out 120/200 W respectively, I'd expect that the Blu would be unlikely to be any louder than the M8: if anything, slightly quieter.
As you know, perceived acoustic volume has a lot to do with cabinet size and resonance, and acoustic coupling in the case of a larger reflex cabinet can boost volume significantly. Both the Blu and M8 are indeed ported, but with their small internal volume I doubt if acoustic coupling is much of a factor for either amp.

I don't know of any Blu users ( there must be some..) this side of the pond; the retail >£1K price may have something to do with it..

[coolvinny]

@Franz, you may well be right. It's hard to know. I just remember that the RE6 sounded noticeably bigger and fatter than the Mambo 8. Again, the RE6 was pretty hefty and its cabinet was free of any electronics, but it was cube-shaped and I know that Michael Biller (who is close with Henriksen) felt that the cabinet designs contribute quite a bit to the sound. The 12 lbs weight of the Blu is pretty compelling as that's nearly 4 lbs lighter than my Mambo Wedge 8. I'll probably end up ordering the Blu...but still interested in what folks have to say.

[Franz 1997]

CV, I'm agreeing that the bigger the ( well designed) cab, the fuller the sound...something that supports this idea is that my Polytone babybrute ( 8", but 11x 11x 12 cab) does sound a bit fuller than the M8, and I'm sure it's due to the cab., as the speakers are the same.
( it has other disadvantages, being 35 years old..).

My guess is you don't get something for nothing, although it would be good to be proved wrong

[coolvinny]

I pulled the trigger. I guess I will be the Mambo 8 vs. Henriksen Blu guinea pig. Don't hold your breath for videos, but I'll report back in about 3 weeks with thoughts before taking the Blu on a road trip in mid June.

I think the main cab design difference lies in the down-firing port on the Blu vs. the Mambo's front-firing ports.

My Mambo definitely sounds great but I want to keep it as a permanent practice room fixture.

[Stringswinger]

I pulled the trigger. I guess I will be the Mambo 8 vs. Henriksen Blu guinea pig. Don't hold your breath for videos, but I'll report back in about 3 weeks with thoughts before taking the Blu on a road trip in mid June.

I think the main cab design difference lies in the down-firing port on the Blu vs. the Mambo's front-firing ports.

My Mambo definitely sounds great but I want to keep it as a permanent practice room fixture.

I cannot speak to the Mambo, but I love my Blu (It has become my main amp and I have five other amps that I presume most guys would be happy having as their main amp). The down firing port does require a flat surface of a few square feet (at least 4 square feet) for the amp to sound it's best.

I look forward to your comparison.

[JazzNote]

I'm also much looking forward to a comparison. In fact for the past half year or so, hearing so much good about it, i was wondering if it would make sense to buy a blu. Unfortunately i wouldn't know where i could try one without ordering/buying. I own a 8" and a 10" Mambo which i like a lot. Last sunday i played a gig using both in parallel mode, the sound was so terrific that even the saxophonist noticed. But if improvement would still be possible i'd go for it.

P.S. i once gigged the 8" Mambo with one of my RE Stealth 10's, but the sound was quite muddy, hard to control, i didn't lke it.

[coolvinny]

Just remembered that the Blu will have a defeatable tweeter as another "difference". Will be interesting to hear how that sounds on vs. off with my deep archtop (CC pickup, flats) vs. my thin archtop (HB, rounds). Both laminates.

Might actually get around to trying the K&K pickup on my carved Trenier Motif one of these days - probably a pretty good fit with teh Blu and the tweeter.

[pingu]

As you know, perceived acoustic volume has a lot to do with cabinet size and resonance, and acoustic coupling in the case of a larger reflex cabinet can boost volume significantly.
I don't know of any Blu users ( there must be some..) this side of the pond; the retail >£1K price may have something to do with it..

Yes I agree

my take ...... is ideally to have
about as much volume in the cab as you would need to build the instrument
...... the most realistic bass cab I ever heard was about the
same volume as a standup bass
sounded just like a bass but Loud

fender delux is about ideal for guitar sounds

obviously we are talking about going smaller here
which does seem to work well for jazz boxes .....

[Woody Sound]

As you know, perceived acoustic volume has a lot to do with cabinet size and resonance, and acoustic coupling in the case of a larger reflex cabinet can boost volume significantly. Both the Blu and M8 are indeed ported, but with their small internal volume I doubt if acoustic coupling is much of a factor for either amp.

Not exactly sure about the kind of coupling you are referring to, but the Bud/Blu does indeed sound huge when on the floor, as opposed to on a chair, etc.

[Franz 1997]

Not exactly sure about the kind of coupling you are referring to, but the Bud/Blu does indeed sound huge when on the floor, as opposed to on a chair, etc.

Just the general idea of utilising the air pressure from the back of the speaker and using it to add to the sound waves coming from the front. To do this, I'm assuming that the phase of the 'back' wave has to be reversed to get it in sync with the wave from the front, and I'm assuming that's what a reflex cabinet does ( crudely put, but I hope the idea comes accros). If that's right, it's called acoustic coupling and theoretically can increase volume substantially.

An open back amp won't do this; there is sound coming from the back but it's not in phase with the sound from the front ( although it has other useful properties.). As far as these small/ powerful amps are concerned, one reason for porting them is to avoid cabinet rattles through air pressure ( old polytones used to blow air audibly through the jack holes, sounded like whistling) - but I assume that the other aim is to get some degree of acoustic coupling to reinforce the sound coming from the front, particularly the bass frequencies.

Happy for any audio expert to explain further/ disprove these assertions...

[Durban]

my Polytone babybrute ( 8" as the speakers are the same.

Hi Franz, what speaker is in your Babybrute?

[Franz 1997]

Hi Franz, what speaker is in your Babybrute?

Eminence Alpha 8, with an 180w class D power amp. The original power amp overheated, blew up and took the speaker with it. This has more headroom, is lighter, more reliable and cooler. The Polytone sound comes 90% from the preamp IMO.

[Greentone]

Unlike the Baby Taurus and Mega Brute--which are open back, 8" designs--the Baby Brute amp was a closed-back, one cubic-foot volume enclosure 75-watt amp. It used the same power amp as the original Mini Brute amp. In that little box the amp really heated up. I had the power amp fail within three years on my '86 Baby Brute. I repaired it, but I never pushed the amp so hard after that.

The Baby Taurus, OTOH, used a different power amp altogether. It was an honest 75-watt design, rather than the larger Mini Brute amp stuffed into a small box. The Baby Taurus drives the 8" Eminence original equipment speaker to satisfying levels for club and auditorium levels. (Listen to the Jazz Baltica concert by Joe Pass, where he uses a Baby Taurus. He sounds superb.)

[Durban]

Eminence Alpha 8, with an 180w class D power amp. The original power amp overheated, blew up and took the speaker with it. This has more headroom, is lighter, more reliable and cooler. The Polytone sound comes 90% from the preamp IMO.

Thanks for that Franz, i bought a Celestion 8ohm TF 0818 ( purely as spare) put in one of my Mega Brutes, sounds fine so far, not too different from stock Eminence 4 ohm slightly brighter, but not much. ive not really played it louder yet, im playing on Sunday, so will test.

[Durban]

Unlike the Baby Taurus and Mega Brute--which are open back, 8" designs

The Baby Taurus, OTOH, used a different power amp altogether. It was an honest 75-watt design, )

My Baby Brute 8" is closed back it seems to have a bit more power than my Mega Brutes 8" also closed backs

all have Eminence 8" OEM 4 ohm speakers i sent mail to Eminence they told me the voice coils magnet weights blah etc.

The amps in my Baby are different to the Mega's no Sonic Circuits. I am not technical at all but know

it looks like they Baby has far less chips STUFF in it, the two Mega Brutes are also slightly different, to each other.

All kick the hell out of my DV Little Jizz

[Franz 1997]

Unlike the Baby Taurus and Mega Brute--which are open back, 8" designs--the Baby Brute amp was a closed-back, one cubic-foot volume enclosure 75-watt amp. It used the same power amp as the original Mini Brute amp. In that little box the amp really heated up. I had the power amp fail within three years on my '86 Baby Brute. I repaired it, but I never pushed the amp so hard after that.
)

When mine failed, one main filter cap exploded from the heat building up inside, simply because I left the amp idling for a few hours by mistake. It also took out the driver chip and speaker. On opening up the amp, it looked like a small explosion had happened ( which indeed it had..)

[coolvinny]

I'll make this short and sweet and then you are unlikely to hear from me for a few weeks.

Picked up my Blu yesterday and just got home to do some A/B comparison against my 2012 Mambo 8 Wedge. Both amps were on the ground, right next to each other and equidistant from the corner. I used my laminate 16 x 3 jazzbox with Lollar CC pickup (HB size). 13 flatwounds, thick pick. Mambo set on default setting (not bright or dark) and with "harmonic" switch engaged.

My observations:

- Default "gain" on the Blu is not adjustable but is higher than on the Mambo (it's adjustable on the Mambo). Personally I like this because I've always been running my Mambo's gain around 2 o'clock. So for this A/B I initially had the Mambo's gain at default (noon) but I found the amps sounded too different that way, so I tried to get them to sound similar which found me again with the Mambo's gain at 2 o'clock.
- Overall the Blu has a bit more of a electric sound to it, yet is brighter (even with the tweeter off). I'm still not sure if I prefer the tweeter on or off. I ran most of the A/B with the tweeter off but that's mostly because I have a tiny bit of fret buzz happening right now on my high E string and the tweeter is amplifying that....but if I ignore that then I may be leaning towards liking the tweeter - seems to make the amp sound a bit "bigger".
- The Blu definitely has more low end punch (at least when on the ground, on a hard surface), and I think more low end in general.
- Treble strings also sound fatter through the Blu.
- With the added low-end and slightly fatter treble strings, overall the Blu sounds a bit more like a "big amp".
- Notes in the middle of the spectrum sound quite similar.
- Weight: Blu is lighter by around 2 lbs. It's noticeable...mostly in that the Blu is crazy light!
- Size: Mambo is smaller, all things considered. It's very slightly taller (like half an inch) but in all other dimensions the Blu is bigger. The Blu is a bit awkward to transport for this reason, IMO, since it's cube-shaped. The Mambo being wedge-shaped carries better/smaller.

I'm still a big fan of Mambo and I also note that, WITH MY GUITAR/SET-UP/FINGERS, the Mambo seems to do better with a humbucker whereas Henriksen amps (my Alfresco anyway) seem to do better with a CC (hb size) pickup. Obviously Henriksens sound great with humbuckers too, and Mambos also sound great with non-HB's like a CC, but in this particular A/B I think the CC pickup slightly tilted things in favour of the Henriksen.

Both amps are excellent and it would have been interesting if my Mambo was one of the newer ones AND if I also had a humbucker-equipped guitar around to try. FYI my Mambo is 180w RMS whereas I think the new ones are up to 400w RMS!

In summary, the Blu is a bit bigger and sounds bigger, despite being lighter, and sounds more "electric" although slightly brighter, yet slightly fatter. The Mambo is smaller but heavier, sounds a bit smaller, and sounds a bit more "hi-fi" and clean although the gain knob can adjust that.

These observations may disappear at louder volumes as speaker break-up an other instruments enter the picture, and remember that I did NOT use a humbucker so your results may vary.

[Franz 1997]

Very thoughtful review, CV. I'm not a Hendriksen user now, but have always thought that they had a potential winner in the graphic eq feature, which allows selective fattening of the top strings via the eq. Evans had the same idea with their 'depth' control. There's no doubt that the niche left by the 8" polytone baby/mega brute has been filled and improved upon. And it's interesting how clever porting lets a 6.5" speaker sound bigger than an 8", which it sounds like it does in this case.

In fairness though, the Mambo 8" model has changed a lot over the years since the early version in your reveiw, and now is somewhat bigger than the 9 x9 x9" Blu at 10.5" x 10" x 9 3/4" - not much smaller than the 10" mambo. Jon Shaw says it's because he couldn't get his hand inside the earlier small cabinet without giving himself RSI. It's sort of academic anyway, as these two amps don't really compete in the same markets, for reasons already well noted.

I'm intrigued to know how Hendriksen have got the weight of the Blu down to 13lb - is it part made of aluminium? Or maybe a neo speaker?

[coolvinny]

In this busy pre-holiday week of mine, I've had a bit of time free up...so I can make an brief appearance to add a bit to the above review.

First, @Franz1997, please note that for my comparison above I had all the Blu and Mambo tone controls at noon, except for the Mambo's gain which was around 1:30 or 2:00. I had to do that otherwise the amps just sounded too different.

...interesting to learn that Jon has made the Mambo 8 cabinets bigger! I was surprised to see that side-by-side the Blu seemed bigger, but that's consistent with your comment that the Mambo 8's have gotten a bit bigger over the years.

Regarding the Blu's tweeter, I think I like it - a lot actually. I think it gives the amp a more open and bigger sound. With the tweeter off, the tone is perhaps a bit more straight-ahead jazz guitar BUT it sounds like a smaller amp/speaker. I prefer to get a slightly bigger sound by engaging the tweeter, though when I do that then I do turn the high frequencies down a little bit from noon and maybe roll my guitar's tone off just very slightly. These trade-offs are worth it to me in order to get a slightly bigger sound. The sound coming out of this little amp with the tweeter engaged is really a trip man! It just sounds so much bigger than it looks! And I think the tweeter contributes quite a bit to that (well, in a solo situation anyway...not sure if it would be that noticeable in a band setting).

My one quibble with the Blu is in the gig bag - having the accessory pocket on the side just adds to bulk. Would have been better for the pocket to have somehow been built into the top of the bag (like a pocket underneath the zip top). Other than that, I have to say that for its size this amp sounds REALLY REALLY good. And with the tweeter engaged you can definitely get a variety of jazzy tones.

Very happy with my purchase of the Blu (and I still love my Mambo too!).

[coolvinny]

Played my first gig of 2019 on Friday night. Quintet (two horns). No piano. Just the way I like it. My drummer buddy organized the gig.

I brought both the Blu and my Alfresco. Both Henriksens. Medium size room. First I plugged in the Blu and gave that a try while we were setting up. Everyone agreed that it sounded great and I felt so too. Really amazing tone and sound quality. "Done" I declared. Then we had some extra minutes to play with before starting and I figured, oh, just for kicks let's hear what the 12" open back Alfresco sounds like. Yeah, it sounded better (the drummer and sax player expressed that before I'd even finished processing the information). It also weighs 2.5 to 3 x as much, but it sounds better. Not 2.5 to 3 x better, but maybe like 1.2 to 1.3 x better. So I played the gig with the Alfresco, but I think in the full band scenario (set-up was just me noodling) the difference between the two would have been even smaller.

My conclusion is that the Blu is absolutely giggable and with very, very little compromise...and this is compared to a 12" open back with the same (pretty much) electronics. Having said that, I was using my 16" x 3" laminate jazzbox with 13's and a heavy pick. If I was using a smaller guitar, based on my experience, I would have more strongly preferred the bigger amp for a bigger overall sound.

So while I won't necessarily use the Blu for all gigs (not that I play many), I will absolutely use it for all jams or get-togethers in houses/rehearsal spaces.

As an aside, my Alfresco sounds so much better since I swapped out my Lollar Imperial HB for a Lollar CC HB size. Previously I found my laminate jazzbox/Alfresco combination too dark. I was worried that the Blu might be too bright with the Lollar CC lacking some of a HB's 'body', but not the case...the Blu sounds *great* with a Lollar CC.

[marcwhy]

Thanks for the updated review, "Vinny!"

It is interesting how the many variables (guitar, pickups, cab, strings, etc.) we can obsess over, can and do make some differences! Not to rationalize our obsessions, of course but there does seem to be some truth to them.

Marc